. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jun 9.

Published in final edited form as: J Biol Rhythms. 2015 Jan 29;30(2):129–143. doi: 10.1177/0748730414568297

Table 1.

Phase shifts in response to novel wheel confinements and light pulses.

Manipulation	Measurement	All Trials
Manipulation	Measurement	WT	Duper
Novel confinement wheels in DD
CT 0	Phase shift (n)	0.2 ± 0.4 (15)	0.04 ± 0.6 (21)
CT 4	Phase shift (n)	0.1 ± 0.4 (18)	0.3 ± 0.4 (19)*
CT 8	Phase shift (n)	0.03 ± 0.3 (15)	0.3 ± 0.6 (24)
Revolutions (all confinements)		2551 ± 211(48)*	2583 ± 209 (64)*
Control (DD)
CT 4	Phase shift (n)	−0.03 ± 0.08 (5)	−0.003 ± 0.10 (8)
CT 4	Revolutions	5 ± 2	10 ± 5
Light pulses
CT 18.5	Phase shift (n)	2.6 ± 0.9 (15)*	−11.6 ± 2.6 (16)*^†
CT 15	Phase shift (n)	−1.3 ± 1.1 (15)	−5.6 ± 1.1 (16)^†
Modified Aschoff type II novel wheel confinements at ZT 6
LD to DD	Phase shift (n)	0.54 ± 0.25 (9)	1.87 ± 0.98 (6)^†
LD to DD	Revolutions	522 ± 123	1047 ± 364
LD to DD Control	Phase shift (n)	0.58 ± 0.40 (9)	2.07 ± 0.83 (6)^†
LD to DD Control	Revolutions	3 ± 2	183 ± 76*
LL to DD	Phase shift (n)	1.95 ± 0.78 (9)*	See text.
LL to DD	Revolutions	733 ± 165	See text.

All phase shifts are presented as circular mean ± circular SD given in circadian hours (number of animals). Number of revolutions for all experiments is provided as mean ± SEM. Significant differences (p < 0.05) between experimental and control groups within genotype and between genotypes are indicated (* and ^†, respectively). Where values are not provided for dupers in the modified Aschoff type II novel wheel confinement experiment, the sample size is too small for statistical analysis; see text for details. WT, wild type.