Circadian Rhythm Regulates Development of Enamel in Mouse Mandibular First Molar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhythmic incremental growth lines and the presence of melatonin receptors were discovered in tooth enamel, suggesting possible role of circadian rhythm. We therefore hypothesized that circadian rhythm may regulate enamel formation through melatonin receptors. To test this hypothesis, we examined expression of melatonin receptors (MTs) and amelogenin (AMELX), a maker of enamel formation, during tooth germ development in mouse. Using qRT-PCR and immunocytochemistry, we found that mRNA and protein levels of both MTs and AMELX in normal mandibular first molar tooth germs increased gradually after birth, peaked at 3 or 4 day postnatal, and then decreased. Expression of MTs and AMELX by immunocytochemistry was significantly delayed in neonatal mice raised in all-dark or all-light environment as well as the enamel development. Furthermore, development of tooth enamel was also delayed showing significant immature histology in those animals, especially for newborn mice raised in all daylight condition. Interestingly, disruption in circadian rhythm in pregnant mice also resulted in delayed enamel development in their babies. Treatment with melatonin receptor antagonist 4P-PDOT in pregnant mice caused underexpression of MTs and AMELX associated with long-lasting deficiency in baby enamel tissue. Electromicroscopic evidence demonstrated increased necrosis and poor enamel mineralization in ameloblasts. The above results suggest that circadian rhythm is important for normal enamel development at both pre- and postnatal stages. Melatonin receptors were partly responsible for the regulation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".