CRISPR-Cas12a targeting of ssDNA plays no detectable role in immunity

CRISPR-Cas12a (Cpf1) is a bacterial RNA-guided nuclease that cuts double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) at sites specified by a CRISPR RNA (crRNA) guide. Additional activities have been ascribed to this enzyme in vitro: site-specific (cis) single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) cleavage and indiscriminate (trans) degradation of ssDNA, RNA, and dsDNA after activation by a complementary target. The ability of Cas12a to cleave nucleic acids indiscriminately has been harnessed for many applications, including diagnostics, but it remains unknown if it contributes to bacterial immunity. Here, we provide evidence that cleavage of ssDNA in cis or in trans by Cas12a is insufficient to impact immunity. Using LbCas12a expressed in either Pseudomonas aeruginosa or Escherichia coli, we observed that cleavage of dsDNA targets did not elicit cell death or dormancy, suggesting insignificant levels of collateral damage against host RNA or DNA. Canonical immunity against invasive dsDNA also had no impact on the replicative fitness of co-infecting dsDNA phage, ssDNA phage or plasmid in trans. Lastly, crRNAs complementary to invasive ssDNA did not provide protection, suggesting that ssDNA cleavage does not occur in vivo or is insignificant. Overall, these results suggest that CRISPR-Cas12a immunity predominantly occurs via canonical targeting of dsDNA, and that the other activities do not significantly impact infection outcomes.     

CRISPR-Cas13a系统用于肿瘤诊断与治疗的进展

CRISPR-Cas系统是一种目前已知的基因编辑工具,其中以靶向DNA基因组编辑的CRISPR-Cas9系统的研究较为成熟。相较于靶向DNA的基因组编辑技术CRISPR-Cas9系统,近年来靶向RNA的Ⅵ型-CRISPR家族CRISPR-C2c2/Cas13a系统研究日渐增多。CRISPR-Cas13a系统具有特异性识别并结合单链RNA序列从而非特异性切割RNA的特点,可应用于检测肿瘤外周血游离核酸,对早期肿瘤患者进行筛查。同时,Cas13a在进行体内RNA切割的过程中,不涉及编码基因DNA的改变,可直接对基因转录产物mRNA进行编辑,达到基因修饰的目的,并能够同时靶向多基因转录产物从而调控基因的表达。Cas13a系统可应用于分子诊断及RNA编辑中,该系统在肿瘤的诊断与治疗中也被证实具有广阔的发展前景。基于已有的文献资料,文中综述了靶向RNA的CRISPR-Cas13a技术应用于肿瘤诊断与治疗的研究进展,探讨了CRISPR-Cas13a系统对癌症治疗的新思路及存在的局限,并展望了未来可能的研究方向。     

Advances in CRISPR-Cas systems for RNA targeting,tracking and editing

Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein (Cas) systems, especially type II (Cas9) systems, have been widely used in gene/genome targeting. Modifications of Cas9 enable these systems to become platforms for precise DNA manipulations. However, the utilization of CRISPR-Cas systems in RNA targeting remains preliminary. The discovery of type VI CRISPR-Cas systems (Cas13) shed light on RNA-guided RNA targeting. Cas13d, the smallest Cas13 protein, with a length of only ~930 amino acids, is a promising platform for RNA targeting compatible with viral delivery systems. Much effort has also been made to develop Cas9, Cas13a and Cas13b applications for RNA-guided RNA targeting. The discovery of new RNA-targeting CRISPR-Cas systems as well as the development of RNA-targeting platforms with Cas9 and Cas13 will promote RNA-targeting technology substantially. Here, we review new advances in RNA-targeting CRISPR-Cas systems as well as advances in applications of these systems in RNA targeting, tracking and editing. We also compare these Cas protein-based technologies with traditional technologies for RNA targeting, tracking and editing. Finally, we discuss remaining questions and prospects for the future.     

