Subadditive responses to extremely short blue and green pulsed light on visual evoked potentials, pupillary constriction and electroretinograms

The circadian stimulus-oscillator model: Improvements to Kronauer’s model of the human circadian pacemaker

Modeling how patterns of light and dark affect circadian phase is important clinically and organizationally (e.g., the military) because circadian disruption can compromise health and performance. Limit-cycle oscillator models in various forms have been used to characterize phase changes to a limited set of light interventions. We approached the analysis of the van der Pol oscillator-based model proposed by Kronauer and colleagues in 1999 and 2000 (Kronauer99) using a well-established framework from experimental psychology whereby the stimulus (S) acts on the organism (O) to produce a response (R). Within that framework, using four independent data sets utilizing calibrated personal light measurements, we conducted a serial analysis of the factors in the Kronauer99 model that could affect prediction accuracy characterized by changes in dim-light melatonin onset. Prediction uncertainty was slightly greater than 1 h for the new data sets using the original Kronauer99 model. The revised model described here reduced prediction uncertainty for these same data sets by roughly half.

Ambient-task combined lighting to regulate autonomic and psychomotor arousal levels without compromising subjective comfort to lighting

Background

Although evidence of both beneficial and adverse biological effects of lighting has accumulated, biologically favorable lighting often does not match subjectively comfortable lighting. By controlling the correlated color temperature (CCT) of ambient lights, we investigated the feasibility of combined lighting that meets both biological requirements and subjective comfort.

Methods

Two types of combined lightings were compared; one consisted of a high-CCT (12000 K) light-emitting diode (LED) panel as the ambient light and a low-CCT (5000 K) LED stand light as the task light (high-low combined lighting), and the other consisted of a low-CCT (4500 K) LED panel as the ambient light and the same low-CCT (5000 K) stand light as the task light (low-low combined lighting) as control. Ten healthy subjects (5 young and 5 elderly) were exposed to the two types of lighting on separate days. Autonomic function by heart rate variability, psychomotor performances, and subjective comfort were compared.

Results

Both at sitting rest and during psychomotor workload, heart rate was higher and the parasympathetic index of heart rate variability was lower under the high-low combined lighting than the low-low combined lighting in both young and elderly subject groups. Increased psychomotor alertness in the elderly and improved sustainability of concentration work performance in both age groups were also observed under the high-low combined lighting. However, no significant difference was observed in the visual-analog-scale assessment of subjective comfort between the two types of lightings.

Conclusions

High-CCT ambient lighting, even when used in combination with low-CCT task lighting, could increase autonomic and psychomotor arousal levels without compromising subjective comfort. This finding suggests the feasibility of independent control of ambient and task lighting as a way to achieve both biological function regulation and subjective comfort.

A review of the studies on nonvisual lighting effects in the field of physiological anthropology

Here, we review the history and the trends in the research on the nonvisual effect of light in the field of physiological anthropology. Research on the nonvisual effect of light in the field of physiological anthropology was pioneered by Sato and colleagues in the early 1990s. These authors found that the color temperature of light affected physiological functions in humans. The groundbreaking event with regard to the study of nonvisual effects of light was the discovery of the intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells in the mammalian retina in the early 2000s. The interest of the physiological anthropology scientific community in the nonvisual effects of light has been increasing since then. A total of 61 papers on nonvisual effects of light were published in the Journal of Physiological Anthropology (including its predecessor journals) until October 2018, 14 papers (1.4/year) in the decade from 1992 to 2001, 45 papers (2.8/year) in the 16 years between 2002 and 2017, and two papers in 2018 (January-October). The number of papers on this topic has been increasing in recent years. We categorized all papers according to light conditions, such as color temperature of light, light intensity, and monochromatic light. Among the 61 papers, 11 papers were related to color temperature, 20 papers were related to light intensity, 18 papers were related to monochromatic light, and 12 papers were classified as others. We provide an overview of these papers and mention future research prospects.

Do green-blocking glasses enhance the nonvisual effects of white polychromatic light?

Background

It is well known that light containing the blue component stimulates the intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) and plays a role in melatonin suppression and pupillary constriction. In our previous studies, we verified that simultaneous exposure to blue and green light resulted in less pupillary constriction than blue light exposure. Hence, we hypothesized that the nonvisual effects of polychromatic white light might be increased by blocking the green component. Therefore, we conducted an experiment using optical filters that blocked blue or green component and examined the nonvisual effects of these lights on pupillary constriction and electroencephalogram power spectra.

Methods

Ten healthy young males participated in this study. The participant sat on a chair with his eyes facing an integrating sphere. After 10 min of light adaptation, the participant’s left eye was exposed to white pulsed light (1000 lx; pulse width 2.5 ms) every 10 s with a blue-blocking glasses, a green-blocking glasses, or control glasses (no lens), and pupillary constriction was measured. Then, after rest for 10 min, the participant was exposed a continuous white light of 1000 lx with a blue- or green-blocking glasses or control glasses and electroencephalogram was measured.

Results

Pupillary constriction with the blue-blocking glasses was significantly less than that observed with the green-blocking glasses. Furthermore, pupillary constriction under the green-blocking glasses was significantly greater than that observed with the control glasses.

Conclusions

A reduction in the green component of light facilitated pupillary constriction. Thus, the effects of polychromatic white light containing blue and green components on ipRGCs are apparently increased by removing the green component.

Suppression of salivary melatonin secretion under 100-Hz flickering and non-flickering blue light

Background

Bright light at night is known to suppress melatonin secretion. Novel photoreceptors named intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) are mainly responsible for projecting dark/bright information to the suprachiasmatic nucleus and thus regulating the circadian system. However, it has been shown that the amplitude of the electroretinogram of ipRGCs is considerably lower under flickering light at 100 Hz than at 1–5 Hz, suggesting that flickering light may also affect the circadian system. Therefore, in this study, we evaluated light-induced melatonin suppression under flickering and non-flickering light.

Methods

Twelve male participants between the ages of 20 and 23 years (mean ± S.D. = 21.6 ± 1.5 years) were exposed to three light conditions (dim, 100-Hz flickering, and non-flickering blue light) from 1:00 A.M. to 2:30 A.M., and saliva samples were obtained just before 1:00 A.M. and at 1:15, 1:30, 2:00, and 2:30 A.M.

Results

A repeated measures t test with Bonferroni correction showed that at 1:15 A.M., melatonin concentrations were significantly lower following exposure to non-flickering light compared with dim light, whereas there was no significant difference between the dim and 100-Hz flickering light conditions. By contrast, after 1:30 A.M., the mean melatonin concentrations were significantly lower under both 100-Hz flickering and non-flickering light than under dim light.

Conclusion

Although melatonin suppression rate tended to be lower under 100-Hz flickering light than under non-flickering light at the initial 15 min of the light exposure, the present study suggests that 100-Hz flickering light may have the same impact on melatonin secretion as non-flickering light.