The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Activity Feedback to the Mammalian Circadian Pacemaker: Influence on Observed Measures of Rhythm Period Length
Abstract
In the mouse, activity is precisely timed by the circadian clock and is normally most intense in the early subjective night. Since vigorous activity (e.g., wheel running) is thought to induce phase shifts in rodents, the temporal placement of daily exercise/activity could be a determinant of observed circadian rhythm period. The relationship between spontaneous running-wheel activity and the circadian period of free-running rhythms was studied to assess this possibility. With ad libitum access to a running wheel, mice exhibited a free-running period (τ) of 23.43 ± 0.08 hr (mean ± SEM). When running wheels were locked, τ increased (23.88 ± 0.04 hr, p < 0.03), and restoration of ad libitum wheel running again produced a shorter period (τ = 23.56 ± 0.06 hr, p < 0.05). A survey of free- running activity patterns in a population of 100 mice revealed a significant correlation between the observed circadian period and the time of day in which spontaneous wheel running occurred ( r = 0.7314, p < 0.0001). Significantly shorter periods were observed when running was concentrated at the beginning of the subjective night (τ = 23.23 ± 0.04), and longer periods were observed if mice ran late in the subjective night (τ = 23.89 ± 0.04), F (1, 99) = 34.96, p < 0.0001. It was previously believed that the period of the circadian clock was primarily responsive to externally imposed tonic or phasic events. Systematic influences of spontaneous exercise on τ demonstrate that physiological and/or behavioral determinants of circadian timekeeping exist as well.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Daan, S., Damassa, D., Pittendrigh, C. S., & Smith, E. R. (1975) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.72.9.3744 · Cited by 207
Cited by
Stability, precision, and near-24-hour period of the human circadian pacemaker
Czeisler, C. A., Duffy, J. F., Shanahan, T. L., Brown, E. N., Mitchell, J. F., Rimmer, D. W., Ronda, J. M., Silva, E. J., Allan, J. S., Emens, J. S., et al. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5423.2177 · Cited by 1,705
Efferent projections of the paraventricular thalamic nucleus in the rat
Moga, M. M., Weis, R. P., & Moore, R. Y. (1995) · Journal of Comparative Neurology · doi:10.1002/cne.903590204 · Cited by 402
Effects of aging on the circadian rhythm of wheel-running activity in C57BL/6 mice
Valentinuzzi, V. S., Scarbrough, K., Takahashi, J. S., & Turek, F. W. (1997) · American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.1997.273.6.r1957 · Cited by 277
Interactions of the serotonin and circadian systems: nature and nurture in rhythms and blues
Ciarleglio, C. M., Resuehr, H. E. S., & McMahon, D. G. (2011) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2011.09.036 · Cited by 151
Methylphenidate Modifies the Motion of the Circadian Clock
Antle, M. C., van Diepen, H. C., Deboer, T., Pedram, P., Pereira, R. R., & Meijer, J. H. (2012) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2012.103 · Cited by 52
Metadata
- Authors
- Edgar, D. M., Martin, C. E., & Dement, W. C.
- Venue
- Journal of Biological Rhythms
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1991-09
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 185-199
- ISSN
- 0748-7304 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-4531
- OpenAlex
- W2141293300
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Activity Feedback to the Mammalian Circadian Pacemaker: Influence on Observed Measures of Rhythm Period Length. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/074873049100600301
- The paper
- Edgar, D. M., Martin, C. E., & Dement, W. C. (1991). Activity Feedback to the Mammalian Circadian Pacemaker: Influence on Observed Measures of Rhythm Period Length. Journal of Biological Rhythms. https://doi.org/10.1177/074873049100600301
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.