ArticlePloS one2018
Sex differences in circadian food anticipatory activity are not altered by individual manipulations of sex hormones or sex chromosome copy number in mice.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Social context suppresses food anticipatory activity and associated thermoregulation in mice.PloS one · 2026Article
- IL-6 decodes sex and diet-dependent circadian and metabolic rhythms.Molecular metabolism · 2025Article
- Multiple oscillators underlie circadian food anticipation in mice.Neurobiology of sleep and circadian rhythms · 2025Article
- Time-restricted feeding leads to sex- and organ-specific responses in the murine digestive system.PloS one · 2025Article
- Astrocytic insulin receptor controls circadian behavior via dopamine signaling in a sexually dimorphic manner.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Gut microbiota depletion minimally affects the daily voluntary wheel running activity and food anticipatory activity in female and male C57BL/6J mice.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Studying food entrainment: Models, methods, and musings.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Review
- Four Core Genotypes and XY* mouse models: Update on impact on SABV research.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2020Review
- Sexes on the brain: Sex as multiple biological variables in the neuronal control of feeding.Biochimica et biophysica acta. Molecular basis of disease · 2020Review
- Sex differences in the response to dietary restriction in rodents.Current opinion in physiology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies in mice have demonstrated a sexual dimorphism in circadian entrainment to scheduled feeding. On a time restricted diet, males tend to develop food anticipatory activity (FAA) sooner than females and with a higher amplitude of activity. The underlying cause of this sex difference remains unknown. One study suggests that sex hormones, both androgens and estrogens, modulate food anticipatory activity in mice. Here we present results suggesting that the sex difference in FAA is unrelated to gonadal sex hormones. While a sex difference between males and females in FAA on a timed, calorie restricted diet was observed there were no differences between intact and gonadectomized mice in the onset or magnitude of FAA. To test other sources of the sex difference in circadian entrainment to scheduled feeding, we used sex chromosome copy number mutants, but there was no difference in FAA when comparing XX, XY-, XY-;Sry Tg, and XX;Sry Tg mice, demonstrating that gene dosage of sex chromosomes does not mediate the sex difference in FAA. Next, we masculinized female mice by treating them with 17-beta estradiol during the neonatal period; yet again, we saw no difference in FAA between control and masculinized females. Finally, we observed that there was no longer a sex difference in FAA for older mice, suggesting that the sex difference in FAA is age-dependent. Thus, our study demonstrates that singular manipulations of gonadal hormones, sex chromosomes, or developmental patterning are not able to explain the difference in FAA between young male and female mice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.