| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
In: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 3. |
- Eisenacher, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
Proteomics Data Collection - 2nd ProDaC Workshop 5 October 2007, Seoul, Korea
- 2008
-
In: Proteomics. - : Wiley. - 1615-9861 .- 1615-9853. ; 8:7, s. 1326-1330
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Proteomics Data Collection (ProDaC) is an EU-funded Coordination Action within the 6th framework programme. It aims to simplify the publication, dissemination and utilization of proteomics data by establishing standards that will support broad data collection from the research community. As a part of ProDaC, regular workshops are organized on a half-yearly basis to enable communication and discussion of the involved partners and to report on project progress. After the kick-off meeting (October 2006) in Long Beach, CA, USA and the 1st workshop in Lyon, France (April 2007), the 2nd ProDaC workshop took place at the COEX InterContinental Hotel in Seoul, Korea, on 5th October 2007, shortly before the HUPO World Congress. The progress achieved within the first year was presented by the leaders of the work packages. Additionally, a Journal's representative talked about his experiences and future plans concerning Proteomics standards; and two further external speakers presented their research related to data handling and Proteomics repositories.
|
|
| 4. |
- Mayer, Gerhard, et al.
(author)
-
The HUPO proteomics standards initiative-mass spectrometry controlled vocabulary
- 2013
-
In: Database: the journal of biological databases and curation. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1758-0463. ; , s. 009-009
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Controlled vocabularies (CVs), i.e. a collection of predefined terms describing a modeling domain, used for the semantic annotation of data, and ontologies are used in structured data formats and databases to avoid inconsistencies in annotation, to have a unique (and preferably short) accession number and to give researchers and computer algorithms the possibility for more expressive semantic annotation of data. The Human Proteome Organization (HUPO)-Proteomics Standards Initiative (PSI) makes extensive use of ontologies/CVs in their data formats. The PSI-Mass Spectrometry (MS) CV contains all the terms used in the PSI MS-related data standards. The CV contains a logical hierarchical structure to ensure ease of maintenance and the development of software that makes use of complex semantics. The CV contains terms required for a complete description of an MS analysis pipeline used in proteomics, including sample labeling, digestion enzymes, instrumentation parts and parameters, software used for identification and quantification of peptides/proteins and the parameters and scores used to determine their significance. Owing to the range of topics covered by the CV, collaborative development across several PSI working groups, including proteomics research groups, instrument manufacturers and software vendors, was necessary. In this article, we describe the overall structure of the CV, the process by which it has been developed and is maintained and the dependencies on other ontologies.
|
|