Structural insights into target DNA recognition and cleavage by the CRISPR-Cas12c1 system

Cas12c is the recently characterized dual RNA-guided DNase effector of type V-C CRISPR-Cas (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and CRISPR-associated protein) systems. Due to minimal requirements for a protospacer adjacent motif (PAM), Cas12c is an attractive candidate for genome editing. Here we report the crystal structure of Cas12c1 in complex with single guide RNA (sgRNA) and target double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) containing the 5′-TG-3′ PAM. Supported by biochemical and mutation assays, this study reveals distinct structural features of Cas12c1 and the associated sgRNA, as well as the molecular basis for PAM recognition, target dsDNA unwinding, heteroduplex formation and recognition, and cleavage of non-target and target DNA strands. Cas12c1 recognizes the PAM through a mechanism that is interdependent on sequence identity and Cas12c1-induced conformational distortion of the PAM region. Another special feature of Cas12c1 is the cleavage of both non-target and target DNA strands at a single, uniform site with indistinguishable cleavage capacity and order. Location of the sgRNA seed region and minimal length of target DNA required for triggering Cas12c1 DNase activity were also determined. Our findings provide valuable information for developing the CRISPR-Cas12c1 system into an efficient, high-fidelity genome editing tool.     

Genome Editing with CRISPR-Cas9:Can It Get Any Better?

The CRISPR-Cas revolution is taking place in virtually all fields of life sciences.Harnessing DNA cleavage with the CRISPR-Cas9 system of Streptococcus pyogenes has proven to be extraordinarily simple and efficient,relying only on the design of a synthetic single guide RNA(sgRNA) and its co-expression with Cas9.Here,we review the progress in the design of sgRNA from the original dual RNA guide for S.pyogenes and Staphylococcus aureus Cas9(SpCas9 and SaCas9).New assays for genome-wide identification of offtargets have provided important insights into the issue of cleavage specificity in vivo.At the same time,the on-target activity of thousands of guides has been determined.These data have led to numerous online tools that facilitate the selection of guide RNAs in target sequences.It appears that for most basic research applications,cleavage activity can be maximized and off-targets minimized by carefully choosing guide RNAs based on computational predictions.Moreover,recent studies of Cas proteins have further improved the flexibility and precision of the CRISPR-Cas toolkit for genome editing.Inspired by the crystal structure of the complex of sgRNA-SpCas9 bound to target DNA,several variants of SpCas9 have recently been engineered,either with novel protospacer adjacent motifs(PAMs) or with drastically reduced off-targets.Novel Cas9 and Cas9-like proteins called Cpf 1 have also been characterized from other bacteria and will benefit from die insights obtained from SpCas9.Genome editing with CRISPR-Cas9 may also progress with better understanding and control of cellular DNA repair pathways activated after Cas9-induced DNA cleavage.     

Key sequence features of CRISPR RNA for dual-guide CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoprotein complexes assembled with wild-type or HiFi Cas9

Specific sequence features of the protospacer and protospacer-adjacent motif (PAM) are critical for efficient cleavage by CRISPR-Cas9, but current knowledge is largely derived from single-guide RNA (sgRNA) systems assessed in cultured cells. In this study, we sought to determine gRNA sequence features of a more native CRISPR-Cas9 ribonucleoprotein (RNP) complex with dual-guide RNAs (dgRNAs) composed of crRNA and tracrRNA, which has been used increasingly in recent CRISPR-Cas9 applications, particularly in zebrafish. Using both wild-type and HiFi SpCas9, we determined on-target cleavage efficiencies of 51 crRNAs in zebrafish embryos by assessing indel occurrence. Statistical analysis of these data identified novel position-specific mononucleotide features relevant to cleavage efficiencies throughout the protospacer sequence that may be unique to CRISPR-Cas9 RNPs pre-assembled with perfectly matched gRNAs. Overall features for wild-type Cas9 resembled those for HiFi Cas9, but specific differences were also observed. Mutational analysis of mononucleotide features confirmed their relevance to cleavage efficiencies. Moreover, the mononucleotide feature-based score, CRISPR-kp, correlated well with efficiencies of gRNAs reported in previous zebrafish RNP injection experiments, as well as independently tested crRNAs only in RNP format, but not with Cas9 mRNA co-injection. These findings will facilitate design of gRNA/crRNAs in genome editing applications, especially when using pre-assembled RNPs.     

