Coupled synthesis and translocation restrains polyphosphate to acidocalcisome-like vacuoles and prevents its toxicity.

Eukaryotes contain inorganic polyphosphate (polyP) and acidocalcisomes, which sequester polyP and store amino acids and divalent cations. Why polyP is sequestered in dedicated organelles is not known. We show that polyP produced in the cytosol of yeast becomes toxic. Reconstitution of polyP translocation with purified vacuoles, the acidocalcisomes of yeast, shows that cytosolic polyP cannot be imported, whereas polyP produced by the vacuolar transporter chaperone (VTC) complex, an endogenous vacuolar polyP polymerase, is efficiently imported and does not interfere with growth. PolyP synthesis and import require an electrochemical gradient, probably as a driving force for polyP translocation. VTC exposes its catalytic domain to the cytosol and carries nine vacuolar transmembrane domains. Mutations in the VTC transmembrane regions, which are likely to constitute the translocation channel, block not only polyP translocation but also synthesis. Given that they are far from the cytosolic catalytic domain of VTC, this suggests that the VTC complex obligatorily couples synthesis of polyP to its import in order to avoid toxic intermediates in the cytosol. Sequestration of otherwise toxic polyP might be one reason for the existence of acidocalcisomes in eukaryotes.

A new alternative method for testing skin irritation using a human skin model: a pilot study.

Studies assessing skin irritation to chemicals have traditionally used laboratory animals; however, such methods are questionable regarding their relevance for humans. New in vitro methods have been validated, such as the reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) model (Episkin®, Epiderm®). The comparison (accuracy) with in vivo results such as the 4-h human patch test (HPT) is 76% at best (Epiderm®). There is a need to develop an in vitro method that better simulates the anatomo-pathological changes encountered in vivo. To develop an in vitro method to determine skin irritation using human viable skin through histopathology, and compare the results of 4 tested substances to the main in vitro methods and in vivo animal method (Draize test). Human skin removed during surgery was dermatomed and mounted on an in vitro flow-through diffusion cell system. Ten chemicals with known non-irritant (heptylbutyrate, hexylsalicylate, butylmethacrylate, isoproturon, bentazon, DEHP and methylisothiazolinone (MI)) and irritant properties (folpet, 1-bromohexane and methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI/MI)), a negative control (sodiumchloride) and a positive control (sodiumlaurylsulphate) were applied. The skin was exposed at least for 4h. Histopathology was performed to investigate irritation signs (spongiosis, necrosis, vacuolization). We obtained 100% accuracy with the HPT model; 75% with the RHE models and 50% with the Draize test for 4 tested substances. The coefficients of variation (CV) between our three test batches were <0.1, showing good reproducibility. Furthermore, we reported objectively histopathological irritation signs (irritation scale): strong (folpet), significant (1-bromohexane), slight (MCI/MI at 750/250ppm) and none (isoproturon, bentazon, DEHP and MI). This new in vitro test method presented effective results for the tested chemicals. It should be further validated using a greater number of substances; and tested in different laboratories in order to suitably evaluate reproducibility.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy in higher eukaryotes.

Research in autophagy continues to accelerate,(1) and as a result many new scientists are entering the field. Accordingly, it is important to establish a standard set of criteria for monitoring macroautophagy in different organisms. Recent reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose.(2,3) There are many useful and convenient methods that can be used to monitor macroautophagy in yeast, but relatively few in other model systems, and there is much confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure macroautophagy in higher eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers of autophagosomes versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway; thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from fully functional autophagy that includes delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of the methods that can be used by investigators who are attempting to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as by reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that investigate these processes. This set of guidelines is 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 verify an autophagic response.