Ukr.Biochem.J. 2022; Volume 94, Issue 1, Jan-Feb, pp. 95-104

doi: https://doi.org/10.15407/ubj94.01.095

Oxidative and mutagenic effects of low intensity microwave radiation on quail embryos

02.05.2022   Uncategorized   No comments

A. Burlaka1, O. Tsybulin2*, O. Brieieva1,
O. Salavor3, I. Yakymenko3,4

1R.E. Kavetsky Institute of Experimental Pathology, Oncology and Radiobiology,
National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv;
2Bila Tserkva National Agrarian University, Bila Tserkva, Ukraine;
3National University of Food Technologies, Kyiv, Ukraine;
4Kyiv Medical University, Kyiv, Ukraine;
*e-mail: alex.tsybulin@gmail.com

Received: 18 December 2020; Accepted: 21 January 2022

Intensive implementation of wireless communication systems raised the question of the possible adverse effects of anthropogenic electromagnetic radiation. This study aims to assess the biological effects of low intensity microwaves (MW) radiation from smartphone Huawei Y5I commercial model used alone or in combination with attached Waveex chip that balances low frequency electromagnetic field but does not affect microwave signal. The biological model of developing quail embryos in ovo was used in the study. The phone as a source of low intensity 1800 MHz (0.32 µW/cm2) microwaves radiation was placed at 3 cm over the surface of hatching eggs and discontinuously activated with a computer program (48 s – on, 12 s – off). It was demonstrated that the exposure of quail embryos to radiation resulted in a statistically significant increase in the content of superoxide, nitrogen oxide and TBA products, DNA integrity damage in embryo cells and increased embryo mortality. Application of Waveex chip during the exposure resulted in a partial normalization of oxidative status and DNA integrity in embryonic cells indicating a negative impact not only of MW radiation, but of low-frequency electromagnetic fields from mobile devices as well.

Keywords: , , , , ,

References:

