I agree with the previous comments, but the literature has shown that the LC3-II / LC3-I ratio has not been considered a good parameter for the interpretation of the autophagy flow. In my previous experience, I obtained results (without the use of drugs that inhibit or activate autophagy) in which there was an increase in LC3-II concomitant with an increase in p62. My choice to better interpret my data was to evaluate other proteins from the different stages of the autophagy flow, such as beclin1, LAMP2 and CHMP2B. As well as immunofluorescence analyzes and transmission electron microscopy.
I suggest the reading of Klionsky DJ, Abdelmohsen K, Abe A, et al. Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) [published correction appears in Autophagy. 2016;12(2):443. Autophagy. 2016;12(1):1-222. doi:10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356, to better understand your data.
I agree with the previous comments, but the literature has shown that the LC3-II / LC3-I ratio has not been considered a good parameter for the interpretation of the autophagy flow. In my previous experience, I obtained results (without the use of drugs that inhibit or activate autophagy) in which there was an increase in LC3-II concomitant with an increase in p62. My choice to better interpret my data was to evaluate other proteins from the different stages of the autophagy flow, such as beclin1, LAMP2 and CHMP2B. As well as immunofluorescence analyzes and transmission electron microscopy.
I suggest the reading of Klionsky DJ, Abdelmohsen K, Abe A, et al. Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition) [published correction appears in Autophagy. 2016;12(2):443. Autophagy. 2016;12(1):1-222. doi:10.1080/15548627.2015.1100356, to better understand your data.