CRISPR-Cas9介导的基因组编辑技术的研究进展

CRISPR-Cas (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats-CRISPR-associated proteins)系统为细菌与古生菌中抵御外源病毒或质粒DNA入侵的获得性免疫系统。该系统在crRNA的指导下,使核酸酶Cas识别并降解外源DNA。其中,Ⅱ型CRISPR-Cas系统最为简单,仅包括一个核酸酶Cas9与tracrRNA：crRNA二聚体便可完成其生物功能。基于CRISPR-Cas9的基因组编辑技术的核心为将tracrRNA:crRNA设计为引导RNA,在引导RNA的指导下Cas9定位于特定DNA序列上,进行DNA双链切割,实现基因组的定向编辑。CRISPR-Cas9系统以设计操纵简便、编辑高效与通用性广等优势成为新一代基因组编辑技术,为基因组定向改造调控与应用等带来突破性革命。从CRISPR-Cas9介导的基因组编辑技术的发展与应用等方面综述其最新研究进展,并着重介绍该技术的关键影响因素,为相关研究者提供参考。     

CRISPR-based DNA and RNA detection with liquid-liquid phase separation

The ability to detect specific nucleic acid sequences allows for a wide range of applications such as the identification of pathogens, clinical diagnostics, and genotyping. CRISPR-Cas proteins Cas12a and Cas13a are RNA-guided endonucleases that bind and cleave specific DNA and RNA sequences, respectively. After recognition of a target sequence, both enzymes activate indiscriminate nucleic acid cleavage, which has been exploited for sequence-specific molecular diagnostics of nucleic acids. Here, we present a label-free detection approach that uses a readout based on solution turbidity caused by liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS). Our approach relies on the fact that the LLPS of oppositely charged polymers requires polymers to be longer than a critical length. This length dependence is predicted by the Voorn-Overbeek model, which we describe in detail and validate experimentally in mixtures of polynucleotides and polycations. We show that the turbidity resulting from LLPS can be used to detect the presence of specific nucleic acid sequences by employing the programmable CRISPR-nucleases Cas12a and Cas13a. Because LLPS of polynucleotides and polycations causes solutions to become turbid, the detection of specific nucleic acid sequences can be observed with the naked eye. We furthermore demonstrate that there is an optimal polynucleotide concentration for detection. Finally, we provide a theoretical prediction that hints towards possible improvements of an LLPS-based detection assay. The deployment of LLPS complements CRISPR-based molecular diagnostic applications and facilitates easy and low-cost nucleotide sequence detection.     

Efficient target cleavage by Type V Cas12a effectors programmed with split CRISPR RNA

CRISPR RNAs (crRNAs) that direct target DNA cleavage by Type V Cas12a nucleases consist of constant repeat-derived 5′-scaffold moiety and variable 3′-spacer moieties. Here, we demonstrate that removal of most of the 20-nucleotide scaffold has only a slight effect on in vitro target DNA cleavage by a Cas12a ortholog from Acidaminococcus sp. (AsCas12a). In fact, residual cleavage was observed even in the presence of a 20-nucleotide crRNA spacer moiety only. crRNAs split into separate scaffold and spacer RNAs catalyzed highly specific and efficient cleavage of target DNA by AsCas12a in vitro and in lysates of human cells. In addition to dsDNA target cleavage, AsCas12a programmed with split crRNAs also catalyzed specific ssDNA target cleavage and non-specific ssDNA degradation (collateral activity). V-A effector nucleases from Francisella novicida (FnCas12a) and Lachnospiraceae bacterium (LbCas12a) were also functional with split crRNAs. Thus, the ability of V-A effectors to use split crRNAs appears to be a general property. Though higher concentrations of split crRNA components are needed to achieve efficient target cleavage, split crRNAs open new lines of inquiry into the mechanisms of target recognition and cleavage and may stimulate further development of single-tube multiplex and/or parallel diagnostic tests based on Cas12a nucleases.     

