Circadian entrainment to the solar light:dark schedule is thought to be maintained by a simple photon counting method. According to this hypothesis, the pacemaker adjusts the phase of the body’s endogenous rhythms in accordance to the intensity and duration with which it encounters a perceived twilight signal. While previous data have generally supported the hypothesis, more recent analysis has codified other factors besides irradiance that influence the magnitude of resetting responses to light delivered within the same phase of the circadian cycle. In particular, the frequency with which light is alternated with darkness, or whether it’s packaged in millisecond flashes versus continuous blocks, can significantly alter the dose-response relationship. Here, we used a drosophilid model to test whether circadian photon-counting trends can be broken with light administration protocols spanning just 15 minutes. In the early part of the delay zone, a 15-min continuous light pulse was fragmented until it could no longer produce a full-magnitude shift of the flies’ locomotor activity rhythms. The remaining exposure was then reorganized along various fractionation schemes that employed pulses with different widths and interstimulus intervals. Our results suggest that the pacemaker integrates the phase-shifting effects of equiluminous light differently depending on the stimulus pattern with which light is made available. For example, despite having fewer photons, certain ratios of light and darkness could be optimized on a timescale of seconds and minutes so as to achieve pacemaker resetting close to par with steady luminance. These data provide further evidence that the circadian pacemaker’s responses to light entail more than photon counting and motivate continued discussion on how phototherapy can be best optimized in clinical practice to improve conditions linked to circadian impairment.
The circadian pacemaker synchronizes to the Earth's rotation by tracking step-by-step changes in illumination that occur as the sun passes the horizon. While twilight progressions of irradiance and colour are considered important stimuli in this process, comparably less thought has been given to the possibility that ultraviolet A (UVA) radiation might actually play a more formative role given its evolutionary significance in shaping 24 h timekeeping. Here, we show that activity rhythms can be phase-shifted by UVA light at an energy range seated well below that of the visible spectrum. Because the energy threshold for this resetting matches the incident amount of UVA on the human retina at twilight, our results suggest that UVA light has the potential to function as a similar time cue in people.
Recent work suggests that the circadian pacemaker responds optimally to millisecond flashes of light, not continuous light exposure as has been historically believed. It is unclear whether these responses are influenced by the physical characteristics of the pulsing. In the present study,
Drosophila
(
n
= 2199) were stimulated with 8, 16 or 120 ms flashes. For each duration, the energy content of the exposure was systematically varied by changing the pulse irradiance and the number of stimuli delivered over a fixed 15 min administration window (64 protocols surveyed in all). Results showed that per microjoule invested, 8 ms flashes were more effective at resetting the circadian activity rhythm than 16- and 120 ms flashes (i.e. left shift of the dose–response curve, as well as a higher estimated maximal response). These data suggest that the circadian pacemaker's photosensitivity declines within milliseconds of light contact. Further introduction of light beyond a floor of (at least) 8 ms leads to diminishing returns on phase-shifting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.