How Its Internal Clock Is Read, Knows Reindeer

In a study in the journal Current Biology, researchers show that reindeer, and probably other Arctic animals, go without a circadian clock in an environment of weeks-long day or night. Christopher Intagliata reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Humans are pegged to a 24-hour cycle. We're locked into it not just by day and night—there’s the master timepiece in the brain called the circadian clock. But it doesn't make sense to live by a 24-hour clock in the Arctic, where it's dark or light for months at time. The solution? Lose the daily clock. Which is exactly what reindeer seem to have done, according to a study in Current Biology. [See Weiqun Lu et al, http://bit.ly/btOYTL]

Reindeer don't sleep eight hours like we do, and there's no obvious 24-hour pattern to their lives. They just chomp on tundra, nap a few hours and feast again. But they still need to know when to mate, pack on fat or thicken their coats. So they probably rely on an annual clock instead, set by the hormone melatonin.

In humans melatonin levels rise at night, in response to darkness and cues from the circadian clock. In reindeer, even if they’re missing a circadian clock, melatonin levels still spike when it's dark and drop when it's light, making the equinoxes an ideal time to synchronize their annual clocks.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


So ask a reindeer what time of year it is, and it may be able to give you the date. Just don't be offended if it won't give you the time of day.

—Christopher Itagliata

[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe