Cell phone-generated radio frequency electromagnetic field effects on the locomotor behaviors of the fishes Poecilia reticulata and Danio rerio.

International journal of radiation biology · 2015 · Mixed · Low evidence

← Research stream

MixedLow evidencePaper 4771

Temperature elevation from the cellular phone was reported as not relevant, and the authors attributed observed changes to RF EMF exposure. Fish locomotion was random under normal conditions and with an off-signaled phone, but significant changes in locomotio…

Study snapshot

PublicationInternational journal of radiation biology · 2015

Study typeanimal

Reported directionMixed

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

PURPOSE: The locomotor behavior of small fish was characterized under a cell phone-generated radio frequency electromagnetic field (RF EMF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The trajectory of movement of 10 pairs of guppy (Poecilia reticulate) and 15 pairs of Zebrafish (Danio rerio) in a fish tank was recorded and tracked under the presence of a cell phone-generated RF EMF. The measures were based on spatial and temporal distributions. A time-series trajectory was utilized to emphasize the dynamic nature of locomotor behavior. Fish movement was recorded in real-time. Their spatial, velocity, turning angle and sinuosity distribution were analyzed in terms of F(v,x), P[n(x,t)], P(v), F (θ) and F(s), respectively. In addition, potential temperature elevation caused by a cellular phone was also examined. RESULTS: We demonstrated that a cellular phone-induced temperature elevation was not relevant, and that our measurements reflected RF EMF-induced effects on the locomotor behavior of Poecilia reticulata and Danio rerio. Fish locomotion was observed under normal conditions, in the visual presence of a cell phone, after feeding, and under starvation. Fish locomotor behavior was random both in normal conditions and in the presence of an off-signaled cell phone. However, there were significant changes in the locomotion of the fish after feeding under the RF EMF. CONCLUSIONS: The locomotion of the fed fish was affected in terms of changes in population and velocity distributions under the presence of the RF EMF emitted by the cell phone. There was, however, no significant difference in angular distribution.

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

PopulationFish (Poecilia reticulata guppy; Danio rerio zebrafish)

Sample size50

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 74% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Outcomes measured

Locomotor behavior (movement trajectory)
Spatial distribution
Velocity distribution
Turning angle (angular distribution)
Sinuosity distribution
Temperature elevation (potential heating)

Limitations

RF exposure characteristics (e.g., frequency, SAR) not reported in abstract
Small sample size and limited species; generalizability unclear
Behavioral effects depended on feeding condition (context-specific findings)

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "animal",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "mobile phone",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": "Fish (Poecilia reticulata guppy; Danio rerio zebrafish)",
  "sample_size": 50,
  "outcomes": [
    "Locomotor behavior (movement trajectory)",
    "Spatial distribution",
    "Velocity distribution",
    "Turning angle (angular distribution)",
    "Sinuosity distribution",
    "Temperature elevation (potential heating)"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Temperature elevation from the cellular phone was reported as not relevant, and the authors attributed observed changes to RF EMF exposure. Fish locomotion was random under normal conditions and with an off-signaled phone, but significant changes in locomotion after feeding were observed under RF EMF exposure; angular distribution showed no significant difference.",
  "effect_direction": "mixed",
  "limitations": [
    "RF exposure characteristics (e.g., frequency, SAR) not reported in abstract",
    "Small sample size and limited species; generalizability unclear",
    "Behavioral effects depended on feeding condition (context-specific findings)"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.74,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "radiofrequency electromagnetic field",
    "RF EMF",
    "cell phone",
    "mobile phone",
    "fish",
    "Poecilia reticulata",
    "Danio rerio",
    "zebrafish",
    "guppy",
    "locomotor behavior",
    "trajectory tracking",
    "velocity distribution",
    "feeding"
  ],
  "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: 10.3109/09553002.2015.1062575
PubMed: 26073525

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library