Interplay of Light, Melatonin, and Circadian Genes in Skin Pigmentation Regulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circadian regulation of skin pigmentation is essential for thermoregulation, ultraviolet (UV) protection, and synchronization of skin cell renewal. This regulation involves both cell-autonomous photic responses and non-cell-autonomous hormonal control, particularly through melatonin produced in a light-sensitive manner. Photosensitive opsins, cryptochromes, and melatonin regulate circadian rhythms in skin pigment cells. We studied light/dark cycles and melatonin coordination in melanin synthesis and cell proliferation of Xenopus laevis melanophores. In vivo, tadpole pigmentation shows robust circadian regulation mainly hormone-driven, in that isolated melanophores respond strongly to melatonin but only slightly to light. Melanophore proliferation is faster in the dark and slower with melatonin as compared to a 12/12 light/dark cycle. Expression of circadian core genes (clock, bmal1, per1, per2, per3, cry1, cry2, and cry4) in melatonin-treated cells during the light phase mimics dark phase expression. Overexpression of individual Crys did not affect melanization or cell proliferation, likely due to their cooperative actions. Melanin synthesis was inhibited by circadian cycle deregulation through (a) pharmacological inhibition of Cry1 and Cry2 degradation with KL001, (b) continuous light or dark conditions, and (c) melatonin treatment. Our findings suggest that circadian cycle regulation, rather than proliferative capacity, alters melanization of melanophores.
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 | 0.001 | 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".