The control of night-break timing was studied in dark-grown seedlings of Pharbitis nil (Choisy cv. Violet) following a single continuous or skeleton photoperiod. There was a rhythmic response to a red (R) interruption of an inductive dark period, and the phasing of the rhythm was influenced by the preceding light treatment.Following a continuous white light photoperiod of 6 hours or less, the points of maximum inhibition of flowering were constant in real time. Following a continuous photoperiod of more than 6 hours, maximum inhibition occurred at 9 and 32.5 hours after the end of the light period. The amplitude of the rhythm during the second circadian cycle was much reduced following prolonged photoperiods.Following a skeleton photoperiod, the time of maximum sensitivity to a R interruption was always related to the second pulse of the skeleton, R2, with the first point of maximum inhibition of flowering occurring after 12 to 18 hours and the second after 39 hours. Without a second R pulse, the time of maximum sensitivity to a R interruption was related to the initial R1 pulse. A 'light-off' or dusk signal was not mimicked by a R pulse ending a skeleton photoperiod; such a pulse only generated a 'light-on' signal and initiated a new rhythm.It is concluded that the timing of sensitivity to a R interruption of an inductive dark period in Pharbitis nil is controlled by a single circadian rhythm initiated by a light-on signal. After 6 hours in continuous white light, the phase of this rhythm is determined by the transition to darkness. Following an extended photoperiod, the timing characteristics were those of an hourglass; this seemed to be due to an effect on the coupling or expression of a single circadian timer during the second and subsequent cycles, rather than to the operation of a different timing mechanism. In addition to the effects on timing, the photoperiod affected the magnitude of the flowering response.The mechanisms which underly the photoperiodic control of flowering and, in particular, the nature of the time-measuring process itself occupied the attention of the late W. S. Hillman throughout his scientific career (8,9,(11)(12)(13)(14). In the control of flowering, as for many other responses, it has been postulated that photoperiodic time measurement involves the circadian clocks that are essentially universal in eukaryotic organisms (4, 23 (5, 6,16, 29). A second approach using skeleton photoperiods beginning and ending with a short light pulse was largely exploited for plants by Hillman using the short-day plant Lemna paucicostata grown in axenic culture (8, 9, 12). Hiliman's results for the control of flowering in Lemna were consistent with predictions from a theoretical photoperiodic model based on the response characteristics of an overt rhythm in a completely different organism, the fruit fly Drosophila (23), thus affording good evidence that a circadian oscillation underlies photoperiodic time measurement.Despite the evidence for the involvement of a circadian timer in photoperiod...