Cited by 267Circadian rhythm and melatoninSleep and Work-Related FatigueSleep and Wakefulness Research

Nonphotic Entrainment in Humans?

Mistlberger, Ralph E., Skene, Debra J.·2005·Journal of Biological Rhythms

Abstract

Although light is accepted as the dominant zeitgeber for entrainment of the human circadian system, there is evidence that nonphotic stimuli may play a role. This review critically assesses the current evidence in support of nonphotic entrainment in humans. Studies involving manipulations of sleep-wake schedules, exercise, mealtimes, and social stimuli are re-examined, bearing in mind the fact that the human circadian clock is sensitive to very dim light and has a free-running period very close to 24 h. Because of light confounds, the study of totally blind subjects with free-running circadian rhythms represents the ideal model to investigate the effects of nonphotic stimuli on circadian phase and period. Strong support for nonphotic entrainment in humans has already come from the study of a few blind subjects with entrained circadian rhythms. However, in these studies the nonphotic stimulus(i) responsible was not identified. The effect of appropriately timed exercise or exogenous melatonin represents the best proof to date of an effect of nonphotic stimuli on human circadian timing. Phase-response curves for both exercise and melatonin have been constructed. Given the powerful effect of feeding as a circadian zeitgeber in various nonhuman species, studies of meal timing are recommended. In conclusion, the available evidence indicates that it remains worthwhile to continue to study nonphotic effects on human circadian timing to identify treatment strategies for shift workers and transmeridian travelers as well as for the blind and possibly the elderly.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0748730405277982

Cites

116 of 116 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mistlberger, R. E., & Skene, D. J.
Affiliations
  • Simon Fraser University (CA)
  • University of Surrey (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Mistlberger, Ralph E.
  • Skene, Debra J.
Venue
Journal of Biological Rhythms
Published
2005-08
Volume
20
Issue
4
Pages
339-352
ISSN
  • 0748-7304 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4531
OpenAlex
W2028158092
Cited by
267
References
116
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 13
FWCI
4.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Biological Rhythms (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
non-photic entrainment, circadian rhythm, circadian clock, zeitgebers, blind subjects, free-running rhythm, physical activity, melatonin, meal timing, social stimuli, phase response curve, shift work, transmeridian travel, older adults
MeSH terms
Blindness, Circadian Rhythm, Humans, Light, Physical Stimulation, Sleep, Wakefulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review