Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Klionsky DJ, Abdelmohsen K, Abe A, Abedin MJ, Abeliovich H, Acevedo Arozena A, et al.
    Autophagy, 2016;12(1):1-222.
    PMID: 26799652 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356
  2. Klionsky DJ, Abdel-Aziz AK, Abdelfatah S, Abdellatif M, Abdoli A, Abel S, et al.
    Autophagy, 2021 Jan;17(1):1-382.
    PMID: 33634751 DOI: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1797280
    In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.
  3. Yang Y, Liang Q, Zhang B, Zhang J, Fan L, Kang J, et al.
    J Chromatogr A, 2024 Jan 25;1715:464621.
    PMID: 38198876 DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2023.464621
    White tea contains the highest flavonoids compared to other teas. While there have been numerous studies on the components of different tea varieties, research explicitly focusing on the flavonoid content of white tea remains scarce, making the need for a good flavonoid purification process for white tea even more important. This study compared the adsorption and desorption performance of five types of macroporous resins: D101, HP20, HPD500, DM301, and AB-8. Among the tested resins, AB-8 was selected based on its best adsorption and desorption performance to investigate the static adsorption kinetics and dynamic adsorption-desorption purification of white tea flavonoids. The optimal purification process was determined: adsorption temperature 25 °C, crude tea flavonoid extract pH 3, ethanol concentration 80 %, sample loading flow rate and eluent flow rate 1.5 BV/min, and eluent dosage 40 BV. The results indicated that the adsorption process followed pseudo-second-order kinetics. Under the above purification conditions, the purity of the total flavonoids in the purified white tea flavonoid increased from approximately 17.69 to 46.23 %, achieving a 2.61-fold improvement, indicating good purification results. The purified white tea flavonoid can be further used for nutraceutical and pharmaceutical applications.
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links