Short verdict: Biology is strong, but the node fuses two major degradation systems with different substrates, machinery, kinetics, and regulation. Split if the map can tolerate another node.
What the current graph claims
Node definition: Protein clearance by the ubiquitin-proteasome system and selective autophagy/lysosomal routes.
What is strongly supported: The 26S proteasome degrades many short-lived or damaged ubiquitinated proteins; selective autophagy clears larger cargo, aggregates, organelles, and some ubiquitinated complexes via receptors such as p62/SQSTM1.
What is context-dependent: Proteasome and autophagy compensate or cooperate under stress; K48/K63 shorthand is not absolute.
What is weak, controversial, or assay-biased: Proteolytic condensate/LLPS claims are context-specific; not all degradation occurs in condensates.
What may be duplicate biology under another name: Overlaps with ROUTER, LICENSE, MATURE, INSPECTOR.
Missing or excessive graph structure
Missing edges: Add DESTROY -> MATURE/proteostasis feedback or keep MATURE -> DESTROY; both are relevant.
Excess edges: PAR -> DESTROY “PARylation -> proteolytic condensates” is too strong; better PAR -> ROUTER/repair turnover dashed.
Candidate splits: Split PROTEASOME and SELECTIVE-AUTOPHAGY.
Candidate merges: No merge.
Candidate renames: CLEARANCE if kept fused.
Recommendation
Concrete graph change, if any: Prefer split; if kept, make label “protein clearance outputs: proteasome + selective autophagy.”
Concrete technical-notes/blog wording change, if any: Mirror the graph recommendation in the glossary and relation catalogue, and explicitly mark the confidence/caveat where the claim is context-dependent or assay-sensitive.
Key sources
PMID 28104834 — ubiquitin-proteasome system review.
PMID 28671639 — selective autophagy receptors and mechanisms review.