Search

It is well established that the oldest chronotype questionnaire, the morningness-eveningness questionnaire (MEQ), has significant heritability, and several associations have been reported between MEQ score and polymorphisms in candidate clock genes, a number of them reproducibly across populations. By contrast, there are no reports of heritability and genetic associations for the Munich chronotype questionnaire (MCTQ). Recent genome-wide association studies (GWAS) from large cohorts have reported multiple associations with chronotype as assessed by a single self-evaluation question. We have taken advantage of the availability of data from all these instruments from a single sample of 597 participants from the Brazilian Baependi Heart Study. The family-based design of the cohort allowed us to calculate the heritability (h2) for these measures. Heritability values for the best-fitted models were 0.37 for MEQ, 0.32 for MCTQ, and 0.28 for single-question chronotype (MEQ Question 19). We also calculated the heritability for the two major factors recently derived from MEQ, "Dissipation of sleep pressure" (0.32) and "Build-up of sleep pressure" (0.28). This first heritability comparison of the major chronotype instruments in current use provides the first quantification of the genetic component of MCTQ score, supporting its future use in genetic analysis. Our findings also suggest that the single chronotype question that has been used for large GWAS analyses captures a larger proportion of the dimensions of chronotype than previously thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Studying communities at different stages of urbanisation and industrialisation can teach us how timing and intensity of light affect the circadian clock under real‐life conditions. We have previously described a strong tendency towards morningness in the Baependi Heart Study, located in a small rural town in Brazil. Here, we tested the hypothesis that this morningness tendency is associated with early circadian phase based on objective measurements (as determined by dim light melatonin onset, DLMO, and activity) and light exposure. We also analysed how well the previously collected chronotype questionnaire data were able to predict these DLMO values. The average DLMO observed in 73 participants (40 female) was 20:03 ± 01:21, SD, with an earlier average onset in men (19:38 ± 01:16) than in women (20:24 ± 01:21; P ≤.01). However, men presented larger phase angle between DLMO and sleep onset time as measured by actigraphy (4.11 hours vs 3.16 hours; P ≤.01). Correlational analysis indicated associations between light exposure, activity rhythms and DLMO, such that early DLMO was observed in participants with higher exposure to light, higher activity and earlier light exposure. The strongest significant predictor of DLMO was morningness‐eveningness questionnaire (MEQ) (beta=−0.35, P ≤.05), followed by age (beta = −0.47, P ≤.01). Sex, light exposure and variables derived from the Munich chronotype questionnaire were not significant predictors. Our observations demonstrate that both early sleep patterns and earlier circadian phase have been retained in this small rural town in spite of availability of electrification, in contrast to metropolitan postindustrial areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]