Mariana G Figueiro1, Barbara Plitnick2, Mark S Rea2. 1. Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 21 Union Street, Troy, NY 12180, USA. Electronic address: figuem@rpi.edu. 2. Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 21 Union Street, Troy, NY 12180, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronotype characterizes individual differences in sleep/wake rhythm timing, which can also impact light exposure patterns. The present study investigated whether early and late chronotypes respond differently to controlled advancing and delaying light exposure patterns while on a fixed, advanced sleep/wake schedule. METHODS: In a mixed design, 23 participants (11 late chronotypes and 12 early chronotypes) completed a 2-week, advanced sleep/wake protocol twice, once with an advancing light exposure pattern and once with a delaying light exposure pattern. In the advancing light exposure pattern, the participants received short-wavelength light in the morning and short-wavelength-restricting orange-tinted glasses in the evening. In the delaying light exposure pattern, participants received short-wavelength-restricting orange-tinted glasses in the morning and short-wavelength light in the evening. Light/dark exposures were measured with the Daysimeter. Salivary dim light melatonin onset (DLMO) was also measured. RESULTS: Compared to the baseline week, DLMO was significantly delayed after the delaying light intervention and significantly advanced after the advancing light intervention in both groups. There was no significant difference in how the two chronotype groups responded to the light intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The present results demonstrate that circadian phase changes resulting from light interventions are consistent with those predicted by previously published phase response curves (PRCs) for both early and late chronotypes.
BACKGROUND: Chronotype characterizes individual differences in sleep/wake rhythm timing, which can also impact light exposure patterns. The present study investigated whether early and late chronotypes respond differently to controlled advancing and delaying light exposure patterns while on a fixed, advanced sleep/wake schedule. METHODS: In a mixed design, 23 participants (11 late chronotypes and 12 early chronotypes) completed a 2-week, advanced sleep/wake protocol twice, once with an advancing light exposure pattern and once with a delaying light exposure pattern. In the advancing light exposure pattern, the participants received short-wavelength light in the morning and short-wavelength-restricting orange-tinted glasses in the evening. In the delaying light exposure pattern, participants received short-wavelength-restricting orange-tinted glasses in the morning and short-wavelength light in the evening. Light/dark exposures were measured with the Daysimeter. Salivary dim light melatonin onset (DLMO) was also measured. RESULTS: Compared to the baseline week, DLMO was significantly delayed after the delaying light intervention and significantly advanced after the advancing light intervention in both groups. There was no significant difference in how the two chronotype groups responded to the light intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The present results demonstrate that circadian phase changes resulting from light interventions are consistent with those predicted by previously published phase response curves (PRCs) for both early and late chronotypes.
Authors: Eliza Van Reen; Katherine M Sharkey; Brandy M Roane; David Barker; Ronald Seifer; Tifenn Raffray; Tamara L Bond; Mary A Carskadon Journal: J Biol Rhythms Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.182
Authors: Marie Aarrebo Jensen; Anne Helene Garde; Jesper Kristiansen; Kirsten Nabe-Nielsen; Åse Marie Hansen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-10-13 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Emma J Wams; Tom Woelders; Irene Marring; Laura van Rosmalen; Domien G M Beersma; Marijke C M Gordijn; Roelof A Hut Journal: Sleep Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Yangchang Zhang; Yang Xiong; Jia Dong; Tingting Guo; Xiaoman Tang; Yong Zhao Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 3.390