  1. Baan R, Grosse Y, Lauby-Secretan B, El Ghissassi F, Bouvard V, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Guha N, Islami F, Galichet L, Straif K. Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):624-626. PubMed, CrossRef
  2. Hardell L, Carlberg M. Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz. Int J Oncol. 2019;54(1):111-127. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  3. Buchner K,Eger H. Changes of Clinically Important Neurotransmitters under the Influence of Modulated RF Fields—A Long-term Study under Real-life Conditions. Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft. 2011;24(1):44-57.
  4. Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and carcinogenesis with focus on male reproductive system. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2009;7:114. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  5. Balmori A. Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts. Effects on wildlife. Pathophysiology. 2009;16(2-3):191-199. PubMed, CrossRef
  6. Balmori A. Electromagnetic radiation as an emerging driver factor for the decline of insects. Sci Total Environ. 2021;767:144913. PubMed, CrossRef
  7. Ruediger HW. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology. 2009;16(2-3):89-102. PubMed, CrossRef
  8. Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2016;35(2):186-202. PubMed, CrossRef
  9. Friedman J, Kraus S, Hauptman Y, Schiff Y, Seger R. Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies. Biochem J. 2007;405(3):559-568. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  10. Khalil AM, Gagaa MH, Alshamali AM. 8-Oxo-7, 8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine as a biomarker of DNA damage by mobile phone radiation. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2012;31(7):734-740. PubMed,CrossRef
  11. Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Kyrylenko S,Yakymenko I. Monochromatic red light of LED protects embryonic cells from oxidative stress caused by radiofrequency radiation. Oxid Antioxid Med Sci. 2016;5(1):21-27. CrossRef
  12. Hamburger V, Hamilton HL. A series of normal stages in the development of the chick embryo. 1951. Dev Dyn. 1992;195(4):231-272. PubMed, CrossRef
  13. Yakymenko I, Henshel D, Sidorik E, Tsybulin O,Rozumnuk V. Effect of mobile phone electronagnetic radiation on somitogenesis of birds. Rep Nat Acad Sci Ukr. 2011;(1):146-152.
  14. Yakimenko I, Besulin V, Testik A. The Effects of Low Intensity Red Laser Irradiation on Hatching Eggs in Chicken and Quail. Int J Poultry Sci. 2002;1(1):06-08. CrossRef
  15. Hartmann A, Agurell E, Beevers C, Brendler-Schwaab S, Burlinson B, Clay P, Collins A, Smith A, Speit G, Thybaud V,Tice RR. Recommendations for conducting the in vivo alkaline Comet assay. 4th International Comet Assay Workshop. Mutagenesis. 2003;18(1):45-51. PubMed, CrossRef
  16. Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Brieieva O, Buchynska L, Kyrylenko S, Henshel D,Yakymenko I. GSM 900 MHz cellular phone radiation can either stimulate or depress early embryogenesis in Japanese quails depending on the duration of exposure. Int J Radiat Biol. 2013;89(9):756-763. PubMed, CrossRef
  17. Buettner GR, Mason RP. Spin-Trapping Methods for Detecting Superoxide and Hydroxyl Free Radicals In Vitro and In Vivo. Critical Reviews of Oxidative Stress and Aging. 2002:27-38. CrossRef
  18. Lai CS, Komarov AM. Spin trapping of nitric oxide produced in vivo in septic-shock mice. FEBS Lett. 1994;345(2-3):120-124. PubMed, CrossRef
  19. Shigenaga MK, Gimeno CJ, Ames BN. Urinary 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine as a biological marker of in vivo oxidative DNA damage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1989;86(24):9697-9701. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  20. Draper HH, Hadley M. Malondialdehyde determination as index of lipid peroxidation. Methods Enzymol. 1990;186:421-431. PubMed, CrossRef
  21. Chavary S, Chaba I,Sekuy I. Role of superoxide dismutase in cellular oxidative processes and method of its determination in biological materials. Lab Delo. 1985;(11):678-681. (In Russian). PubMed
  22. Koroliuk MA, Ivanova LI, Mayorova IG, Tokarev VE. A method of determining catalase activity. Lab Delo. 1988;(1):16-19. (In Russian). PubMed
  23. Ten EV. Rapid method of determining the activity of ceruloplasmin in blood. Lab Delo. 1981;(6):334-335. (In Russian). PubMed
  24. De Iuliis GN, Newey RJ, King BV, Aitken RJ. Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro. PLoS One. 2009;4(7):e6446. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  25. Burlaka A, Tsybulin O, Sidorik, Lukin S, Polishuk V, Tsehmistrenko S, Yakymenko I. Overproduction of free radical species in embryonal cells exposed to low intensity radiofrequency radiation. Exp Oncol. 2013;35(3):219-225. PubMed
  26. Halliwell B. Biochemistry of oxidative stress. Biochem Soc Trans. 2007;35(Pt 5):1147-1150. PubMed, CrossRef
  27. Valko M, Rhodes CJ, Moncol J, Izakovic M, Mazur M. Free radicals, metals and antioxidants in oxidative stress-induced cancer. Chem Biol Interact. 2006;160(1):1-40. PubMed, CrossRef
  28. Valko M, Leibfritz D, Moncol J, Cronin MTD, Mazur M, Telser J. Free radicals and antioxidants in normal physiological functions and human disease. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2007;39(1):44-84. PubMed, CrossRef
  29. Nguyen HL, Zucker S, Zarrabi K, Kadam P, Schmidt C, Cao J. Oxidative stress and prostate cancer progression are elicited by membrane-type 1 matrix metalloproteinase. Mol Cancer Res. 2011;9(10):1305-1318. PubMed, PubMedCentral, CrossRef
  30. Ralph SJ, Rodríguez-Enríquez S, Neuzil J, Saavedra E, Moreno-Sánchez R. The causes of cancer revisited: “mitochondrial malignancy” and ROS-induced oncogenic transformation – why mitochondria are targets for cancer therapy. Mol Aspects Med. 2010;31(2):145-170. PubMed, CrossRef
Creative CommonsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.