Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NTR: [Secretory autophagy] #27757

Closed
MariaLivia opened this issue Apr 26, 2024 · 7 comments
Closed

NTR: [Secretory autophagy] #27757

MariaLivia opened this issue Apr 26, 2024 · 7 comments
Assignees

Comments

@MariaLivia
Copy link

Please provide as much information as you can:

  • Suggested term label:

  • Secretory autophagy

  • Definition (free text)

  • Non-lytic type of autophagy in which the autophagic machinery leads to secretion/expulsion of cytoplasmic constituents instead of their degradation.

  • Reference, in format PMID:#######
    PMID:25988755
    PMID:38534758

  • Gene product name and ID to be annotated to this term
    APOLD1 (PMID: 35638551)

  • Parent term(s)
    GO:0006914 Autophagy

  • Children terms (if applicable) Should any existing terms that should be moved underneath this new proposed term?

  • Synonyms (please specify, EXACT, BROAD, NARROW or RELATED)

  • Cross-references

  • For enzymes, please provide RHEA and/or EC numbers.

  • Can also provide MetaCyc, KEGG, Wikipedia, and other links.

  • Any other information

@MariaLivia
Copy link
Author

Hi,
any news about this term request? I see there is no assignee.

@pgaudet
Copy link
Contributor

pgaudet commented Jul 2, 2024

Thanks for the reminder ! I meant to ask @marcfeuermann about this; was this omitted on purpose during the autophagy refactoring ? Or it this missing and should be added?

@marcfeuermann
Copy link

Hello,
I've never heard of the term until now, and I've never seen it mentioned in any major article on autophagy. As far as I'm concerned, it's rather odd because in autophagy there's "phagy", i.e. degradation. For me, it's clearly another process. Secretory autophagy is a form of unconventional protein secretion that uses the autophagy machinery. So, as far as the ontology is concerned, this should be classified as a secretion process, and not as an autophagy sub-process.
I hope this will help.
Best regards,
Marc.

@marcfeuermann
Copy link

In fact the problem comes from the term "secretory autophagy" itself which is nonsense. I would rather call this something like "autophagosome-dependent secretion" or "autophagosome-mediated secretion", and add "secretory autophagy" as a synonym. The emphasis would be on secretion.
Also we could make a more appropriate definition:
"Unconventional secretion pathway that uses the autophagy machinery to facilitate secretion of the cytosolic cargo such as leaderless cytosolic proteins which cannot enter the conventional secretory pathway operating via the endoplasmic reticulum and the Golgi apparatus."
Like that it would fit well as a child of "secretion".
Marc.

@MariaLivia
Copy link
Author

Perfectly in agreement with Marc.

raymond91125 added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 3, 2024
Created autophagosome-dependent secretion; #27757
@raymond91125
Copy link
Contributor

+[Term]
+id: GO:0160192
+name: autophagosome-dependent secretion
+namespace: biological_process
+def: "A process of exocytosis that uses the autophagy machinery to facilitate secretion of the cytosolic cargo such as leaderless cytosolic proteins which cannot enter the conventional secretory pathway operating via the endoplasmic reticulum and the Golgi apparatus." [PMID:25988755, PMID:38534758]
+synonym: "autophagy-dependent secretion" EXACT []
+synonym: "secretory autophagy" EXACT []
+intersection_of: GO:0006887 ! exocytosis
+intersection_of: has_primary_input GO:0005776 ! autophagosome
+property_value: term_tracker_item "#27757" xsd:anyURI
+created_by: rynl
+creation_date: 2024-07-03T16:58:30Z

@MariaLivia
Copy link
Author

Great, thank you !

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants