Enterovirus 71 (EV71), a causative agent of hand, foot, and mouth disease can be classified into three genotypes and many subtypes. The objectives of this study were to conduct a molecular epidemiological study of EV71 in the central region of Taiwan from 2002-2012 and to test the hypothesis that whether the alternative appearance of different EV71 subtypes in Taiwan is due to transmission from neighboring countries or from re-emergence of pre-existing local strains. We selected 174 EV71 isolates and used reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction to amplify their VP1 region for DNA sequencing. Phylogenetic analyses were conducted using Neighbor-Joining, Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian methods. We found that the major subtypes of EV71 in Taiwan were B4 for 2002 epidemic, C4 for 2004-2005 epidemic, B5 for 2008-2009 epidemic, C4 for 2010 epidemic and B5 for 2011-2012 epidemic. Phylogenetic analysis demonstrated that the 2002 and 2008 epidemics were associated with EV71 from Malaysia and Singapore; while both 2010 and 2011-2012 epidemics originated from different regions of mainland China including Shanghai, Henan, Xiamen and Gong-Dong. Furthermore, minor strains have been identified in each epidemic and some of them were correlated with the subsequent outbreaks. Therefore, the EV71 infection in Taiwan may originate from pre-existing minor strains or from other regions in Asia including mainland China. In addition, 101 EV71 isolates were selected for the detection of new recombinant strains using the nucleotide sequences spanning the VP1-2A-2B region. No new recombinant strain was found. Analysis of clinical manifestations showed that patients infected with C4 had significantly higher rates of pharyngeal vesicles or ulcers than patients infected with B5. This is the first study demonstrating that different EV 71 genotypes may have different clinical manifestations and the association of EV71 infections between Taiwan and mainland China.
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.