Distinct requirements of Autophagy-related genes in programmed cell death

Although most programmed cell death (PCD) during animal development occurs by caspase-dependent apoptosis, autophagy-dependent cell death is also important in specific contexts. In previous studies, we established that PCD of the obsolete Drosophila larval midgut tissue is dependent on autophagy and can occur in the absence of the main components of the apoptotic pathway. As autophagy is primarily a survival mechanism in response to stress such as starvation, it is currently unclear if the regulation and mechanism of autophagy as a pro-death pathway is distinct to that as pro-survival. To establish the requirement of the components of the autophagy pathway during cell death, we examined the effect of systematically knocking down components of the autophagy machinery on autophagy induction and timing of midgut PCD. We found that there is a distinct requirement of the individual components of the autophagy pathway in a pro-death context. Furthermore, we show that TORC1 is upstream of autophagy induction in the midgut indicating that while the machinery may be distinct the activation may occur similarly in PCD and during starvation-induced autophagy signalling. Our data reveal that while autophagy initiation occurs similarly in different cellular contexts, there is a tissue/function-specific requirement for the components of the autophagic machinery.There is a fundamental requirement for multicellular organisms to remove excess, detrimental, obsolete and damaged cells by programmed cell death (PCD).^{1, 2} In the majority of cases caspase-dependent apoptosis is the principle pathway of PCD; however, there are other modes of cell death with important context-specific roles, such as autophagy.^{3, 4} Defects in autophagy have significant adverse consequences to normal cellular functions and contribute to the pathogenesis of numerous human diseases. This is particularly evident in cancer where depending on the context autophagy can have tumour-suppressing or -promoting roles. Given the number of clinical trials targeting autophagy in cancer therapy, it will be critically important to understand the context-specific regulation and functions of autophagy.⁵Autophagy is a highly conserved multi-step catabolic process characterised by the encapsulation of part of the cytoplasm inside a double-membrane vesicle called the autophagosome. Autophagosomes then fuse with lysosomes and the components are subsequently degraded by acidic lysosomal hydrolases.⁶ The process of autophagy can be functionally divided into four groups: (1) serine/threonine kinase Atg1 (ULK1 in mammals) complex and its regulators responsible for the induction of autophagy; (2) the class III phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) complex, which involves Atg6 and functions in the nucleation of the autophagosome; (3) the Atg8 and Atg12 conjugation systems, which involves several Autophagy-related (Atg) proteins essential for the expansion of autophagosome; and (4) Atg9 and its associated proteins including Atg2 and Atg18, which aids the recycling of lipid and proteins.⁷ In addition, several of the Atg proteins can function in multiple steps. For example, Atg1 interacts with proteins with different functions (e.g. Atg8, Atg18 and others), suggesting that it is not only required for initiation but also participates in the formation of autophagosomes.⁸ It is yet to be fully established if the context-specific functions of autophagy have distinct requirements for select components of the autophagy pathway.High levels of autophagy are induced in response to stress, such as nutrient deprivation, intracellular stress, high temperature, high culture density, hormones and growth factor deprivation.^{9, 10} The target of rapamycin (TOR) pathway is a central mediator in regulating the response to nutrients and growth signalling. TOR functions in two distinct complexes, with regulatory associated protein of TOR (Raptor) in TOR complex 1 (TORC1) or with rapamycin insensitive companion of TOR (Rictor) in TOR complex 2 (TORC2).^{11, 12, 13, 14, 15} Of these, TORC1 regulates autophagy; in nutrient-rich conditions, TORC1 activity inhibits the Atg1 complex preventing autophagy and cellular stress such as starvation leads to inactivation of TORC1 promoting a dramatic increase in autophagy. TORC2 can also negatively regulate autophagy via the FoxO3 complex in specific context.¹⁶Most direct in vivo evidence for a role of autophagy in cell death has emerged from studies in Drosophila.⁵ Developmentally regulated removal of the Drosophila larval midgut can occur in the absence of canonical apoptosis pathway, whereas inhibiting autophagy delays the process.^{17, 18} Also, inhibition of autophagy leads to delayed degradation of larval salivary glands in Drosophila.¹⁹ Genetic studies have shown that many of the Atg genes known to be involved in starvation-induced autophagy in the Drosophila fat body are also involved in autophagy-dependent degradation of salivary glands and midgut.^{5, 20, 21} However, systematic studies to test whether starvation-induced autophagy and autophagy required for PCD require identical components have not been carried out, and there are some observations suggesting that there may be distinctions. For example, in Atg7-null mutants autophagy is perturbed but the larval–adult midgut transition proceeds normally.²² In addition, a novel Atg7- and Atg3-independent autophagy pathway is required for cell size reduction during midgut removal.²³ Here we show that downregulation of TORC1 activity is required for induction of autophagy during midgut removal. Surprisingly, however, the requirement of part of the autophagy machinery during midgut degradation was found to be distinct to that which is required during autophagy induced by starvation. We report that Atg genes required for autophagy initiation, Atg8a and recycling are all essential for autophagy-dependent midgut removal, whereas other components of the elongation and nucleation steps are not essential.