RF Safe

Zebrafish Larval Melanophores Respond to Electromagnetic Fields Exposure

2023 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream
HarmLow evidencePaper 480

Zebrafish embryos/larvae exposed to static (0 Hz), ELF (0.2 Hz), LF (270 kHz), VHF (100 MHz), and UHF (900 MHz) fields showed alterations in body pigmentation compared with unexposed controls, including changes in the total number, area, and morphology of mel…

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2023
Study typeanimal
Reported directionHarm
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Zebrafish Larval Melanophores Respond to Electromagnetic Fields Exposure Nassisi V, Mazzei A, Del Vecchio G, Calisi A, Velardi L, Alifano P, Verri T. Zebrafish Larval Melanophores Respond to Electromagnetic Fields Exposure. Applied Sciences. 2023; 13(8):4721. doi.org. Abstract Groups of zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos receive radiations of different frequencies and intensities by means of new prototype devices. They are exposed to static (B0, 0 Hz), extremely low-frequency (ELF, 0.2 Hz), low- frequency (LF, 270 kHz), very-high-frequency (VHF, 100 MHz), and ultra-high-frequency (UHF, 900 MHz) field irradiations. The applied magnetic field intensities are 40 mT at 0 Hz, 40 mT at 0.2 Hz, 470 μT at 270 kHz, 240 nT at 100 MHz, and 240 nT at 900 MHz. Such combinations are meant to cover environmental radiations from geomagnetic fields and cosmic magnetism to electromagnetic radiation of electronic instruments such as GSM and UMTS transmission-mode mobile systems. For each frequency, fish are monitored for up to 5 days. Unexposed embryos are used as controls. Notably, exposure to the different radiations brings alterations of body pigmentation in zebrafish embryos and larvae in terms of total number, area, and morphology of (black) melanophores. This research may contribute to evaluating the roles and effects of magnetic radiation on living matter. Open access paper: mdpi.com

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeanimal
Effect directionharm
PopulationZebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos/larvae
Sample sizeNot supplied
ExposureELF · monitored up to 5 days
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Zebrafish embryos/larvae exposed to static (0 Hz), ELF (0.2 Hz), LF (270 kHz), VHF (100 MHz), and UHF (900 MHz) fields showed alterations in body pigmentation compared with unexposed controls, including changes in the total number, area, and morphology of melanophores.

Outcomes measured

  • Body pigmentation alterations
  • Melanophore total number
  • Melanophore area
  • Melanophore morphology

Limitations

  • Sample size not reported in the provided abstract/metadata
  • No quantitative effect sizes or statistical details provided in the provided abstract/metadata
  • Exposure metrics are given as magnetic field intensities; SAR not reported
  • Details of exposure protocol (e.g., duration per day, timing during development) not provided in the provided abstract/metadata
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "ELF",
    "source": "prototype devices (static/ELF/LF/VHF/UHF fields; includes GSM/UMTS-relevant frequencies)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "monitored up to 5 days"
  },
  "population": "Zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos/larvae",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Body pigmentation alterations",
    "Melanophore total number",
    "Melanophore area",
    "Melanophore morphology"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Zebrafish embryos/larvae exposed to static (0 Hz), ELF (0.2 Hz), LF (270 kHz), VHF (100 MHz), and UHF (900 MHz) fields showed alterations in body pigmentation compared with unexposed controls, including changes in the total number, area, and morphology of melanophores.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in the provided abstract/metadata",
    "No quantitative effect sizes or statistical details provided in the provided abstract/metadata",
    "Exposure metrics are given as magnetic field intensities; SAR not reported",
    "Details of exposure protocol (e.g., duration per day, timing during development) not provided in the provided abstract/metadata"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "zebrafish",
    "Danio rerio",
    "embryos",
    "larvae",
    "melanophores",
    "pigmentation",
    "static magnetic field",
    "ELF",
    "low frequency",
    "VHF",
    "UHF",
    "900 MHz",
    "GSM",
    "UMTS"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "5g-policy",
      "weight": 0,
      "reason": null
    },
    {
      "slug": "occupational-exposure",
      "weight": 0,
      "reason": null
    },
    {
      "slug": "smart-meters",
      "weight": 0,
      "reason": null
    },
    {
      "slug": "school-wi-fi",
      "weight": 0,
      "reason": null
    },
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0,
      "reason": null
    }
  ]
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.3390/app13084721
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library