Search

Like neurons in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), the master circadian pacemaker in the brain, single fibroblasts can function as independent oscillators. In the SCN, synaptic and paracrine signaling among cells creates a robust, synchronized circadian oscillation, whereas there is no evidence for such integration in fibroblast cultures. However, interactions among single-cell fibroblast oscillators cannot be completely excluded, because fibroblasts were not isolated in previous work. In this study, we tested the autonomy of fibroblasts as single-cell circadian oscillators in high- and low-density culture, by single-cell imaging of cells from PER2::LUC circadian reporter mice. We found greatly reduced PER2::LUC rhythmicity in low-density cultures, which could result from lack of either constitutive or rhythmic paracrine signals from neighboring fibroblasts. To discriminate between these 2 possibilities, we mixed PER2::LUC wild-type (WT) cells with nonluminescent, nonrhythmic Bmal1–/– cells, so that density of rhythmic cells was low but overall cell density remained high. In this condition, WT cells showed clear rhythmicity similar to high-density cultures. We also mixed PER2::LUC WT cells with nonluminescent, long period Cry2–/– cells. In this condition, WT cells showed a period no different from cells cultured with rhythmic WT cells or nonrhythmic Bmal1–/– cells. In previous work, we found that low K+ suppresses fibroblast rhythmicity, and we and others have found that either low K+ or low Ca2+ suppresses SCN rhythmicity. Therefore, we attempted to rescue rhythmicity of low-density fibroblasts with high K+ (21 mM), high Ca2+ (3.6 mM), or conditioned medium. Conditioned medium from high-density fibroblast cultures rescued rhythmicity of low-density cultures, whereas high K+ or Ca2+ medium did not consistently rescue rhythmicity. These data suggest that fibroblasts require paracrine signals from adjacent cells for normal expression of rhythmicity, but that these signals do not have to be rhythmic, and that rhythmic signals from other cells do not affect the intrinsic periods of fibroblasts.

Light is the primary signal that calibrates circadian neural circuits and thus coordinates daily physiological and behavioral rhythms with solar entrainment cues. Drosophila and mammalian circadian circuits consist of diverse populations of cellular oscillators that exhibit a wide range of dynamic light responses, periods, phases, and degrees of synchrony. How heterogeneous circadian circuits can generate robust physiological rhythms while remaining flexible enough to respond to synchronizing stimuli has long remained enigmatic. Cryptochrome is a short-wavelength photoreceptor that is endogenously expressed in approximately half of Drosophila circadian neurons. In a previous study, physiological light response was measured using real-time bioluminescence recordings in Drosophila whole-brain explants, which remain intrinsically light-sensitive. Here we apply analysis of real-time bioluminescence experimental data to show detailed dynamic ensemble representations of whole circadian circuit light entrainment at single neuron resolution. Organotypic whole-brain explants were either maintained in constant darkness (DD) for 6 days or exposed to a phase-advancing light pulse on the second day. We find that stronger circadian oscillators support robust overall circuit rhythmicity in DD, whereas weaker oscillators can be pushed toward transient desynchrony and damped amplitude to facilitate a new state of phase-shifted network synchrony. Additionally, we use mathematical modeling to examine how a network composed of distinct oscillator types can give rise to complex dynamic signatures in DD conditions and in response to simulated light pulses. Simulations suggest that complementary coupling mechanisms and a combination of strong and weak oscillators may enable a robust yet flexible circadian network that promotes both synchrony and entrainment. A more complete understanding of how the properties of oscillators and their signaling mechanisms facilitate their distinct roles in light entrainment may allow us to direct and augment the circadian system to speed recovery from jet lag, shift work, and seasonal affective disorder.

