Comparative cyto- and genotoxicity of 900 MHz and 1800 MHz electromagnetic field radiations in root

2019 · Harm · Low evidence

← Research stream

HarmLow evidencePaper 1638

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2019

Study typeanimal

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Comparative cyto- and genotoxicity of 900 MHz and 1800 MHz electromagnetic field radiations in root meristems of Allium cepa Kumar A, Kaur S, Chandel S, Singh HP, Batish DR, Kohli RK. Comparative cyto- and genotoxicity of 900 MHz and 1800 MHz electromagnetic field radiations in root meristems of Allium cepa. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2019 Nov 4;188:109786. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109786. Abstract In the last few decades, tremendous increase in the use of wireless electronic gadgets, particularly the cell phones, has significantly enhanced the levels of electromagnetic field radiations (EMF-r) in the environment. Therefore, it is pertinent to study the effect of these radiations on biological systems including plants. We investigated comparative cytotoxic and DNA damaging effects of 900 and 1800 MHz EMF-r in Allium cepa (onion) root meristematic cells in terms of mitotic index (MI), chromosomal aberrations (CAs) and single cell gel electrophoresis (comet assay). Onion bulbs were subjected to 900 and 1800 MHz (at power densities 261 ± 8.50 mW m-2 and 332 ± 10.36 mW m-2, respectively) of EMF-r for 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, and 4 h. Root length declined by 13.2% and 12.3%, whereas root thickness was increased by 46.7% and 48.3% after 4 h exposure to 900 MHz and 1800 MHz, respectively. Cytogenetic studies exhibited clastogenic effect of EMF-r as depicted by increased CAs and MI. MI increased by 36% and 53% after 2 and 4 h exposure to 900 MHz EMF-r, whereas it increased by 41% and 67% in response to 1800 MHz EMF-r. Aberration index was increased by 41%-266% and 14%-257% during 0.5-4 h of exposure to 900 MHz and 1800 MHz, respectively, over the control. EMF-r exposure decreased % head DNA (DNAH) and increased % tail DNA (DNAT) and olive tail moment (OTM) at both 900 and 1800 EMF-r. In 4 h exposure treatments, head DNA (%) declined by 19% and 23% at 900 MHz and 1800 MHz, respectively. DNAT and OTM were increased by 2.3 and 3.7 fold upon exposure to 900 MHz EMF-r over that in the control, whereas 2.8 and 5.8 fold increase was observed in response to 1800 MHz EMF-r exposure for 4 h and the difference was statistically significant. The study concludes that EMF-r in the communication range (900 and 1800 MHz) adversely affect root meristems in plants and induce cytotoxic and DNA damage. EMF-r induced DNA damage was more pronounced at 1800 MHz than that at 900 MHz. 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 directionharm

PopulationAllium cepa (onion) root meristematic cells

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF · 0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, and 4 h

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Onion bulbs exposed to 900 MHz (261 ± 8.50 mW m-2) or 1800 MHz (332 ± 10.36 mW m-2) EMF-r for up to 4 h showed reduced root length and increased root thickness. Cytogenetic endpoints indicated increased mitotic index and chromosomal aberrations, and comet assay measures were consistent with increased DNA damage at both frequencies, with more pronounced DNA damage reported at 1800 MHz than 900 MHz.

Outcomes measured

Root length
Root thickness
Mitotic index (MI)
Chromosomal aberrations (CAs)
Comet assay (% head DNA, % tail DNA, olive tail moment)
DNA damage (clastogenic effects)

Limitations

Sample size not reported in abstract
Exposure metric reported as power density; SAR not provided
Plant model (Allium cepa) may not generalize to humans or other organisms
Only short-term exposures (up to 4 h) described

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "wireless electronic gadgets/cell phones (communication range)",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "0.5 h, 1 h, 2 h, and 4 h"
  },
  "population": "Allium cepa (onion) root meristematic cells",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Root length",
    "Root thickness",
    "Mitotic index (MI)",
    "Chromosomal aberrations (CAs)",
    "Comet assay (% head DNA, % tail DNA, olive tail moment)",
    "DNA damage (clastogenic effects)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Onion bulbs exposed to 900 MHz (261 ± 8.50 mW m-2) or 1800 MHz (332 ± 10.36 mW m-2) EMF-r for up to 4 h showed reduced root length and increased root thickness. Cytogenetic endpoints indicated increased mitotic index and chromosomal aberrations, and comet assay measures were consistent with increased DNA damage at both frequencies, with more pronounced DNA damage reported at 1800 MHz than 900 MHz.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in abstract",
    "Exposure metric reported as power density; SAR not provided",
    "Plant model (Allium cepa) may not generalize to humans or other organisms",
    "Only short-term exposures (up to 4 h) described"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "900 MHz",
    "1800 MHz",
    "RF-EMF",
    "electromagnetic field radiation",
    "Allium cepa",
    "root meristem",
    "cytotoxicity",
    "genotoxicity",
    "chromosomal aberrations",
    "comet assay",
    "mitotic index",
    "power density"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "rf-genotoxicity",
      "weight": 0.86,
      "reason": "Assesses DNA damage and chromosomal aberrations after RF (900/1800 MHz) exposure in a biological model."
    },
    {
      "slug": "mobile-telephony",
      "weight": 0.62,
      "reason": "Frequencies (900/1800 MHz) are in the mobile communication range and framed as related to cell phone/wireless gadget emissions."
    }
  ]
}

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: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109786
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library