## ATL3
- **UniProt:** Q6DD88 · **batch:** proteostasis-batch-2026-06-03 · **review status:** COMPLETE
- **PN placement:** `ALP|Autophagy substrate selection|Selective autophagy receptor|ERphagy` (also `...|Autophagophore initiation and elongation|ULK1 pathway, direct|Modulator of ULK1 activity`) ; **PN-node mapping:** type-leaf `mapped`, `ok_for_propagation_to_go` → GO:0061709 reticulophagy (verified real, OLS); ULK1 leaf `no_mapping`.
- **Consistency:** Internally consistent. Deep research (Falcon) and review YAML both center ATL3 on GTP-dependent homotypic ER membrane fusion / tubular-ER maintenance; both treat the ER-phagy receptor role as unsettled. The notes explicitly document the PN reticulophagy projection and the reasoned decision NOT to add it, quoting Bryce 2023 framing ER-phagy as "possible" context. No contradictions.
- **PN story / NEW pressure:** PN asserts ATL3 as an ERphagy receptor → GO:0061709 reticulophagy, which is NOT in existing GOA and is a real term. The review correctly declined to ADD it: the ATL3-specific evidence supports ER fusion/morphology, and the GABARAP-interaction/ER-phagy receptor claim (Chen 2019, not cited in YAML) is not anchored to a cached supporting quote. Verdict: PN story over-reaches as a confident GO assertion; appropriately held as suggested question/experiment rather than a NEW annotation.
- **Mapping strategy:** Gene does not change the node mapping; the type-leaf `mapped`/`ok_for_propagation` stands as a class-level statement, but this individual gene is a defensible decline (like TOMM20/HSPA8 precedent where projection out-reaches gene evidence). Projected term is narrower than review scope only in that review omits it entirely.
- **Evidence alignment:** Divergent. PN cites review-style titles (Chen 2019 ATL3 ER-phagy receptor; Liu/atlastin-ULK1 JCB) not present in the review's PMID set. Review is built on fusion/structure papers (PMID:37102997, 27619977, 28602821, 24459106). No PMID overlap on the ER-phagy claim → the projection is unsupported within the dossier's own citations.
- **Verdict:** Consistent; PN reticulophagy claim correctly NOT added (over-reaches gene-level evidence). No edits required.