Carbon and water fluxes in ecologically vulnerable areas in China

Ecologic vulnerable areas (EVAs) are the regions where ecosystems are fragile and vulnerable to suffer from degradation with external disturbances, e.g. environmental changes and human activities (Feng et al. 2022; Wang et al. 2019). EVAs in China are widely distributed and account for more than 55% China’s land area (Ministry of Ecology and Environment of the People’s Republic of China 2008). The ecosystem in EVAs, chartered with low stability, weak resistance and high vulnerability, has been experiencing significant degradation owing to the impacts of global climate change and human activities (Bai et al. 2018; Chen et al. 2021; Yu et al. 2022). The EVAs in China are not only the most serious areas of environmental degradation, but also the most poverty-stricken regions (Wang et al. 2019). Harsh environmental condition (drought, low temperature and strong radiation) and limited resource supply (water, soil nutrients, etc.) constrain the vegetation productivity and ecosystem services of EVAs (Li et al. 2021). Climate change adds new challenges with warmer temperatures, changing rainfall regime and increasing frequency of extreme events (drought, heat wave, storms, etc.), which make it is more difficult to predict the changes of ecosystem processes and functions in future scenarios (Piao et al. 2020; Reid et al. 2014). Carbon and water fluxes are the core ecosystem processes, which is linked to diverse ecosystem services (Lian et al. 2021). Therefore, clarifying the variations and controls of ecosystem carbon and water fluxes is an effective approach to clarifying how ecosystem respond to global change in EVAs (Baldocchi 2020). As the only technique can directly measure the carbon, water and energy fluxes between vegetation and atmosphere, eddy covariance technique has been considered as a standard method for flux observations (Chen et al. 2020). By integrating long-term, eddy covariance measurements over time and space, researches are able to assess ecosystem metabolism at different time scales (hours to decades) (Forzieri et al. 2020; Han et al. 2020; Jung et al. 2017). Eddy covariance measurements also produce information on how ecosystem respond to the changes in climate, which is useful for assessing ecosystem carbon sequestration (Hu et al. 2018), water and energy balance (Forzieri et al. 2020), resource use efficiency (Liu et al. 2019) and ecosystem feedback to climate change (Huang et al. 2019; Piao et al. 2020; Yue et al. 2020). Long-term flux measurements are also vital for detecting the responses of ecosystem functions to extreme events, optimizing and validating models on regional and global scales (Baldocchi 2020). Combining with remote sensing and ecosystem modeling techniques, scientists can upscale and evaluate the functional relations between carbon and water fluxes with environmental variables at high resolution and across diverse spatial/temporal scales (Niu et al. 2017; Xia et al. 2020).     

CRISPR-Cas9系统在疾病模型中的应用

规律成簇间隔短回文重复（CRISPR）及相关核酸内切酶（Cas）系统是最近发现的一种关于RNA指导核酸内切酶的基因编辑技术,这一技术的发现促进了生物学和医学研究的发展。CRISPR-Cas9系统的简便性使其广泛应用于细胞基因组编辑、动物模型的构建及疾病模型的基因治疗。现就CRISPR-Cas9系统的结构特点、作用机制及应用进行了综述。     

基于CRISPR-Cas13家族的RNA编辑系统及其最新进展

存在于细菌和古菌中的获得性免疫系统CRISPR-Cas目前已被广泛应用到生物技术领域,尤其是靶向DNA的CRISPR-Cas9技术。然而CRISPR-Cas系统靶向RNA的技术还处于初步应用阶段。Ⅵ型CRISPR-Cas系统(CRISPR-Cas13)的发现,揭示了RNA引导的RNA靶向性。CRISPR-Cas13是目前CRISPR-Cas家族中唯一只靶向ssRNA的系统,为RNA靶向和RNA编辑奠定了基础。根据Cas13系统发育已证明将Ⅵ型CRISPR-Cas系统分为4种亚型(A-D)。主要对目前最新的靶向RNA技术的CRISPR-Cas13家族的分类以及防御机制进行了综述,介绍了 CRISPR-Cas13 技术的应用以及基于CRISPR-Cas13家族的RNA编辑系统的最新研究进展。最后,对目前CRISPR-Cas13 RNA编辑技术体系存在的问题进行了分析和对未来的发展进行展望。     

Structural Basis for the Ribonuclease Activity of a Thermostable CRISPR-Cas13a from Thermoclostridium caenicola

