Role of Posttranscriptional Regulation in Orcadian Clocks: Lessons formDrosophila
- 1 January 1999
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Chronobiology International
- Vol. 16 (4) , 377-414
- https://doi.org/10.3109/07420529908998716
Abstract
Incredible progress has been made in the last few years in our understanding of the molecular mechanisms underlying circadian clocks. Many of the recent insights have been gained by the isolation and characterization of novel clock mutants and their associated gene products. As might be expected based on theoretical considerations and earlier studies that indicated the importance of temporally regulated macromolecular synthesis for the manifestation of overt rhythms, daily oscillations in the levels of “clock” RNAs and proteins are a pervasive feature of these timekeeping devices. How are these molecular rhythms generated and synchronized? Recent evidence accumulated from a wide variety of model organisms, ranging from bacteria to mammals, points toward an emerging trend; at the “heart” of circadian oscillators lies a cell autonomous transcriptional feedback loop that is composed of alternatively functioning positive and negative elements. Nonetheless, it is also clear that to bring this transcriptional feedback loop to “life” requires important contributions from posttranscriptional regulatory schemes. For one thing, there must be times in the day when the activities of negative-feedback regulators are separated from the activities of the positive regulators they act on, or else the oscillatory potential of the system will be dissipated, resulting in a collection of molecules at steady state. This review mainly summarizes the role of posttranscriptional regulation in the Drosophila melanogaster timekeeping mechanism. Accumulating evidence from Drosophila and other systems suggests that posttranscriptional regulatory mechanisms increase the dynamic range of circadian transcriptional feedback loops, overlaying them with appropriately timed biochemical constraints that not only engender these loops with precise daily periods of about 24h, but also with the ability to integrate and respond rapidly to multiple environmental cues such that their phases are aligned optimally to the prevailing external conditions.Keywords
This publication has 95 references indexed in Scilit:
- Antiphase Circadian Expression betweenBMAL1andperiodHomologue mRNA in the Suprachiasmatic Nucleus and Peripheral Tissues of RatsBiochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 1998
- A Clockwork Explosion!Neuron, 1998
- The basic-helix–loop–helix-PAS orphan MOP3 forms transcriptionally active complexes with circadian and hypoxia factorsProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1998
- Circadian rhythms: From behaviour to moleculesBioEssays, 1997
- Circadian Pacemakers Blowing Hot and Cold—But They're Clocks, Not ThermometersCell, 1997
- Are Cycling Gene Products as Internal Zeitgebers No Longer the Zeitgeist of Chronobiology?Neuron, 1996
- Control of Circadian Rhythms by a Two-Component ClockMolecular and Cellular Neuroscience, 1996
- Behavior of period-altered circadian rhythm mutants ofDrosophila in light: Dark cycles (Diptera: Drosophilidae)Journal of Insect Behavior, 1992
- Feedback of the Drosophila period gene product on circadian cycling of its messenger RNA levelsNature, 1990
- Behavioural entrainment of circadian rhythmsCellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 1989