Neural correlates of arousal‐induced circadian clock resetting: hypocretin/orexin and the intergeniculate leaflet
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Syrian hamsters, some procedures for stimulating behavioural arousal (e.g. running in a novel wheel and sleep deprivation by gentle handling with minimal activity) markedly phase-advance circadian rhythms when applied during the middle of the daily rest period, while other arousal procedures do not (e.g. physical restraint, caffeine and modafinil). The neural basis for this differential effect of arousal procedures on clock resetting is unknown. We used c-fos expression as a marker for neuronal activation to determine whether these arousal procedures differentially activate two nonphotic inputs to the circadian system, the thalamic intergeniculate leaflet (IGL; a proposed nonphotic gateway to the circadian clock) and the hypothalamic hypocretin system (which depolarizes arousal-related cell groups throughout the brain and innervates both the IGL and the peri-suprachiasmatic nucleus region). c-FOS in hypocretin-1-immunoreactive neurons, in hypothalamic nonhypocretin neurons and in the IGL was significantly increased by novel wheel running, gentle handling and physical restraint, but only weakly by systemic injections of modafinil (300 mg/kg) or caffeine (75 mg/kg), at doses that are strongly alerting. Spatial analysis revealed few regional differences in the percentage of cells double-labelled for hypocretin-1 and c-FOS following each treatment. These results suggest that activation of hypocretin neurons (as in the restraint condition) is not sufficient to induce phase shifts, and that gating of arousal effects on circadian clock phase may be downstream from the hypocretin system and from IGL neurons activated by these procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".