Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A Suprachiasmatic Nucleus Generated Rhythm in Basal Glucose
A Suprachiasmatic Nucleus Generated Rhythm in Basal Glucose
A Suprachiasmatic Nucleus Generated Rhythm in Basal Glucose
11, 643–652
Abstract
The daily rhythm in feeding activity in mammals, as driven by the biological clock, largely
determines the daily fluctuations in basal concentrations of glucose and insulin. To investigate a
possible direct impact of the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) on these parameters, we subjected
intact rats and SCN-lesioned rats to a fasting regimen of 36 h, or to a scheduled feeding regimen of
six identical meals equally distributed over the light5dark-cycle. Plasma profiles of glucose and
insulin in rats during the final 24 h of the 36 h of fasting, and in rats subjected to the scheduled
feeding regimen were compared to profiles in rats fed ad libitum. In rats fed ad libitum, in fasted
rats and in rats subjected to a scheduled feeding regimen basal glucose concentrations showed a
pronounced 24-h rhythm that was not found in rats that had been SCN-lesioned. Basal insulin levels
showed a 24-h rhythm in 50% of the rats fed ad libitum and in 50% of the rats subjected to a
scheduled feeding regimen; neither rhythms were present in SCN-lesioned rats. However, none of
the fasted rats showed a 24-h rhythm in basal insulin concentrations. These data provide clear
evidence that the SCN directly controls basal glucose concentrations independent of its influence on
feeding activity. At the same time, we found no consistent evidence for a strong impact of the SCN
on basal insulin concentrations.
Key words: glucose, insulin, suprachiasmatic nucleus, food intake, liver, corticosterone.
Plasma concentrations of glucose and insulin show a daily shows a pronounced daily rhythm. This indicates that daily
rhythm in mammals (1–4) including humans (5–7). Many changes in basal concentrations of glucose and insulin are at
daily rhythms are generated by an endogenous circadian least indirectly mediated by the control of the SCN of feeding
oscillator which, in mammals, is located in the suprachias- activity. Consequently in order to assess whether or not a
matic nucleus (SCN ). Numerous studies have shown that the direct impact of the SCN on basal concentrations of glucose
SCN influences behavioural rhythms such as locomotor activ- and insulin exists, it is necessary to suppress the influence of
ity, the sleep–wake cycle and feeding behaviour (8). There is the SCN on feeding behaviour.
also clear evidence for the involvement of the SCN in anterior In several studies therefore rodents were subjected to a
pituitary hormonel release (8). However, the direct involve- fasting regimen (1, 3, 10, 11). However, the results of these
ment of the SCN in the autonomic nervous activity and more experiments were not clear cut, which may be due to differ-
peripheral hormonal systems, such as those involved in ences in fasting regimen and to low sampling frequencies.
glucose homeostasis, is unclear. Recently, anatomical studies Previous experiments (12), in which we subjected rats to a
have revealed that the SCN influences the adrenals via a feeding regimen of six identical meals a day, with an interval
multisynaptic neural pathway (9). We hypothesized that the of 4 h between every meal, indicated a diurnal rhythm in
SCN influences the pancreas and the liver via a similar food-induced responses of glucose and insulin, independent
pathway, which may contribute to the diurnal rhythm in of the previous feeding activity of an animal.
glucose concentrations. The present study was designed to investigate the contribu-
The main physiological stimulus for insulin secretion from tion of the SCN to the presence of an endogenous rhythm in
the pancreas is an elevation in blood glucose concentrations concentrations of glucose and insulin independent of the
due to food intake, which is controlled by the SCN and rhythm in feeding behaviour generated by the SCN. We
Correspondence to: S.E. la Fleur, Netherlands Institute for Brain Research, Meibergdreef 33, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
(e-mail:S.La.Fleur@nih.knaw.nl ).
(A) (B)
Glucose (%)
(C )
(B)
ZT (h)
R2
Intact rats 0.47±0.05 (7) 0.59±0.05 (6) 0.46±0.05 (7)
SCNx – 0.61±0.08 (3) –
M (mmol/l )
Intact 6.3±0.07 5.0±0.01‡§ 6.5±0.09
SCNx 7.1±0.09* 5.5±0.05*‡§ 6.4±0.14†
Am (%)
Intact 10.6±1.4 15.7±1.5† 12.9±1.1
SCNx – 12.0±2.3 –
A (ZT )
Intact 11.5±0.6 8.0±0.4‡§ 11.3±0.4
SCNx – 5.1±2.0* – (B)
Glucose (%)
‡P<0.001 for comparison with conditions of ad libitum feeding;
§P<0.001 for comparison with scheduled feeding conditions.
Insulin (%)
feeding regimen was significantly different from that of fasted
rats and not significant different from that of rats fed ad
libitum (Table 1).
In SCN-lesioned rats on a scheduled feeding regimen, basal
glucose concentrations did not show diurnal variation
(Fig. 3). The highest and the lowest basal glucose concen-
trations were ±6.8 mmol/l and 5.9 mmol/l, respectively. The
absolute 24 h mean in basal glucose concentrations of SCN-
lesioned rats was not significant different from that of intact
rats ( Table 1), also repeated-measures ANOVA did not detect (C)
an effect of group (F1,14)=0.6; (P=0.45). Repeated-
measures ANOVA did indicate a clear effect of time (F (23,
322)=3.67, (P<0.001) and of ‘group×time’ (F (23, 322)=
2.06, (P<0.003). Thus, there was a significant difference
between intact rats and SCN-lesioned rats in the shape of
the profile of glucose concentrations.
R2
Intact 0.45±0.11 (4) – 0.32±0.02 (4)
SCNx – – 0.48 (1)
M (mIU/ml )
Intact 57.0±7.5 19.5±2.8† 110.9±6.0
SCNx 56.7±6.3 19.9±2.3† 93.4±4.5*
Am (%)
Intact 22.3±5.1 – 17.0±2.0
SCNx – – 17.7
A (ZT )
Intact 13.3±2.3 – 9.8±1.2
SCNx – – 13.6 (B)
Insulin (%)
comparison with rats fed ad libitum.
D Insulin (µIU/ml)
The absolute 24 h mean of insulin concentrations of intact
rats were significantly different from those of SCN-lesioned 30
rats (Table 2), this was also detected by repeated-measures 25
ANOVA as an effect of group ((F (1, 14)=6.4, P<0.03).
Also the shape of the profile of insulin concentrations in 20
intact rats was significantly different from that in SCN-
15
lesioned rats (effect of time (F (23, 322)=5.2, P<0.001) and
effect of ‘group×time’ (F (23, 322)=2.5, P<0.001)). 10
5
Insulin sensitivity
0
For a rough estimation of insulin sensitivity, we calculated Intact SCN lesioned
the quotient of glucose and insulin concentrations for both
intact rats and SCN-lesioned rats with the 24 h averages of F. 6. Mean insulin increments to a meal in intact rats and SCN-
concentrations of glucose and insulin during all three condi- lesioned rats subjected to a scheduled feeding regimen expressed as the
tions. In addition, for the fasting experiment we also calcu- difference between the last sample point before a meal. Mean glucose
increments were −0.17 mmol/l ±0.12 for intact rats and 0.04 mmol/l
lated the glucose/insulin quotient with the last samples at the
±0.06 for SCN-lesioned rats. *P<0.001
end of the 36 h fast. No significant difference for these
quotients were found between intact rats and SCN lesioned
rats, in any condition. T 3. Rhythm Parameters of Corticosterone
In rats subjected to a scheduled feeding regimen we calcu- Concentrations in Intact Rats and SCN-Lesioned Rats.
lated insulin increments after a meal. Insulin concentrations
in both intact rats and in SCN-lesioned rats increased. For Fed ad libitum Fasted Scheduled fed
intact rats this increase in insulin (expressed as the difference
with the last sample point before a meal ) reached significance R2
after the meals at ZT2, ZT6, ZT10 and ZT14 (P<0.04) and Intact 0.37±0.03 (8) 0.32±0.03 (5) 0.48±0.04 (8)
SCNx – – –
for SCN-lesioned rats after the meals at ZT6 and ZT14 M (ng/ml )
(P<0.04). In intact rats, the mean insulin increment to the Intact 35±3 73±3 ‡¶ 35.6±3.5
six meals was significantly higher than that in SCN-lesioned SCNx 55±78 68±5 44.5±2.8*
rats (P<0.02) (Fig. 6). In intact rats as well as in SCN- Am (%)
Intact 72±6 69±9§ 98±9†
lesioned rats no glucose increments were observed after a SCNx – – –
meal (expressed as the difference with the last sample point A ( ZT )
before a meal )(see the legend of Fig. 6). Intact 13.1±0.5 12.4±0.7 11.1±0.3
SCNx – – –
Plasma corticosterone concentrations in intact rats and SCN- R2=Goodness of fit; M=absolute 24 h mean (ng/ml ); Am=Amplitude
lesioned rats, fed ad libitum and fasted (%); A=Acrophase (ZT ); SCNx=SCN-lesioned. Values are
means±SEM. Between brackets the number of animals. *P<0.05 for
Diurnal rhythm parameters of plasma corticosterone concen- comparisons between intact rats and SCN-lesioned rats; †P<0.05 and
trations of intact rats, fed ad libitum and fasted were deter- ‡P<0.001 for comparison with rats fed ad libitum. §P<0.05 and
mined. For all rats fed ad libitum and for five of the eight ¶P<0.001 for comparison with scheduled feeding conditions.
fasted intact rats, sets of data points were fitted with the
single cosinor analysis so that the fitted curve was not
Plasma corticosterone concentrations in intact rats and SCN-
significantly different from the curve of the individual rat
lesioned rats subjected to a scheduled feeding regimen
(Table 3). The mean corticosterone concentrations (mesor)
of fasting intact rats were significantly higher than those of Mean plasma corticosterone concentrations in intact rats are
rats fed ad libitum. The timing of the peak (acrophase) was shown in Fig. 7 ANOVA detected a significant effect of time
not significantly different ( Table 3). (F (23, 138)=11.2, P<0.001). It was possible to fit the
Also for SCN-lesioned rats plasma corticosterone profiles individual set of data points of all intact rats with the single
were determined. None of the SCN-lesioned rats, fed ad cosinor analysis ( Table 3). The mean plasma corticosterone
libitum or fasted, showed a diurnal rhythm, it was not possible concentrations in SCN-lesioned rats are shown in Fig. 7.
to fit sets of data points with the single cosinor analysis. The ANOVA detected no effect of time (F (23, 138)=1.5, P=
mean corticosterone concentrations of fasting SCN-lesioned 0.08). The mean corticosterone concentration in SCN-
rats were not significantly different from those of rats fed lesioned rats was significantly different from that in intact
ad libitum (Table 3). rats (P<0.02) (Table 3).