Discrimination between these two routes has been made possible by comparing whole transcriptome analyses of mice with or without functional Luminespib in vivo liver clocks (Kornmann et al., 2007). Six out of seven oscillating transcripts ceased to fluctuate when local circadian oscillators were arrested,

indicating that they depend on local oscillators in liver cells as opposed to systemic signals from the SCN. These genes may be termed “locally clock-controlled output genes” (Asher and Schibler, 2011). The remaining single oscillating mRNA transcript continued to fluctuate in a daily manner with few changes in phase, amplitude, or magnitude. These systemically driven liver clock genes most likely include immediate early genes, which can convey CP-673451 rhythmic signals to core clock genes in hepatocytes and are consequently involved in the synchronization of liver clocks and genes directly involved in rhythmic liver physiology and metabolic functions (centrally clock controlled output genes, Asher and Schibler, 2011). Candidates for the synchronization

of the various body clocks in mammals are heat-shock transcription factor 1 (HSF1) (Reinke et al., 2008) and serum response factor 1 (SRF1). The signaling pathways involved in the phase entrainment of peripheral clocks are numerous and are just beginning to be unraveled. To distinguish between SCN-dependent Rutecarpine and feeding-dependent regulators, the kinetics of feeding-induced phase adaptation have been studied. Because the reversal of feeding rhythms sends conflicting feeding messages and SCN signals to peripheral organs, the effects of feeding rhythms on phase adaptation in peripheral clocks have been studied either in the absence of SCN-dependent glucocorticoid signaling or of nutrient-dependent signaling. Ablation of glucocorticoid receptor (GR) in the liver and inversion of feeding

time have revealed that GR and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP-1), respectively, participate in the phase resetting of liver clocks. While GR signaling is SCN dependent (Le Minh et al., 2001), PARP1 is a feeding-dependent regulator (Asher et al., 2010). To establish communication between circadian clocks and metabolism, sensors affecting both systems exist as outlined below. These may include redox sensors, AMP/ATP ratio sensors, glucose sensors, and fatty acid sensors (Figure 4). The first evidence for an involvement of redox state in circadian clock regulation came from biochemical experiments that revealed the sensitivity of CLOCK/BMAL1 and NPAS2/BMAL1 to the NAD(P)+/NAD(P)H ratio when binding to their cognate E-box sequence (Rutter et al., 2001). Whereas the reduced forms of NADH and NADPH stimulate binding, the oxidized forms NAD+ and NADP+ strongly inhibit binding.