| Literature DB >> 33177530 |
Kevin M Hannay1, Daniel B Forger2,3, Victoria Booth2,4.
Abstract
We study the impact of light on the mammalian circadian system using the theory of phase response curves. Using a recently developed ansatz we derive a low-dimensional macroscopic model for the core circadian clock in mammals. Significantly, the variables and parameters in our model have physiological interpretations and may be compared with experimental results. We focus on the effect of four key factors which help shape the mammalian phase response to light: heterogeneity in the population of oscillators, the structure of the typical light phase response curve, the fraction of oscillators which receive direct light input and changes in the coupling strengths associated with seasonal day-lengths. We find these factors can explain several experimental results and provide insight into the processing of light information in the mammalian circadian system. In particular, we find that the sensitivity of the circadian system to light may be modulated by changes in the relative coupling forces between the light sensing and non-sensing populations. Finally, we show how seasonal day-length, after-effects to light entrainment and seasonal variations in light sensitivity in the mammalian circadian clock are interrelated.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33177530 PMCID: PMC7658258 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-74002-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Subpopulations and coupling in the SCN. Light input comes into the sensor cells in the ventral SCN through the retinohypothalamic tract (RHT). The majority of the dorsal cells do not receive direct input from the RHT but are bidirectionally coupled to the ventral sensor cells. Coupling terms are labeled as in Eq. 1.
Parameter sets used for numerical simulations in the main text (default parameter set).
| Parameter | Value |
|---|---|
| 0.024 | |
| 0.095 | |
| 0.07 | |
| 0.05 | |
| 2.0 | |
| 0.5 |
These parameters give steady state values of , , . The mean frequency parameters are chosen to be consistent with experimental measures[22]. The remaining parameters were chosen to be consistent with known properties of the SCN, however they have not been determined from experimental measurements. The results presented here are not sensitive to the choice of these parameters.
Figure 2Collective phase response curves for two assumed microscopic phase response curves: (left) Simple phase response curve , (right) Light-like PRC shape . Shown for three phase coherence R values: R=1 (solid black) R=0.6 (dashed green) and R=0.3 (red circles).
Figure 3Prompt resetting curve with the fraction of sensors in the population and the default parameter values. The microscopic phase response curve (solid black) is fit to the human PRC to a brief light pulse, direct numerical simulations of Eq. 1 with (red crosses) and the theoretical prediction Eq. 25 (dashed green).
Figure 4Relaxation phase response curve using a first order perturbation series to calculate (A, B) in Eq. 29 (dotted green) versus numerical simulation(red crosses) for the default parameter values.
Figure 5Network resistance to phase shifts B versus for the first order perturbation theory (circles) with the default parameter values varying and the approximate formula Eq. 30 (solid line) with (red), (blue), (green).
Figure 6Collective phase response curve for the theoretical curve (Eq. 31) (dotted green) versus numerical simulation (red crosses) for the default parameter values.
Figure 7The amplitude of the collective phase response curve as a function of . The range of the numerical collective phase response is highlighted in yellow and the theoretical prediction of the amplitude (Eq. 31) is shown as dotted green lines.