Pineal melatonin acts as a circadian zeitgeber and growth factor in chick astrocytes.

Melatonin is rhythmically synthesized and released by the avian pineal gland and retina during the night, targeting an array of tissues and affecting a variety of physiological and behavioral processes. Among these targets, astrocytes express two melatonin receptor subtypes in vitro, the Mel(1A) and Mel(1C) receptors, which play a role in regulating metabolic activity and calcium homeostasis in these cells. Molecular characterization of chick astrocytes has revealed the expression of orthologs of the mammalian clock genes including clock, cry1, cry2, per2, and per3. To test the hypothesis that pineal melatonin entrains molecular clockworks in downstream cells, we asked whether coculturing astrocytes with pinealocytes or administration of exogenous melatonin cycles would entrain metabolic rhythms of 2-deoxy [14C]-glucose (2DG] uptake and/or clock gene expression in cultured astrocytes. Rhythmic secretion of melatonin from light-entrained pinealocytes in coculture as well as cyclic administration of exogenous melatonin entrained rhythms of 2DG uptake and expression of Gallus per2 (gper2) and/or gper3, but not of gcry1 mRNA. Surprisingly, melatonin also caused a dose-dependent increase in mitotic activity of astrocytes, both in coculture and when administered exogenously. The observation that melatonin stimulates mitotic activity in diencephalic astrocytes suggests a trophic role of the hormone in brain development. The data suggest a dual role for melatonin in avian astrocytes: synchronization of rhythmic processes in these cells and regulation of growth and differentiation. These two processes may or may not be mutually exclusive.

Modulation of metabolic and clock gene mRNA rhythms by pineal and retinal circadian oscillators.

Avian circadian organization involves interactions between three neural pacemakers: the suprachiasmatic nuclei (SCN), pineal, and retina. Each of these structures is linked within a neuroendocrine loop to influence downstream processes and peripheral oscillations. However, the contribution of each structure to drive or synchronize peripheral oscillators or circadian outputs in avian species is largely unknown. To explore these interactions in the chick, we measured 2-deoxy[(14)C]-glucose (2DG) uptake and mRNA expression of the chick clock genes bmal1, cry1, and per3 in three brain areas and in two peripheral organs in chicks that underwent pinealectomy, enucleation, or sham surgery. We found that 2DG uptake rhythms damp under constant darkness in intact animals, while clock gene mRNA levels continue to cycle, demonstrating that metabolic rhythms are not directly driven by clock gene transcription. Moreover, 2DG rhythms are not phase-locked to rhythms of clock gene mRNA. However, pinealectomy and enucleation had similar disruptive effects on both metabolic and clock gene rhythms, suggesting that both of these oscillators act similarly to reinforce molecular and physiological rhythms in the chicken. Finally, we show that the relative phasing of at least one clock gene, cry1, varies between central and peripheral oscillators in a tissue specific manner. These data point to a complex, differential orchestration of central and peripheral oscillators in the chick, and, importantly, indicate a disconnect between canonical clock gene regulation and circadian control of metabolism.

Circadian genomics of the chick pineal gland in vitro.

BACKGROUND: Chick pinealocytes exhibit all the characteristics of a complete circadian system, comprising photoreceptive inputs, molecular clockworks and an easily measured rhythmic output, melatonin biosynthesis. These properties make the in vitro pineal a particularly useful model for exploring circadian control of gene transcription in a pacemaker tissue, as well as regulation of the transcriptome by primary inputs to the clock (both photic and noradrenergic). RESULTS: We used microarray analysis to investigate the expression of approximately 8000 genes within cultured pinealocytes subjected to both LD and DD. We report that a reduced subset of genes was rhythmically expressed in vitro compared to those previously published in vivo, and that gene expression rhythms were lower in amplitude, although the functional distribution of the rhythmic transcriptome was largely similar. We also investigated the effects of 6-hour pulses of light or of norepinephrine on gene expression in free-running cultures during both subjective day and night. As expected, both light and norepinephrine inhibited melatonin production; however, the two treatments differentially enhanced or suppressed specific sets of genes in a fashion that was dependent upon time of day. CONCLUSION: Our combined approach of utilizing a temporal, photic and pharmacological microarray experiment allowed us to identify novel genes linking clock input to clock function within the pineal. We identified approximately 30 rhythmic, light-responsive, NE-insensitive genes with no previously known clock function, which may play a role in circadian regulation of the pineal. These are candidates for future functional genomics experiments to elucidate their potential role in circadian physiology. Further, we hypothesize that the pineal circadian transcriptome is reduced but functionally conserved in vitro, and supports an endogenous role for the pineal in regulating local rhythms in metabolism, immune function, and other conserved pathways.