Biological clocks and incremental growth line formation in dentine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dentine‐ and enamel‐forming cells secrete matrix in consistent rhythmic phases, resulting in the formation of successive microscopic growth lines inside tooth crowns and roots. Experimental studies of various mammals have proven that these lines are laid down in subdaily, daily (circadian), and multidaily rhythms, but it is less clear how these rhythms are initiated and maintained. In 2001, researchers reported that lesioning the so‐called master biological clock, the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), halted daily line formation in rat dentine, whereas subdaily lines persisted. More recently, a key clock gene ( Bmal1 ) expressed in the SCN in a circadian manner was also found to be active in dentine‐ and enamel‐ secretory cells. To probe these potential neurological and local mechanisms for the production of rhythmic lines in teeth, we reexamined the role of the SCN in growth line formation in Wistar rats and investigated the presence of daily lines in Bmal1 knockout mice ( Bmal1 −/− ). In contrast to the results of the 2001 study, we found that both daily and subdaily growth lines persisted in rat dentine after complete or partial SCN lesion in the majority of individuals. In mice, after transfer into constant darkness, daily rhythms continued to manifest as incremental lines in the dentine of each Bmal1 genotype (wild‐type, Bmal +/– , and Bmal1 −/− ). These results affirm that the manifestation of biological rhythms in teeth is a robust phenomenon, imply a more autonomous role of local biological clocks in tooth growth than previously suggested, and underscore the need further to elucidate tissue‐specific circadian biology and its role in incremental line formation. Investigations of this nature will strengthen an invaluable system for determining growth rates and calendar ages from mammalian hard tissues, as well as documenting the early lives of fossil hominins and other primates.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".