National Fisheries Research & Development Institute

About: National Fisheries Research & Development Institute is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Olive flounder & Population. The organization has 1471 authors who have published 2306 publications receiving 43966 citations.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

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. For example, 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 versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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 assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy

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.

Microplastic Size-Dependent Toxicity, Oxidative Stress Induction, and p-JNK and p-p38 Activation in the Monogonont Rotifer (Brachionus koreanus)

Abstract: In this study, we evaluated accumulation and adverse effects of ingestion of microplastics in the monogonont rotifer (Brachionus koreanus). The dependence of microplastic toxicity on particle size was investigated by measuring several in vivo end points and studying the ingestion and egestion using 0.05-, 0.5-, and 6-μm nonfunctionalized polystyrene microbeads. To identify the defense mechanisms activated in response to microplastic exposure, the activities of several antioxidant-related enzymes and the phosphorylation status of mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) were determined. Exposure to polystyrene microbeads of all sizes led to significant size-dependent effects, including reduced growth rate, reduced fecundity, decreased lifespan and longer reproduction time. Rotifers exposed to 6-μm fluorescently labeled microbeads exhibited almost no fluorescence after 24 h, while rotifers exposed to 0.05- and 0.5-μm fluorescently labeled microbeads displayed fluorescence until 48 h, suggesting that 6-μm microbeads are more effectively egested from B. koreanus than 0.05- or 0.5-μm microbeads. This observation provides a potential explanation for our findings that microbead toxicity was size-dependent and smaller microbeads were more toxic. In vitro tests revealed that antioxidant-related enzymes and MAPK signaling pathways were significantly activated in response to microplastic exposure in a size-dependent manner.

Seaweed aquaculture: cultivation technologies, challenges and its ecosystem services

Abstract: Copyright © 2017 The Korean Society of Phycology 1 http://e-algae.org pISSN: 1226-2617 eISSN: 2093-0860 Seaweed aquaculture: cultivation technologies, challenges and its ecosystem services Jang K. Kim, Charles Yarish*, Eun Kyoung Hwang, Miseon Park and Youngdae Kim Department of Marine Science, School of Natural Sciences, Incheon National University, Incheon 22012, Korea Department of Marine Sciences, University of Connecticut, 1 University Place, Stamford, CT 06901, USA Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, 1 University Place, Stamford, CT 06901, USA Seaweed Research Center, National Institute of Fisheries Science, Mokpo 58746, Korea Southeast Sea Fisheries Research Institute, National Institute of Fisheries Science, Tongyeong 46083, Korea