Expression of circadian rhythmicity in Djungarian hamsters under constant light : effects of light intensity and the circadian system's state

• Published in: Journal of Comparative Physiology A Vol. 169; no. 2; pp. 185 - 189
• Main Authors: PUCHALSKI, W, LYNCH, G. R
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Berlin Springer 01-08-1991
• Subjects: Animals; Biological and medical sciences; Circadian Rhythm - physiology; Cricetinae; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Light; Motor Activity - physiology; Phenotype; Phodopus sungorus; Thermoregulation. Hibernation. Estivation. Ecophysiology and environmental effects; Time Factors; Vertebrates: anatomy and physiology, studies on body, several organs or systems; Biological clock; Luminous intensity; Vertebrata; Mammalia; Light; Rodentia; Environmental factor; Biological rhythm; Phodopus sungorus; Circadian rhythm; Hamster
• ISSN: 0340-7594; 1432-1351
• DOI: 10.1007/BF00215865

Djungarian hamsters (Phodopus sungorus), were exposed to constant light with increasing intensities (20, 60, 350 lux), and wheel running activity was recorded. With increasing light intensity the percentage of hamsters showing a split in their daily activity pattern increased and the free running period was lengthened for both the unsplit and the split state. The fact that the free running period of both states depended on the light intensity together with the observation that the highest incidence of a circadian activity occurred under 350 lux, provoked the idea that the emergence of splitting or a circadian rhythmicity is a direct consequence of the light induced lengthening of the free running period. However, analysis of the data failed to support the idea that emergence of a split or a circadian activity is a threshold phenomenon with respect to the free running period. Due to differences in circadian function some Djungarian hamsters do not exhibit photoinduction following short day exposure. In these individuals splitting also occurred but required exposure to a higher light intensity than in photo-responsive hamsters. This observation is in accordance with the idea that the two phenotypes differ in the interaction of the two component oscillators underlying circadian rhythmicity.