The RNA-targeting type VI CRISPR-Cas effector complexes are widely used in biotechnology applications such as gene knockdown, RNA editing, and molecular diagnostics. Compared with Cas13a from mesophilic organisms, a newly discovered Cas13a from thermophilic bacteria Thermoclostridium caenicola (TccCas13a) shows low sequence similarity, high thermostability, and lacks pre-crRNA processing activity. The thermostability of TccCas13a has been harnessed to make a sensitive and robust tool for nucleic acid detection. Here we present the structures of TccCas13a-crRNA binary complex at 2.8 Å, and TccCas13a at 3.5 Å. Although TccCas13a shares a similarly bilobed architecture with other mesophilic organism-derived Cas13a proteins, TccCas13a displayed distinct structure features. Specifically, it holds a long crRNA 5′-flank, forming extensive polar contacts with Helical-1 and HEPN2 domains. The detailed analysis of the interaction between crRNA 5′-flank and TccCas13a suggested lack of suitable nucleophile to attack the 2′-OH of crRNA 5′-flank may explain why TccCas13a fails to cleave pre-crRNA. The stem-loop segment of crRNA spacer toggles between double-stranded and single-stranded conformational states, suggesting a potential safeguard mechanism for target recognition. Superimposition of the structures of TccCas13a and TccCas13a-crRNA revealed several conformational changes required for crRNA loading, including dramatic movement of Helical-2 domain. Collectively, these structural insights expand our understanding into type VI CRISPR-Cas effectors, and would facilitate the development of TccCas13a-based applications.     

ATG8ylation of proteins: A way to cope with cell stress?

The ATG8 family of proteins regulates autophagy in a variety of ways. Recently, ATG8s were demonstrated to conjugate directly to cellular proteins in a process termed “ATG8ylation,” which is amplified by mitochondrial damage and antagonized by ATG4 proteases. ATG8s may have an emerging role as small protein modifiers.

