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.

Comparative analysis of Tritrichomonas foetus (Riedmüller, 1928) cat genotype, T. foetus (Riedmüller, 1928) cattle genotype and Tritrichomonas suis (Davaine, 1875) at 10 DNA loci.

The parasitic protists in the genus Tritrichomonas cause significant disease in domestic cattle and cats. To assess the genetic diversity of feline and bovine isolates of Tritrichomonas foetus (Riedmüller, 1928) Wenrich and Emmerson, 1933, we used 10 different genetic regions, namely the protein coding genes of cysteine proteases 1, 2 and 4-9 (CP1, 2, 4-9) involved in the pathogenesis of the disease caused by the parasite. The cytosolic malate dehydrogenase 1 (MDH1) and internal transcribed spacer region 2 of the rDNA unit (ITS2) were included as additional markers. The gene sequences were compared with those of Tritrichomonas suis (Davaine, 1875) Morgan and Hawkins, 1948 and Tritrichomonas mobilensisCulberson et al., 1986. The study revealed 100% identity for all 10 genes among all feline isolates (=T. foetus cat genotype), 100% identity among all bovine isolates (=T. foetus cattle genotype) and a genetic distinctness of 1% between the cat and cattle genotypes of T. foetus. The cattle genotype of T. foetus was 100% identical to T. suis at nine loci (CP1, 2, 4-8, ITS2, MDH1). At CP9, three out of four T. suis isolates were identical to the T. foetus cattle genotype, while the T. suis isolate SUI-H3B sequence contained a single unique nucleotide substitution. Tritrichomonas mobilensis was 0.4% and 0.7% distinct from the cat and cattle genotypes of T. foetus, respectively. The genetic differences resulted in amino acid changes in the CP genes, most pronouncedly in CP2, potentially providing a platform for elucidation of genotype-specific host-pathogen interactions of T. foetus. On the basis of this data we judge T. suis and T. foetus to be subjective synonyms. For the first time, on objective nomenclatural grounds, the authority of T. suis is given to Davaine, 1875, rather than the commonly cited Gruby and Delafond, 1843. To maintain prevailing usage of T. foetus, we are suppressing the senior synomym T. suisDavaine, 1875 according to Article 23.9, because it has never been used as a valid name after 1899 and T. foetus is widely discussed as the cause of bovine trichomonosis. Thus bovine, feline and porcine isolates should all be given the name T. foetus. This promotes the stability of T. foetus for the veterinary and economically significant venereal parasite causing bovine trichomonosis.