Literature DB >> 14667150

Different effects of intensity and duration of locomotor activity on circadian period.

Pawel Koteja1, John G Swallow, Patrick A Carter, Theodore Garland.   

Abstract

An outstanding unresolved issue in chronobiology is how the level of locomotor activity influences length of the free-running, endogenous circadian period (tau). To address this issue, the authors studied a novel model, 4 replicate lines of laboratory house mice (Mus domesticus) that had been selectively bred for high wheel-running activity (S) and their 4 unselected control (C) lines. Previous work indicates that S mice run approximately twice as many revolutions/day and exhibit an altered dopaminergic function as compared with C mice. The authors report that S mice have a tau shorter by about 0.5 h as compared with C mice. The difference in tau was significant both under constant light (control lines: tau = 25.5 h; selected: tau = 24.9 h) and under constant dark (control lines: 23.7 h; selected: 23.4 h). Moreover, the difference remained statistically significant even when the effects of running speed and time spent running were controlled in ANCOVA. Thus, something more fundamental than just intensity or duration of wheel-running activity per se must underlie the difference in tau between the S and C lines. However, despite significant difference in total wheel-running activity between females and males, tau did not differ between the sexes. Similarly, among individuals within lines, tau was not correlated with wheel-running activity measured as total revolutions per day. Instead, tau tended to decrease with average running speed but increase with time spent running. Finally, within individuals, an increase in time spent running resulted in decreased tau in the next few days, but changes in running speed had no statistically significant effect. The distinctions between effects of duration versus intensity of an activity, as well as between the among- versus within-individual correlations, are critical to understanding the relation between locomotor activity and pace of the circadian clock.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14667150     DOI: 10.1177/0748730403256998

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biol Rhythms        ISSN: 0748-7304            Impact factor:   3.182


  6 in total

Review 1.  Driven to be inactive? The genetics of physical activity.

Authors:  Trudy Moore-Harrison; J Timothy Lightfoot
Journal:  Prog Mol Biol Transl Sci       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 3.622

Review 2.  Exercise as a synchroniser of human circadian rhythms: an update and discussion of the methodological problems.

Authors:  Greg Atkinson; Ben Edwards; Thomas Reilly; Jim Waterhouse
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2006-12-13       Impact factor: 3.078

3.  Suprachiasmatic nucleus as the site of androgen action on circadian rhythms.

Authors:  Zina Model; Matthew P Butler; Joseph LeSauter; Rae Silver
Journal:  Horm Behav       Date:  2015-05-24       Impact factor: 3.587

4.  Selection for increased voluntary wheel-running affects behavior and brain monoamines in mice.

Authors:  R Parrish Waters; R B Pringle; G L Forster; K J Renner; J L Malisch; T Garland; J G Swallow
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.252

5.  Parameters for abolishing conditioned place preference for cocaine from running and environmental enrichment in male C57BL/6J mice.

Authors:  M L Mustroph; H Pinardo; J R Merritt; J S Rhodes
Journal:  Behav Brain Res       Date:  2016-06-27       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  Gemvid, an open source, modular, automated activity recording system for rats using digital video.

Authors:  Jean-Etienne Poirrier; Laurent Poirrier; Pierre Leprince; Pierre Maquet
Journal:  J Circadian Rhythms       Date:  2006-08-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.