ATG8 proteins directly conjugate to cellular proteinsAutophagy describes the capture of intracellular material by autophagosomes and their delivery to lysosomes for destruction (Kaur and Debnath, 2015). This process homeostatically remodels the intracellular environment and is necessary for an organism to overcome starvation (Kaur and Debnath, 2015). The autophagy pathway is coordinated by autophagy-related (ATG) proteins that are controlled by diverse post-translational modifications (e.g., phosphorylation, acetylation, ubiquitination, and lipidation; Ichimura et al., 2000; McEwan and Dikic, 2011). Recently, a previously uncharacterized post-translational modification termed “ATG8ylation” was uncovered (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). ATG8ylation is the direct covalent attachment of the small ubiquitin-like family of ATG8 proteins to cellular proteins (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Until now, the only known instances of ATG8 conjugation to proteins were of a transient nature, as E1- and E2-like intermediates with ATG7 and ATG3, respectively, as a way of ligating ATG8 to the lipid phosphatidylethanolamine during autophagy (Ichimura et al., 2000). Therefore, ATG8ylation may represent an underappreciated regulatory mechanism for many cellular proteins that coordinate pathways such as mitophagy.ATG8s play many roles in the autophagy pathwayDuring canonical autophagy, the ATG8 family (comprising LC3A, -B, and -C and GABARAP, -L1, and -L2) undergoes molecular processing that concludes with their attachment to phosphatidylethanolamine, enabling proper construction of autophagosomes and subsequent autophagosome–lysosome fusion (Nguyen et al., 2016). The ATG4 family of cysteine proteases (ATG4A, -B, -C, and -D) cleaves ATG8 proteins immediately after a conserved glycine residue in their C terminus in a process dubbed “priming,” which leads to the formation of ATG8-I (Skytte Rasmussen et al., 2017; Tanida et al., 2004). ATG7 then attaches to the exposed glycine residue of ATG8-I via a thioester linkage to form an E1 ubiquitin-like complex that transfers ATG8-I to ATG3 in a similar way to generate an E2-like complex (Ichimura et al., 2000). The ATG5–ATG12–ATG16L1 complex then catalyzes the E3-like transfer of ATG8-I from ATG3 to phosphatidylethanolamine to form ATG8-II, which is the lipidated species that is incorporated into double membrane–bound compartments such as autophagosomes (Hanada et al., 2007). The lipidation of ATG8s and their recruitment to the phagophore are not essential for the formation of autophagosomes but are important for phagophore expansion, the selective capture of autophagic substrates, and autophagosome–lysosome fusion (Kirkin and Rogov, 2019; Nguyen et al., 2016). Intriguingly, ATG8 lipidation is multifaceted, as ATG8s can be alternatively lipidated with phosphatidylserine (instead of phosphatidylethanolamine) to enable their recruitment to single membrane–bound compartments during LC3-associated phagocytosis, influenza infection, and lysosomal dysfunction (Durgan et al., 2021).The discovery of ATG8ylationKey insights into ATG8ylation came from the observation that various ATG8s form high-molecular-weight species in cells following the expression of their primed forms that have their C-terminal glycine exposed (for example, LC3B-G), bypassing the need for cleavage by ATG4 (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Indeed, on an immunoblot, ATG8⁺ “smears” resemble that of ubiquitinated proteins (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Traditionally, in the autophagy field, ATG8⁺ smears were thought to arise from poor antibody specificity. However, in light of recent findings, this widely accepted interpretation has been challenged, given that ATG8⁺ smears are enriched following ATG8 overexpression and disappear in the absence of ATG8s (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Smearing has also been detected after immunoprecipitation of epitope-tagged ATG8s from cell extracts under denaturing conditions, ruling out noncovalent interactions accounting for this upshift (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Further, smearing is not abolished by deubiquitinase treatment, arguing strongly against ATG8 ubiquitination as the cause (Nguyen et al., 2021). Everything considered, the most plausible explanation is that ATG8 itself undergoes covalent linkage to cellular proteins, akin to ubiquitin and NEDD8 modifiers, which are structurally similar to ATG8s. Remarkably, the protease ATG4 antagonizes the ATG8ylation state of many proteins (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021).ATG4 displays isoform-specific proteolytic cleavage of ATG8ATG4 is required for the formation of autophagosomes, but its protease activity is not (Nguyen et al., 2021). The protease activity of ATG4 is, however, required for ATG8 processing, such as priming ahead of lipidation and de-lipidation, which removes excess ATG8 from autophagosomes and other membranes (Nguyen et al., 2021; Tanida et al., 2004; Fig. 1 A). Apart from these functions, ATG4 regulates the deubiquitinase-like removal of ATG8 from cellular proteins (de-ATG8ylation; Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021; Fig. 1 A). Consistent with this role, deletion of all four ATG4 isoforms (A, B, C, and D) increases the abundance of ATG8ylated proteins (Nguyen et al., 2021). In contrast, overexpression of ATG4B has the opposite effect, but only if its protease activity is intact (Agrotis et al., 2019). As such, ATG4 inhibits the ATG8ylation state of many proteins, which is likely to modulate their downstream functions.