Bipolar disorder (BD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) are heritable neuropsychiatric disorders associated with disrupted circadian rhythms. The hypothesis that circadian clock dysfunction plays a causal role in these disorders has endured for decades but has been difficult to test and remains controversial. In the meantime, the discovery of clock genes and cellular clocks has revolutionized our understanding of circadian timing. Cellular circadian clocks are located in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), the brain’s primary circadian pacemaker, but also throughout the brain and peripheral tissues. In BD and MDD patients, defects have been found in SCN-dependent rhythms of body temperature and melatonin release. However, these are imperfect and indirect indicators of SCN function. Moreover, the SCN may not be particularly relevant to mood regulation, whereas the lateral habenula, ventral tegmentum, and hippocampus, which also contain cellular clocks, have established roles in this regard. Dysfunction in these non-SCN clocks could contribute directly to the pathophysiology of BD/MDD. We hypothesize that circadian clock dysfunction in non-SCN clocks is a trait marker of mood disorders, encoded by pathological genetic variants. Because network features of the SCN render it uniquely resistant to perturbation, previous studies of SCN outputs in mood disorders patients may have failed to detect genetic defects affecting non-SCN clocks, which include not only mood-regulating neurons in the brain but also peripheral cells accessible in human subjects. Therefore, reporters of rhythmic clock gene expression in cells from patients or mouse models could provide a direct assay of the molecular gears of the clock, in cellular clocks that are likely to be more representative than the SCN of mood-regulating neurons in patients. This approach, informed by the new insights and tools of modern chronobiology, will allow a more definitive test of the role of cellular circadian clocks in mood disorders.

Cells in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) display remarkable precision, while either physically or chemically decoupling these cells from each other leads to a dramatic increase in period-to-period variability. Where previous studies have classified cells as either arrhythmic or circadian, our wavelet analysis reveals that individual cells, when removed from network interactions, intermittently express circadian and/or longer infradian periods. We reproduce the characteristic period distribution of uncoupled SCN cells with a stochastic model of the uncoupled SCN cell near a bifurcation in Bmal1 transcription repression. This suggests that the uncoupled cells may be switching between 2 oscillatory mechanisms: the indirect negative feedback of protein complex PER-CRY on the expression of Per and Cry genes, and the negative feedback of CLOCK-BMAL1 on the expression of the Bmal1 gene. The model is particularly sensitive near this bifurcation point, with only a small change in Bmal1 transcription repression needed to switch from the stable precision of coupled SCN cells to the unstable oscillations of decoupled individual cells, making this rate constant, an ideal target for cell signaling in the SCN.

Two major approaches have been used to model circadian clocks. Qualitative modeling, used prior to the recent wealth of detailed molecular knowledge, makes general predictions but cannot provide detailed mechanistic insights. The more recent biophysical approach, on the other hand, incorporates the biochemical events that drive the clock and can make detailed and testable molecular predictions. These predictions are being tested using new experimental techniques that measure reaction kinetics and the behavior of individual cells. A joint modeling and experimental approach has recently been used to understand how mutations affecting phosphorylation can lead to a short circadian period in tau mutant hamsters and in humans with familial advanced sleep phase syndrome (FASPS). Another recent study has revealed novel single-cell phenotypes of clock gene mutations, demanding revision of current biophysical models yet validating certain model predictions that were previously overlooked. A new paradigm for clock research is emerging in which modeling inspires new experimental efforts, experimental data inspire new modeling efforts, and joint modeling/experimental studies lead to a deeper understanding of mammalian circadian rhythms.

Circadian rhythms in physiology and behavior are regulated by the SCN. When assessed by expression of clock genes, at least 2 distinct functional cell types are discernible within the SCN: nonrhythmic, light-inducible, retinorecipient cells and rhythmic autonomous oscillator cells that are not directly retinorecipient. To predict the responses of the circadian system, the authors have proposed a model based on these biological properties. In this model, output of rhythmic oscillator cells regulates the activity of the gate cells. The gate cells provide a daily organizing signal that maintains phase coherence among the oscillator cells. In the absence of external stimuli, this arrangement yields a multicomponent system capable of producing a self-sustained consensus rhythm. This follow-up study considers how the system responds when the gate cells are activated by an external stimulus, simulating a response to an entraining (or phase-setting) signal. In this model, the authors find that the system can be entrained to periods within the circadian range, that the free-running system can be phase shifted by timed activation of the gate, and that the phase response curve for activation is similar to that observed when animals are exposed to a light pulse. Finally, exogenous triggering of the gate over a number of days can organize an arrhythmic system, simulating the light-dependent reappearance of rhythmicity in a population of disorganized, independent oscillators. The model demonstrates that a single mechanism (i.e., the output of gate cells) can account for not only free-running and entrained rhythmicity but also other circadian phenomena, including limits of entrainment, a PRC with both delay and advance zones, and the light-dependent reappearance of rhythmicity in an arrhythmic animal.