Changes in Body Temperature of Small Mammals and Birds in a Few Minutes Range as Reflection of Environmental Influences

Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2021 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream
MixedLow evidencePaper 1103

Intraperitoneal body temperature changes over a few minutes were correlated across animals within species and also between birds and mammals kept isolated and under different illumination regimens. In 80% of cases, phases of the most pronounced body temperatu…

Study snapshot

PublicationBulletin of experimental biology and medicine · 2021
Study typeanimal
Reported directionMixed
Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Changes in Body Temperature of Small Mammals and Birds in a Few Minutes Range as Reflection of Environmental Influences M E Diatroptov. Changes in Body Temperature of Small Mammals and Birds in a Few Minutes Range as Reflection of Environmental Influences. Bull Exp Biol Med. 2021 Jul 23. doi: 10.1007/s10517-021-05234-z. Abstract The study examined the changes in intraperitoneal body temperature of laboratory mice, Jungar hamsters, European greenfinch Chloris chloris, and starlings. In a few minutes range, these changes significantly correlated not only between the animals of the same species, but also between the different classes such as birds and mammals, which were isolated from each other and maintained under different illumination regimen. This phenomenon indicates some external influence(s) on the central mechanisms of the thermal control system not related to illumination regiment. In 80% cases, the phases of most pronounced rhythms of body temperature oscillating with the periods of 8-9 and 12-13 min coincided with those of geomagnetic field within the accuracy of ±1 min. However, the amplitude of body temperature oscillations did not depend on the amplitude of geomagnetic field (GMF) oscillations. Synchronicity of the changes in body temperature and GMF was observed at the amplitude of GMF oscillation of 0.4 nT, which is extremely low value. In contrast, there was no reaction of body temperature to greater (6-10 nT) but irregular and abrupt perturbations of GMF. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

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 directionmixed
PopulationLaboratory mice, Jungar hamsters, European greenfinch (Chloris chloris), and starlings
Sample sizeNot supplied
Exposureminutes (8–9 and 12–13 min oscillation periods; observations in a few-minutes range)
Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Intraperitoneal body temperature changes over a few minutes were correlated across animals within species and also between birds and mammals kept isolated and under different illumination regimens. In 80% of cases, phases of the most pronounced body temperature rhythms (periods 8–9 and 12–13 min) coincided with phases of geomagnetic field oscillations within ±1 min, though body temperature oscillation amplitude did not depend on GMF oscillation amplitude. Synchronicity was observed at GMF oscillation amplitude of 0.4 nT, while no body temperature reaction was observed to larger (6–10 nT) irregular and abrupt GMF perturbations.

Outcomes measured

  • Intraperitoneal body temperature changes/oscillations
  • Correlation/synchronicity between body temperature rhythms and geomagnetic field (GMF) oscillations

Limitations

  • Sample size not reported in abstract
  • Observational/correlational description; causality not established in abstract
  • Exposure characterization limited to GMF oscillation amplitude and phase coincidence; measurement methods not described in abstract
  • Species-specific and laboratory/controlled setting; generalizability not addressed in abstract
View raw extracted JSON
{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": null,
    "source": "geomagnetic field",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "minutes (8–9 and 12–13 min oscillation periods; observations in a few-minutes range)"
  },
  "population": "Laboratory mice, Jungar hamsters, European greenfinch (Chloris chloris), and starlings",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Intraperitoneal body temperature changes/oscillations",
    "Correlation/synchronicity between body temperature rhythms and geomagnetic field (GMF) oscillations"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Intraperitoneal body temperature changes over a few minutes were correlated across animals within species and also between birds and mammals kept isolated and under different illumination regimens. In 80% of cases, phases of the most pronounced body temperature rhythms (periods 8–9 and 12–13 min) coincided with phases of geomagnetic field oscillations within ±1 min, though body temperature oscillation amplitude did not depend on GMF oscillation amplitude. Synchronicity was observed at GMF oscillation amplitude of 0.4 nT, while no body temperature reaction was observed to larger (6–10 nT) irregular and abrupt GMF perturbations.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Observational/correlational description; causality not established in abstract",
    "Exposure characterization limited to GMF oscillation amplitude and phase coincidence; measurement methods not described in abstract",
    "Species-specific and laboratory/controlled setting; generalizability not addressed in abstract"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "body temperature",
    "intraperitoneal temperature",
    "mice",
    "Jungar hamsters",
    "European greenfinch",
    "starlings",
    "birds",
    "mammals",
    "geomagnetic field",
    "GMF",
    "rhythms",
    "oscillations",
    "phase coincidence"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": []
}
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: 10.1007/s10517-021-05234-z
PubMed: 34297296

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library