| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- D'Orangeville, Loic, et al.
(författare)
-
Drought timing and local climate determine the sensitivity of eastern temperate forests to drought
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : Wiley. - 1354-1013 .- 1365-2486. ; 24:6, s. 2339-2351
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Projected changes in temperature and drought regime are likely to reduce carbon (C) storage in forests, thereby amplifying rates of climate change. While such reductions are often presumed to be greatest in semi-arid forests that experience widespread tree mortality, the consequences of drought may also be important in temperate mesic forests of Eastern North America (ENA) if tree growth is significantly curtailed by drought. Investigations of the environmental conditions that determine drought sensitivity are critically needed to accurately predict ecosystem feedbacks to climate change. We matched site factors with the growth responses to drought of 10,753 trees across mesic forests of ENA, representing 24 species and 346 stands, to determine the broad-scale drivers of drought sensitivity for the dominant trees in ENA. Here we show that two factors-the timing of drought, and the atmospheric demand for water (i.e., local potential evapotranspiration; PET)-are stronger drivers of drought sensitivity than soil and stand characteristics. Droughtinduced reductions in tree growth were greatest when the droughts occurred during early-season peaks in radial growth, especially for trees growing in the warmest, driest regions (i.e., highest PET). Further, mean species trait values (rooting depth and psi(50)) were poor predictors of drought sensitivity, as intraspecific variation in sensitivity was equal to or greater than interspecific variation in 17 of 24 species. From a general circulation model ensemble, we find that future increases in earlyseason PET may exacerbate these effects, and potentially offset gains in C uptake and storage in ENA owing to other global change factors.
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
