John Garstang at Sirkeli Höyük, Cilician Plain, in 1936-1937: Old Photographs and New Evidence from the Renewed Excavations

During the winter of 1936-1937, British archaeologist John Garstang (1876-1956) excavated several trenches at the site of Sirkeli Höyük, located in the Plain of Cilicia (18 km west of modern-day Ceyhan). After a single campaign, however, he left the site and his interest shifted to site of Yumuktepe/Mersin, where he then excavated for a number of years. Apart from two very brief preliminary reports of his excavations at Sirkeli Höyük, which were published in the journal 'Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology of the University of Liverpool', not much is known about the trenches and their associated finds. Unpublished photographs kept in the Special Archives of University College London shed new light on the location and orientation of some of Garstang’s trenches at the site. Furthermore, in the 2012 campaign of the renewed Turkish-Swiss excavations at the site, a trench was found in the western part of the northern terrace that most probably was excavated by Garstang, but was not mentioned by him in his reports. This hitherto unknown trench may be related to his discovery of a lion-shaped column base made of basalt that is now kept in the collections of the Archaeological Museum of Adana.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

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.