Abstract
Recent work with exotic 24-h light:dark:light:dark (LDLD) cycles indicates surprising flexibility in the entrainment patterns of Syrian hamsters. Following exposure to an LDLD cycle, hamsters may adopt a form of rhythm splitting in which markers of subjective night (e.g., activity, melatonin) are expressed in each of the twice daily scotophases. This pattern contrasts markedly with that of conventionally entrained hamsters in which markers of subjective night are expressed once daily in only 1 of the 2 dark periods. The “split” entrainment pattern was examined further here in Syrian and Siberian hamsters and in mice exposed to LDLD 7:5:7:5, a condition that reliably induces split activity rhythms in all 3 species. The phase angle of entrainment and activity duration were generally similar comparing the 2 daily activity bouts in each species. The stability of this split entrainment state was assessed by deletions of photophases on individual days, by exposure to skeleton photoperiods, and by transfer to constant darkness. As in Syrian hamsters, the one-time substitution of darkness for one 7-h photophase did not grossly alter activity patterns of Siberian hamsters but acutely disrupted the split rhythms of mice. Skeleton light pulses of progressively shorter duration did not significantly alter split entrainment patterns of either Syrian or Siberian hamsters. Both species continued to exhibit stable entrainment with activity expressed in alternate scotophases of an LD 1:5 cycle presented 4 times daily. In contrast, the split activity rhythms of mice were not maintained under skeleton pulses. In constant darkness, rhythms of Siberian hamsters remained distinctly split for a minimum of 2 cycles. Split entrainment to these novel LDLD and 4-pulse skeleton lighting regimes demonstrates a marked degree of plasticity common to the circadian systems of several rodent species and identifies novel entrainment patterns that may be reliably elicited with simple environmental manipulations. Inter- and intraspecific differences in the stability of split activity rhythms likely reflect differences in coupling interactions between the component circadian oscillators, which, adopting separate phase relations to these novel LD cycles, yield a split entrainment pattern.