Anticipation of Scheduled Feeding in BTBR Mice Reveals Independence and Interactions Between the Light- and Food-Entrainable Circadian Clocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many animal species exhibit food-anticipatory activity (FAA) when fed at a fixed time of the day. FAA exhibits properties of a daily rhythm controlled by food-entrainable circadian oscillators (FEOs). Lesion studies indicate that FEOs are separate from the light-entrainable circadian pacemaker (LEP) located in the suprachiasmatic nucleus. While anatomically distinct, food- and light-entrainable clocks do appear to interact, and the output of these clocks may be modulated by their phase relation. We report here an analysis of FAA in the BTBR T + Itpr3 tf /J (BTBR) mouse strain that provides new insights into the nature of interactions between food- and light-entrained clocks and rhythms. BTBR mice fed ad libitum exhibit an unusually short active phase and free-running circadian periodicity (~22.5 h). In a light-dark cycle, BTBR mice limited to a 4 h daily meal in the light period show robust FAA compared to the C57BL/6J mice. In constant darkness, BTBR mice exhibit clear and distinct free-running and food-anticipatory rhythms that interact in a phase-dependent fashion. The free-running rhythm exhibits phase advances when FAA occurs in the mid-to-late rest phase of the free run, and phase delays when FAA occurs in the late active phase. A phase-response curve (PRC) inferred from these shifts is similar to the PRC for activity-induced phase shifts in nocturnal rodents, suggesting that the effects of feeding schedules on the LEP in constant darkness are mediated by FAA. A phase-dependent effect of the free-running rhythm on FAA was evident in both its magnitude and duration; FAA counts were greatest when FAA occurred during the active phase of the free-running rhythm. The LEP inhibited FAA when FAA occurred at the end of the subjective day. These findings provide evidence for interactions between food- and light-entrainable circadian clocks and rhythms and demonstrate the utility of the BTBR mouse model in probing these interactions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".