LAMP1 antibody and lysosome and autophagy reagents: counting compartments, not flux

Autophagy is a flux, and every marker in it is a snapshot of a compartment that is simultaneously being made and destroyed. A rise in a marker can mean more autophagy or blocked degradation, and the two are opposite conclusions. Only a comparison with and without a degradation inhibitor separates them.

good laboratory practice for nonclinical studies, 21 CFR
Part 58
the labelling clause behind research use only on an antibody
809.10(c)
the biosafety manual that decides handling for primary material
BMBL

The figures in this panel are regulation and manual identifiers, named from the documents themselves and linked below. They are not prices: BioBricks publishes verified prices for synthesis services only, and does not imply a reagent price index it has not measured.

Measuring flux honestly

  1. Always run the inhibitor arm. The interpretable measurement is the difference between marker levels with and without a lysosomal inhibitor. A single measurement without that comparison cannot distinguish increased synthesis of autophagosomes from blocked clearance.
  2. Read the lipidated form as a ratio. The informative quantity is the proportion of the marker in its membrane bound form, and it needs a gel that resolves the two species cleanly. Reporting only the lipidated band is a common and misleading shortcut.
  3. Use the cargo receptor as the second axis. A receptor that is itself degraded by the pathway falls when flux increases and accumulates when it is blocked. Read in the opposite direction to the membrane marker, it constrains the interpretation considerably.
  4. Treat machinery levels as capacity, not activity. Core machinery proteins are present whether or not the pathway is running. Their levels report capacity, and reading them as activity is one of the most frequent errors in this literature.
  5. Distinguish zymogen from mature protease. Lysosomal proteases are made as inactive precursors and matured in the compartment. A reagent detecting both reports synthesis; only the mature band reports delivery to a functioning lysosome.

Two readings, opposite conclusions

This is the field where a single blot most reliably produces the wrong answer. Accumulation of a marker is consistent with the pathway running harder and with the pathway being blocked, and the papers that get this wrong are numerous enough that reviewers now ask for the inhibitor arm by default.

Design it in from the start. It doubles the number of lanes and removes the only serious objection to the result.

Imaging adds what blots cannot

Puncta counts per cell, colocalisation between an autophagosome marker and a lysosomal one, and tandem fluorescent reporters that change colour on acidification all report flux more directly than a blot.

Where the conclusion is central, pair a blot with one imaging readout. Two independent methods agreeing is what makes a flux claim durable.

A tfeb antibody and the translocation that is the signal

TFEB drives lysosomal gene expression and is controlled by moving into the nucleus when the pathway that holds it in the cytoplasm is off, so a tfeb antibody measures a ratio between compartments rather than a level. A fractionation with markers, or an image with a nuclear counterstain, is the method. Starvation or an inhibitor with a stated time is the positive control that shows the movement.

An atg5 antibody and the conjugate that is the band

ATG5 is mostly found covalently joined to ATG12, so an atg5 antibody usually shows the conjugate rather than free protein, and a figure expecting a single small band will read as a failure. The expected masses for both forms belong in the method. Because the conjugate is stable, its level reports capacity rather than flux, and flux is measured with a lysosomal inhibitor beside it.

An atg7 antibody and the enzyme the pathway needs

ATG7 is the activating enzyme for both autophagy conjugation systems, so an atg7 antibody is the reagent for confirming a knockout or knockdown that the rest of a figure depends on. It is large, which makes transfer the usual failure, and a knockout lysate is the cleanest validation available in this field. Loss of the ATG12 conjugate on the same membrane is the functional confirmation.

A rab7 antibody and the compartment it defines

Rab7 marks late endosomes and lysosomes and is read as a punctate pattern whose overlap with another marker is the measurement, so a rab7 antibody is an imaging reagent with a colocalisation rule. Only the membrane bound pool is informative, so a fractionation separating cytosolic from membrane Rab is what a blot should show. The family is large and conserved, so specificity data matter.

An npc1 antibody and the cholesterol export defect

NPC1 is a large multipass lysosomal membrane protein, so an npc1 antibody needs gentle lysis and no boiling, and the band is broad because the protein is glycosylated. It is read with a cholesterol stain, since the accumulating lipid rather than the protein is the phenotype. A patient derived line is the negative control that makes a faint band in a normal line interpretable.

Common questions

Does more autophagosome marker mean more autophagy?
Not on its own. It can equally mean autophagosomes are accumulating because they are not being cleared. The inhibitor comparison is what distinguishes induction from blockade, and no single measurement substitutes for it.
Does a LAMP 1 antibody measure lysosome function?
No. It counts compartments carrying that membrane protein. Function requires acidification and active proteases, which are measured with pH sensitive probes and by looking at protease maturation.
Why does the cargo receptor, an SQSTM1 antibody target, go the other way?
Because it is degraded along with the cargo it binds. Falling receptor with rising membrane marker indicates flux; both rising together indicates a block.

Get a shortlist for your project

Free. We send a shortlist of vendors whose published prices and service scope fit what you described, built from the verified index on this site. We may email you about this enquiry and similar services from this site; opt out any time, including from the first message.

Browse by service class

Sources

Cite or embed this figure

The median advertised gene synthesis price per base pair in the US research synthesis services market was $0.11 in August 2026, across 4 verified vendor service pages recorded in BioBricks Synthesis Price Index.

Cite as: "BioBricks Synthesis Price Index", updated 2026-08-24, https://biobricks.org/lamp1-antibody/.

Embed this figure (plain HTML, no scripts)
median advertised gene synthesis price per base pair · the US research synthesis services market · August 2026

$0.11

Middle 50%$0.07 – $0.15
verified vendor service pages4

Source: BioBricks Synthesis Price Index

Get a vendor shortlistCompare synthesis prices