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.The many roles of ATG4 in ATG8 processing. (A) Molecular processing of ATG8 proteins by ATG4 illustrating its roles in priming, de-lipidation, and de-ATG8ylation. The structure of LC3B (Protein Data Bank accession no. 1V49) was used to denote ATG8 (G, glycine; PE, phosphatidylethanolamine). (B) Heatmap summarizing relationships between ATG4 isoforms and ATG8 family members. Data were summarized for qualitative interpretation (Agrotis et al., 2019; Li et al., 2011; Nguyen et al., 2021). Int., intermediate; N.d., not determined. (C) Graphical summary of questions moving forward with ATG8ylation (P, phosphorylation).ATG4 is an important “gatekeeper” for ATG8 conjugation events. ATG4 primes ATG8s to expose their C-terminal glycine, which is required for conjugation to proteins or lipids; however, ATG4 also catalyzes de-ATG8ylation and de-lipidation events, respectively (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021; Tanida et al., 2004). Because the C-terminal glycine of a single ATG8 is occupied when conjugated to a protein or lipid, it is unlikely that ATG8ylated proteins directly engage with phagophore membranes in the same way as ATG8-II. Indeed, protease protection assays with recombinant ATG4B reveal that de-ATG8ylation of cell lysates remains unchanged with or without organellar membrane disruption, suggesting that ATG8ylated proteins are largely cytoplasmic facing rather than intraluminal (Agrotis et al., 2019). Paradoxically, however, ATG8ylation is enhanced by lysosomal V-type ATPase inhibition, which blocks the degradation of lysosomal contents, indicating that ATG8ylated substrates may undergo lysosome-dependent turnover (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). One explanation for these differences may be that the process of ATG8ylation is itself sensitive to lysosomal dysfunction.Functional relationships between ATG4s and ATG8sIsoforms of ATG4 show clear preferences for proteolytically processing ATG8 subfamilies (i.e., LC3s and GABARAPs) for de-ATG8ylation and priming upstream of phosphatidylethanolamine ligation (Agrotis et al., 2019; Li et al., 2011; Nguyen et al., 2021; Fig. 1 B). ATG4A strongly reduces the abundance of proteins that have been ATG8ylated with the GABARAP family while promoting ligation of GABARAPs to phosphatidylethanolamine (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021; Fig. 1 B). In contrast, ATG4B strongly reduces the abundance of proteins that have been ATG8ylated with LC3 proteins while promoting ligation of LC3s to phosphatidylethanolamine (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021; Fig. 1 B). In comparison, ATG4C and -D lack obvious de-ATG8ylation activity, although the latter weakly promotes phosphatidylethanolamine ligation to GABARAPL1 only (Nguyen et al., 2021). These functional similarities between ATG4 isoforms are consistent with both their sequence and structural homology (i.e., ATG4A and -B are most similar; Maruyama and Noda, 2018; Satoo et al., 2009). Structurally, ATG4B adopts an auto-inhibited conformation with its regulatory loop and N-terminal tail blocking substrate entry to its proteolytic core (Maruyama and Noda, 2018). LC3B induces conformational rearrangements in ATG4B that involve displacement of its regulatory loop and its N-terminal tail, with the latter achieved by an interaction between the ATG8-interacting region in its N-terminal tail with a second copy of LC3B that functions allosterically (Maruyama and Noda, 2018; Satoo et al., 2009). These rearrangements permit entry of LC3B into the proteolytic core of ATG4B, where cleavage of LC3B following its C-terminal glycine occurs (Li et al., 2011; Maruyama and Noda, 2018). ATG4B^L232 is directly involved in LC3B binding and its selectivity for LC3s (Satoo et al., 2009). This residue corresponds to ATG4A^I233 and, when substituted for leucine, gives ATG4A^I233L the ability to efficiently process LC3 proteins, whereas without this mutation it preferentially processes GABARAPs (Satoo et al., 2009). Moreover, the ATG8–ATG4 interaction is necessary for the de-ATG8ylation of cellular proteins, as an LC3B-G^Q116P mutant that cannot bind to ATG4 leads to widespread ATG8ylation (Agrotis et al., 2019). Altogether, these observations hint toward a common mechanism of ATG8 cleavage that regulates priming, de-lipidation, and de-ATG8ylation.Mitochondrial damage promotes ATG8ylationATG8ylation of cellular proteins appears to be enhanced by mitochondrial depolarization and inhibition of the lysosomal V-type ATPase (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). This may be the consequence of