$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The circadian clock is found ubiquitously across species and provides a time-keeping mechanism that helps organisms to adapt to their rhythmically changing environment. The master circadian pacemaker is located in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus. The SCN is primarily entrained by the environmental light-dark cycle, and synchronizes peripheral clocks present in nearly every cell of the body via multiple cues, including neuronal and hormonal signals, feeding, and body temperature1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8. In mammals, the molecular circadian clock relies on the heterodimeric transcription factor CLOCK: BMAL19,10, which controls the expression of the core clock genes named Period (Per1, Per2, and Per3) and Cryptochrome (Cry1 and Cry2) to initiate a transcriptional feedback loop that is critical for the generation of circadian rhythms9,11,12. The molecular clock also regulates the rhythmic transcription of thousands of genes that control the rhythmicity of virtually every biological function13,14,15. More than 50% of the genome in mammals is rhythmically expressed in at least one tissue type16,17,18, and tissues such as the liver in mice have about 25%-30% of their transcriptome expressed rhythmically18,19. Rhythmic gene expression is crucial to activate important biological processes such as cell cycle control20, glucose homeostasis21, and amino acid metabolism22 at the right time of the day in order to increase organism fitness.
Over the past few decades, there has been increasing evidence suggesting that food intake can act as a potent synchronizing cue for entraining rhythms in gene expression in multiple tissues, including the liver23,24. Importantly, feeding has been shown to entrain rhythms in the liver independently of the SCN or of the light-dark cycle25, and rhythmic feeding can drive rhythmic gene expression without involving the molecular clock26,27,28,29,30,31. Feeding restricted to the inactive period of mice (daytime) inverts the phase of expression of the core clock genes and of many rhythmic genes31. Time-restricted feeding (TRF), which is a nutritional intervention where the daily caloric intake is restricted to a period of 8-10 h, has been shown to protect against obesity, hyperinsulinemia, hepatic steatosis, and metabolic syndrome32,33. All the above experiments involving manipulation of food intake require the experimenter to make use of effective methods to deliver food at the right time of day.
Different methods of food delivery have been developed, bearing several advantages and disadvantages29,34,35,36,37,38,39 (Table 1). Some automated feeders have been designed to operate based on a software that controls the amount, duration, and timing of food availability while recording feeding and voluntary wheel-running activity in mice34. A few other methods involve mice being placed in different cages for different feeding conditions, with the experimenter manually adding food pellets at the prerequisite time38,39. Another system uses an automated feeder system controlled by a computer where a pneumatic-driven shield prevents access to food and which can be controlled either by time intervals or mass of food35. All these methods either require utilization and setup of a computerized software that can be expensive and require some training for proper operation of the instrument or are labor intensive because the experimenter needs to be present at specific times to manually change feeding conditions. Computerized systems also come with their share of issues, including malfunctioning of levers or doors that let the food out, food pellets getting stuck in the outlets, and software breakdown. Moreover, the sound that may be produced during the opening of doors or levers presents the risk of conditioning mice to associate these with food delivery, thereby compromising the interpretation of effects of food manipulation as being strictly due to food access or due to effects on other behavioral rhythms such as sleep/wake cycle. The overall goal of this study was to develop an affordable and efficient system to manipulate long-term rhythmic food intake that would help alleviate many of these aforementioned issues. First and foremost, the feeding apparatus that was developed and is described below can be constructed at a very minimal cost compared to the automated machines (Table 2) and does not require sophisticated training for handling, operation, and maintenance. Secondly, the feeding system only produces a background white noise and no loud sounds during food delivery, thereby preventing Pavlovian conditioning. Altogether, this feeding system is economic, more accessible, and reliable for researchers while still being efficient in the manipulation of rhythmic food intake.