Effect of DECT cordless phone radiation on exposed, laboratory cultivated maize plants

2017 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 2365

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2017

Study typeanimal

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Effect of DECT cordless phone radiation on exposed, laboratory cultivated maize plants Stefia AL, Margaritis LH, Christodoulakis NS. The effect of the non-ionizing radiation on exposed, laboratory cultivated maize (Zea mays L.) plants. Flora. 223: 23-20. Aug 2017. doi.org Highlights • Young corn plants exposed to long term radiation from a DECT base-unit. • No biomass reduction was observed for the exposed plants, after two weeks. • Photosynthetic pigment content seems unaltered. • After two weeks, mesophyll chloroplast structure seems not to be affected. • Bundle sheath chloroplasts severely affected, apprehending repression of a major advantage. Abstract A series of experiments was carried out to investigate possible structural or biochemical effects on young Zea mays plants after a long-term exposure to non-ionizing, continuous radiation emitted from the base unit of a cordless DECT system. Exposed plants, compared to their normal counterparts, do not seem to be affected concerning their sprouting potential, biomass production for both the above ground part and the root, leaf structure, photosynthetic pigment content and their absorbance. The structural profile of the exposed plants seems almost identical to those of the control ones. Biomass production, photosynthetic pigments, leaf structure and chloroplast arrangement do not differ in exposed plants. What seems to be affected is the structure of the chloroplasts accommodated in the bundle sheath cells of the exposed leaves. They suffer a slight swelling of their thylakoids and an undulation of some of the thylakoid membranes. Scarcely a disruption of chloroplast envelope can be observed. sciencedirect.com Excerpts In the middle of one of the two cages, the base unit of a DECT telephone apparatus (General, Model 123) was appropriately positioned (Fig. 2). The DECT base was in a 24 h a day, 7 days a week, pulsed transmission mode, at 1882 MHz, as described elsewhere (Margaritis et al., 2014) while the light/dark programme of the chamber was adjusted to a 16/8 cycle (Stefi et al., 2016, 2017). Radiation was measured in the two cages, while the DECT device was transmitting within one of them, with a NARDA SRM3000 (Germany) spectrum analyzer. Τhe corresponding electrical field intensity (average and peak), in each experimental setup, was measured for a 6-min period according to ICNIRP (1998) guidelines as in Table 1. Supplementary, low precision measurements were made in the control cage with a broadband field meter (TES-92, 50 MHz-3.5 GHz, Electromagnetic radiation detector - TES Electrical Electronic Corp. Taipei, Taiwan, R.O.C.) at the value of 490.1 mV/m. In the nearby cage (exposed), radiation reached the value of 27.46 V/m (27.460 mV/m, at 1882 MHz) (55 fold higher). Concluding, we could say that non-ionizing radiation emitted from devices of everyday use such as mobile phones, DECT phones, tablets, Wi-Fi routers etc, can by no means be considered as "innocent". Our current results, recent papers for the effects on Arabidopsis thaliana and Gossypium hirsutum (Stefi et al., 2016, 2017), numerous reports from epidemiological researches correlating exposure and clinical disorders such as sleep disorders on children that use mobile phone before sleep (Van den Bulck 2007), promotion of lymphomas and leukemias in adults and children (Hardell et al., 2014) are serious reasons for further consideration. Moreover, the effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on behavior (Divan et al., 2012), cardiovascular system (Celik and Hascalik 2004), reproduction and development (Margaritis et al., 2014), oxidative stress induction (Esmekaya et al., 2011; Manta et al., 2014), memory deficits (Fragopoulou et al., 2010, Ntzouni et al., 2011) and cancer provocation (Hardell and Carlberg 2009), strongly support the aspect that the problem is far more than serious and public anxiety seems justified. Taking in to account that: • The function of the C4 chloroplasts is uniquely associated with the function of stomata (Ghannoum, 2008). • Stomata of Z. mays are of the dumbbell - shape type. This type of stomata appears only in Graminae and is unique in structure and function. • The total yield in our experiments was almost similar for both control and exposed plants. • The photosynthetic pigment content, as measured with the UV/Vis Specol photometer, was more or less similar in both control and exposed plants. • Taking into consideration that maize plants are fully mature and pistillate female flowers appear after about two months while corns are harvested three months after sprouting, We may conclude that the differences between control and exposed plants are negligible in spite of the significant structural deformations of the agranal BSC chloroplasts. Moreover, stomatal function seems not to be affected and photosynthesis (even the C4) not to be disturbed by radiation, until this stage of the plant's life. Finally, we may point out that the deformations observed in the chloroplasts may affect the mature plant by suspending the great advantage of the C4 photosynthesis.

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 cultivated young maize plants (Zea mays L.)

Sample sizeNot supplied

ExposureRF · 1882 MHz · long-term; 24 h/day, 7 days/week; outcomes reported after two weeks

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

After two weeks of continuous DECT base-unit exposure (1882 MHz), exposed maize plants showed no apparent differences vs controls in sprouting potential, biomass production, leaf structure, photosynthetic pigment content/absorbance, or mesophyll chloroplast structure/arrangement. The bundle sheath cell chloroplasts showed structural changes described as slight thylakoid swelling, undulation of some thylakoid membranes, and scarce disruption of the chloroplast envelope.

Outcomes measured

Sprouting potential
Biomass production (above-ground and root)
Leaf structure
Photosynthetic pigment content and absorbance
Mesophyll chloroplast structure/arrangement
Bundle sheath cell chloroplast ultrastructure (thylakoids, membranes, envelope)

Limitations

Sample size not reported in provided text
Exposure quantified mainly as electric field intensity; SAR not reported
Outcomes reported primarily at an early time point (two weeks) with speculation about possible later effects

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "DECT cordless phone base unit",
    "frequency_mhz": 1882,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": "long-term; 24 h/day, 7 days/week; outcomes reported after two weeks"
  },
  "population": "Laboratory cultivated young maize plants (Zea mays L.)",
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "Sprouting potential",
    "Biomass production (above-ground and root)",
    "Leaf structure",
    "Photosynthetic pigment content and absorbance",
    "Mesophyll chloroplast structure/arrangement",
    "Bundle sheath cell chloroplast ultrastructure (thylakoids, membranes, envelope)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "After two weeks of continuous DECT base-unit exposure (1882 MHz), exposed maize plants showed no apparent differences vs controls in sprouting potential, biomass production, leaf structure, photosynthetic pigment content/absorbance, or mesophyll chloroplast structure/arrangement. The bundle sheath cell chloroplasts showed structural changes described as slight thylakoid swelling, undulation of some thylakoid membranes, and scarce disruption of the chloroplast envelope.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "Sample size not reported in provided text",
    "Exposure quantified mainly as electric field intensity; SAR not reported",
    "Outcomes reported primarily at an early time point (two weeks) with speculation about possible later effects"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "DECT",
    "cordless phone",
    "base unit",
    "1882 MHz",
    "RF-EMF",
    "maize",
    "Zea mays",
    "chloroplast",
    "bundle sheath cells",
    "thylakoids",
    "photosynthetic pigments",
    "biomass"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "school-wi-fi",
      "weight": 0.15,
      "reason": "Mentions Wi‑Fi routers among everyday RF sources in discussion, but study exposure is DECT."
    }
  ]
}

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.flora.2017.05.008
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library