acute ATG4A and -B inhibition, given that cells lacking all ATG4 isoforms display an increased abundance of ATG8ylated proteins and are insensitive to further increase by mitochondrial depolarization or lysosomal V-type ATPase inhibition (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). Indeed, mitochondrial depolarization leads to activation of ULK1, which phosphorylates ATG4B^S316 to inhibit its protease activity (Pengo et al., 2017). Similarly, mitochondrial depolarization stimulates TBK1 activation, which prevents de-lipidation of ATG8s by blocking the ATG8–ATG4 interaction through phosphorylation of LC3C^S93/S96 and GABARAP-L2^S87/S88 (Herhaus et al., 2020; Richter et al., 2016). As such, ATG8 phosphorylation may render ATG8ylated substrates more resistant to de-ATG8ylation by ATG4s. This may be analogous to how chains of phosphorylated ubiquitin^S65 are more resistant to hydrolysis by deubiquitinating enzymes than unphosphorylated ones (Wauer et al., 2015). Moreover, ATG8ylation is insensitive to nutrient deprivation and pharmacological inhibition of mTOR, which rules out a functional contribution of this process to starvation-induced autophagy (Agrotis et al., 2019). Therefore, ATG8ylation may be a unique aspect of mitophagy (and perhaps also other forms of selective autophagy) given that depolarization potently activates Parkin-dependent mitophagy (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021).Substrates of ATG8ylationBased on ATG8⁺ smearing, ATG4 regulates the de-ATG8ylation of numerous proteins (Agrotis et al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2021). For the majority, their identity, induced structural and functional changes, and the cellular contexts during which these modifications occur await exploration. Considering that the ATG8 interactome is well characterized, it is likely that at least some ATG8ylated proteins have been mistaken for ATG8-binding partners (Behrends et al., 2010). Given their E2- and E3-like roles in ATG8 lipidation, it is remarkable that ATG3 and ATG16L1 are themselves modified by ATG8ylation (Agrotis et al., 2019; Hanada et al., 2007; Ichimura et al., 2000; Nguyen et al., 2021). Lysine mutagenesis indicates that ATG3^K243 is the “acceptor” site for ATG8ylation (Agrotis et al., 2019). ATG3^K243 is essential for its conjugation to either LC3B or ATG12 and is required for autophagosomes to form around damaged mitochondria (Agrotis et al., 2019; Radoshevich et al., 2010). This also raises the possibility that key functions originally attributed to ATG3–ATG12 conjugation may be, at least in part, due to ATG3–ATG8 conjugation. Because multiple high-molecular-weight species of ATG3 are enriched following immunoprecipitation of primed LC3B-G from cells lacking ATG4B, it is likely that ATG3 is either mono-ATG8ylated at several sites or poly-ATG8ylated (Agrotis et al., 2019). ATG8ylation of ATG3 may also reflect the stabilization of its E2-like intermediate (Ichimura et al., 2000). ATG8ylation of ATG16L1 may regulate whether canonical or noncanonical autophagy pathways are activated (Durgan et al., 2021; Nguyen et al., 2021). In line with this possibility, the WD40 domain mutant of ATG16L1^K490A prevents lipidation of ATG8s with phosphatidylserine (i.e., during noncanonical autophagy pathways) but not phosphatidylethanolamine (i.e., during canonical autophagy; Durgan et al., 2021). Moreover, given that ATG8ylation of protein targets correlates with the activation of mitophagy, it is tempting to speculate that it may stimulate the E2-/E3-like activity of the ATG8 conjugation machinery to amplify mitochondrial capture and destruction.Concluding remarksThe finding that numerous cellular proteins are modified by ATG8ylation poses several questions about how signaling networks are coordinated during selective autophagy (i.e., mitophagy). Whether ATG8ylation is augmented by mitochondrial injury per se or is the consequence of mitophagy activation is yet to be determined, as is whether this phenomenon occurs during other types of selective autophagy (e.g., ER-phagy, ribophagy, and lysophagy; Kirkin and Rogov, 2019; Fig. 1 C). While the in vivo relevance of ATG8ylation is not yet understood, it is plausible that this process could be altered in diseases with defective mitophagy (e.g., Parkinson’s disease and atherosclerosis). Exploring the mechanistic aspects of ATG8ylation (e.g., ATG8 ligases and regulatory proteins, linkage types, acceptor sites, etc.) and de-ATG8ylation by ATG4 will improve our understanding about how this modifier alters the structure and biological function of cellular proteins (Fig. 1 C). By identifying ATG8ylated substrates, or the ATG8ylome, insights into whether ATG8ylation is a ubiquitous epiphenomenon or a post-translational modification that is selective to proteins of distinct biological function(s) will become clearer (Fig. 1 C). Considering the similarity of ATG8s with bona fide modifier proteins (e.g., ubiquitin and ubiquitin-like proteins) and the diversity of their substrates (e.g., lipid species and proteins), only now are we beginning to understand the functional complexities of the ATG8 protein family.