ArticleNature and science of sleep2026
A Dynamic Model of Microsleep and Vigilance Tradeoffs in Nesting Chinstrap Penguins.
Article in Nature and science of sleep, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Sleep in wild animals reflects both physiological regulation and ecological demands. Nesting chinstrap penguins exhibit extreme sleep fragmentation, obtaining substantial sleep through thousands of brief microsleep episodes while maintaining vigilance. Objective: To examine whether a dynamic model integrating sleep regulation with ecological trade-offs can account for the fragmented sleep patterns observed in nesting chinstrap penguins. Methods: We adapted a dynamic model of sleep choice in which an animal switches between sleep and wakefulness on the basis of homeostatic sleep pressure, circadian alignment, switching costs, and stochastic waking opportunities. The model was calibrated to published sleep data from 14 nesting chinstrap penguins using five simulated moments: average hours of sleep per day, the standard deviation of hours of sleep per day, the number of sleep events, the maximum sleep duration, and the percentage of sleep durations less than 10 seconds. Results: The model reproduced several key qualitative features of penguin sleep. Simulated sleep episodes were very short, with an average duration of 2.774 seconds compared with 3.91 seconds in the observed data. The model also generated frequent transitions between sleep and wake, closely matching the observed number of daily sleep events and reproducing the maximum observed sleep duration. However, it underestimated total sleep time and produced a larger share of very short episodes than observed in the data. Estimated parameters implied minimal switching costs, rapid homeostatic adjustment over seconds-long bouts, and a strong relative weight on sleep utility within the fitted model. Conclusion: A dynamic optimization framework can capture important qualitative features of fragmented sleep in nesting chinstrap penguins. The findings suggest that microsleeps may reflect adaptive trade-offs between restorative sleep and wakeful activity under ecological constraint. Because the model treats sleep as a binary behavioral state, it does not distinguish unihemispheric from bihemispheric slow-wave sleep. We therefore interpret the model primarily as a model of microsleep timing and fragmentation rather than as a complete model of penguin sleep architecture or fragmented sleep across wild animals.
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.