| Literature DB >> 32802791 |
Haghani M1, Pouladvand V2, Mortazavi S M J3,4, Razavinasab M5, Bayat M6, Shabani M5,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prenatal adverse effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) exposure on nervous system are an issue of major concern.Entities:
Keywords: Cell Phone; Electrophysiological Properties; Prenatal Injuries; Purkinje Cells
Year: 2020 PMID: 32802791 PMCID: PMC7416100 DOI: 10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.560
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Biomed Phys Eng ISSN: 2251-7200
No significant differences were observed in dam’s body temperature, litter size, Length of pregnancy, pup’s body weight and mortality rate between control and Mobile phone exposure groups.
| Dam’s body temperature | Litter size | Length of Pregnancy (days) | Body weight (g) | Mortality rate | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | First exposure | Last exposure | PND 23 | |||
| Control | 37.5±0.3 | 37.6±0.4 | 10.9±1.2 | 21.2±0.1 | 29.8±1.3 | 0 |
| Mobile | 37.61±0.54 | 37.6±0.38 | 9.81±1.07 | 20.93±0.4 | 31.2±2.4 | 0 |
Postnatal Day
Figure 1Whole cell patch clamp recordings revealed that prenatal EMF exposure affected the firing frequency of the purkinje cells of the rats’ offspring slices.
Blue color traces: control; Red color traces: EMF
Figure 2Prenatal EMF exposure decreased the voltage onset of inward current in the male pups. *** (P < 0.01) represents significant differences between prenatal EMF exposure group vs. control group
Figure 3Peak amplitude of the current for the exposure pups showed a significant decrement response compared to the control group. * (P < 0.05)
Figure 4Effect of prenatal EMF exposure on voltage dependent currents. (A) the membrane current of the EMF group exhibited an upward and a rightward shift. (B) the reversal potential increased in the EMF group. * (P < 0.05), ** (P < 0.01) and *** (P < 0.001) represent significant differences between the prenatal EMF exposure group vs. the control group