SIAH proteins regulate the degradation and intra‐SIAH proteins regulate the degradation and intra-mitochondrial aggregation of PINK1: Implications for mitochondrial pathology in Parkinson's disease

Parkinson's disease (PD) is characterized by degeneration of neurons, particularly dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra. PD brains show accumulation of α-synuclein in Lewy bodies and accumulation of dysfunctional mitochondria. However, the mechanisms leading to mitochondrial pathology in sporadic PD are poorly understood. PINK1 is a key for mitophagy activation and recycling of unfit mitochondria. The activation of mitophagy depends on the accumulation of uncleaved PINK1 at the outer mitochondrial membrane and activation of a cascade of protein ubiquitination at the surface of the organelle. We have now found that SIAH3, a member of the SIAH proteins but lacking ubiquitin-ligase activity, is increased in PD brains and cerebrospinal fluid and in neurons treated with α-synuclein preformed fibrils (α-SynPFF). We also observed that SIAH3 is aggregated together with PINK1 in the mitochondria of PD brains. SIAH3 directly interacts with PINK1, leading to their intra-mitochondrial aggregation in cells and neurons and triggering a cascade of toxicity with PINK1 inactivation along with mitochondrial depolarization and neuronal death. We also found that SIAH1 interacts with PINK1 and promotes ubiquitination and proteasomal degradation of PINK1. Similar to the dimerization of SIAH1/SIAH2, SIAH3 interacts with SIAH1, promoting its translocation to mitochondria and preventing its ubiquitin-ligase activity toward PINK1. Our results support the notion that the increase in SIAH3 and intra-mitochondrial aggregation of SIAH3-PINK1 may mediate α-synuclein pathology by promoting proteotoxicity and preventing the elimination of dysfunctional mitochondria. We consider it possible that PINK1 activity is decreased in sporadic PD, which impedes proper mitochondrial renewal in the disease

Glycation potentiates α-synuclein-associated neurodegeneration in synucleinopathies

publishersversionpublishe

Effect of dietary palm oil on growth and carcass composition of Heterobranchus longifilis fingerlings

This study investigated the effects of dietary palm oil (PO) on growth performance and carcass composition of Heterobranchus longifilis with the goal of replacing dietary fish oil with palm oil. In this study triplicate groups of H. longifilis fingerlings were fed the experimental diets for 8 weeks. Five isonitrogenous (45% crude protein), isoenergetic (20 KJg-1) experimental diets were made containing either 6.0% FO and 0% PO, 4.5% FO and 1.5% PO; 3.0% FO and 3.0% PO; 1.5% FO and 4.5% PO; or 0% FO and 6.0% PO using soybean and fish meal as the protein source. Dietary palm oil had no significant effect on growth rate or feed conversion ratio. Similarly, No significant differences were observed between dietary treatments for moisture, protein and ash content in H. longifilis fingerlings. However, fillet saturated, monounsaturated fatty acids and liver lipid deposition were significantly (P0.05) higher in fish fed 6.0% PO diet. This study suggests that the replacement of cod liver oil by palm oil as lipid supplement in the diet permitted a clear improvement of growth and FCR of H. longifilis. This indicates that PO can effectively replace FO in the diet of the fish without compromising fish growth and feed efficiency

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

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 fl ux 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, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost 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 fi eld 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 delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so 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 autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field