| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- 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.
|
|
| 5. |
- Kristan, M., et al.
(författare)
-
The Eighth Visual Object Tracking VOT2020 Challenge Results
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Computer Vision. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783030682378 ; , s. 547-601
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Visual Object Tracking challenge VOT2020 is the eighth annual tracker benchmarking activity organized by the VOT initiative. Results of 58 trackers are presented; many are state-of-the-art trackers published at major computer vision conferences or in journals in the recent years. The VOT2020 challenge was composed of five sub-challenges focusing on different tracking domains: (i) VOT-ST2020 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB, (ii) VOT-RT2020 challenge focused on “real-time” short-term tracking in RGB, (iii) VOT-LT2020 focused on long-term tracking namely coping with target disappearance and reappearance, (iv) VOT-RGBT2020 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB and thermal imagery and (v) VOT-RGBD2020 challenge focused on long-term tracking in RGB and depth imagery. Only the VOT-ST2020 datasets were refreshed. A significant novelty is introduction of a new VOT short-term tracking evaluation methodology, and introduction of segmentation ground truth in the VOT-ST2020 challenge – bounding boxes will no longer be used in the VOT-ST challenges. A new VOT Python toolkit that implements all these novelites was introduced. Performance of the tested trackers typically by far exceeds standard baselines. The source code for most of the trackers is publicly available from the VOT page. The dataset, the evaluation kit and the results are publicly available at the challenge website (http://votchallenge.net ).
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
