ArticleScientific reports2024
Lengthened circadian rhythms in mice with self-controlled ambient light intensity.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ethological Constraints and Welfare-Related Bias in Laboratory Mice: Implications of Housing, Lighting, and Social Environment.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Chrononutrition: Potential, Challenges, and Application in Managing Obesity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- At the Intersection of Pain and Sleep: a Roadmap for Preclinical Pain Research.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Laboratory animals are typically maintained under 12-h light and 12-h dark (12:12 LD) conditions with a daytime light intensity of ~ 200 lx. In this study, we designed an apparatus that allowed mice to self-select the room light intensity by nose poking. We measured the behavioral rhythms of the mice under this self-controlled light regimen. The mice quickly learned the relationship between their nose pokes and the resulting changes in the light intensity. Under these conditions, the mice exhibited free-running circadian behavior with a period of 24.5 ± 0.4 h. This circadian period was ~ 1 h longer than that of the same strain of mice when they were kept in constant darkness (DD) after 12:12 LD entrainment, and the lengthened period lasted for at least 30 days. The rhythm of the light intensity controlled by the mice also exhibited a similar period, but the phase of the illuminance rhythm preceded the phase of the locomotor activity rhythm. Mice that did not have access to the light controller were also entrained to the illuminance cycle produced by the mice that did have access to the light controller, but with a slightly delayed phase. The rhythm was likely controlled by the canonical circadian clock because mice with tau mutations in the circadian clock gene CSNK1E exhibited short periods of circadian rhythm under the same conditions. These results indicate that the free-running period of mice in the wild may differ from what they exhibit if they are attuned by forced light cycles in laboratories because mice in their natural habitats can self-control their exposure to ambient light, similar to our experimental conditions.
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.