Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Survival Assessment of Mouse Preimplantation Embryos After Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation

Authors
1 Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran; Department of Biology and Anatomical Sciences, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
2 Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran
Abstract
Background: Using cellular phone has rapidly increased all over the world. Also, the concern on the possible health hazards of electromagnetic fields (EMF) induced from cell phones to reproduction has been growing in many countries. The aim of this study was to assess the consequences and effects of exposure to the cell phone radiation on the quality and survival rates of preimplantation embryos in mice. Methods: A total of 40 mice (20 females and 20 males), 6 weeks old and sexually mature BALB/c, were used for control and experimental groups. The ovary burses were removed and the zygotes were dissected in the morning after mating. Next, 2-cell embryos were divided into two groups of control (n=150) and experimental (n=150). EMF (900-1800 MHz) was used for four days in experimental group for 30 min/day in culture at 37°C in a CO2 incubator. The quality of embryos was recorded daily and the fluorescent staining was used for identification of viable blastocysts. All data were compared by Student’s t-test and Mann-Whitney test (p<0.05). Results: The rate of embryo survival to the blastocysts stage was similar in both groups. However, the percentage of dead embryos at the 2-cell stage was significantly higher in EMF-exposed group compared with controls (p=0.03). Also, the loss of cell viability significantly increased in experimental blastocysts (p=0.002). Conclusion: The normal embryonic development up to the blastocyst stage indicates that EMF-exposure commonly did not have adverse effect on embryo development in mice. But, it caused loss of blastocysts cell viability.
Keywords

  1. Panagopoulos DJ, Karabarbounis A, Margaritis LH. Effect of GSM 900-MHz Mobile phone radiation on the reproductive capacity of Drosophila melanogaster. Electromagn Biol Med. 2004;23(1):29-43.
  2. Lee KS, Choi JS, Hong SY, Son TH, Yu K. Mobile phone electromagnetic radiation activates MAPK signaling and regulates viability in Drosophila. Bioelectromagnetics. 2008;29(5):371-9.
  3. Panagopoulos DJ, Chavdoula ED, Karabarbounis A, Margaritis LH. Comparison of bioactivity between GSM 900 MHz and DCS 1800 MHz mobile telephony radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2007;26(1):33-44.
  4. Challis LJ. Mechanisms for interaction between RF fields and biological tissue. Bioelectromagnetics. 2005;Suppl 7:S98-S106.
  5. Hyland GJ. Physics and biology of mobile telephony. Lancet. 2000;356(9244):1833-6.
  6. Zareen N, Khan MY, Minhas LA. Dose related shifts in the developmental progress of chick embryos exposed to mobile phone induced electromagnetic fields. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2009;21(1):130-4.
  7. Panagopoulos DJ, Margaritis LH. The effect of exposure duration on the biological activity of mobile telephony radiation. Mutat Res. 2010;699(1-2):17-22.
  8. Pilger A, Ivancsits S, Diem E, Steffens M, Kolb HA, Rüdiger HW. No effects of intermittent 50 Hz EMF on cytoplasmic free calcium and on the mitochondrial membrane potential in human diploid fibroblasts. Radiat Environ Biophys. 2004;43(3):203-7.
  9. Falzone N, Huyser C, Franken DR, Leszczynski D. Mobile phone radiation does not induce pro-apoptosis effects in human spermatozoa. Radiat Res. 2010;174(2):169-76.
  10. Beraldi R, Sciamanna I, Mangiacasale R, Lorenzini R, Spadafora C. Mouse early embryos obtained by natural breeding or in vitro fertilization display a differential sensitivity to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields. Mutat Res. 2003;538(1-2):163-70.
  11. Wdowiak A, Wdowiak L, Wiktor H. Evaluation of the effect of using mobile phones on male fertility. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2007;14(1):169-72.
  12. El-Sayed A, Badr HS, Yahia R, Salem SM, Kandil AM. Effects of thirty minute mobile phone irradiation on morphological and physiological parameters and gene expression in pregnant rats and their fetuses. Afr J Biotechnol. 2011;10(84):19670-80.
  13. D'Silva, MH, Swer RT, Anbalagan J, Bhargavan R. Effect of ultrahigh frequency radiation emitted from 2G cell phone on developing lens of chick embryo: a histological study. Advances in Anatomy. 2014;2014:1-9.
  14. Halvaei I, Khalili MA, Soleimani M, Razi MH. Evaluating the Role of First Polar Body Morphology on Rates of Fertilization and Embryo Development in ICSI Cycles. Int J Fertil Steril. 2011;5(2):110-5.
  15. Farin PW, Crosier AE, Farin CE. Influence of in vitro systems on embryo survival and fetal development in cattle. Theriogenology. 2001;55(1):151-70.
  16. Luo Q, Yang J, Zeng QL, Zhu XM, Qian YL, Huang HF. 50-Hertz electromagnetic fields induce gammaH2AX foci formation in mouse preimplantation embryos in vitro. Biol Reprod. 2006;75(5):673-80.
  17. Elledge SJ. Cell cycle checkpoints: preventing an identity crisis. Science. 1996;274(5293):1664-72.
  18. Murray A. Cell cycle checkpoints. Curr Opin Cell Biol. 1994;6(6):872-6.
  19. Wells PG, Bhuller Y, Chen CS, Jeng W, Kasapinovic S, Kennedy JC, et al. Molecular and biochemical mechanisms in teratogenesis involving reactive oxygen species. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 2005;207(2 Suppl):354-66.
  20. Hardy K. Cell death in the mammalian blastocyst. Mol Hum Reprod. 1997;3(10):919-25.
  21. Friedman J, Kraus S, Hauptman Y, Schiff Y, Seger R. Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies. Biochem J. 2007;405(3):559-68.
  22. Henshaw DL, Reiter RJ. Do magnetic fields cause increased risk of childhood leukemia via melatonin disruption? Bioelectromagnetics. 2005;Suppl 7:S86-97.
  23. Panagopoulos DJ, Chavdoula ED, Nezis IP, Margaritis LH. Cell death induced by GSM 900-MHz and DCS 1800-MHz mobile telephony radiation. Mutat Res. 2007;626(1-2):69-78.
  24. Pasternak CA. Membrane transport and disease. Mol Cell Biochem. 1989;91(1-2):3-11.
  25. Weisbrot D, Lin H, Ye L, Blank M, Goodman R. Effects of mobile phone radiation on reproduction and development in Drosophila melanogaster. J Cell Biochem. 2003;89(1):48-55.
  26. de Pomerai D, Daniells C, David H, Allan J, Duce I, Mutwakil M, et al. Non-thermal heat-shock response to microwaves. Nature. 2000;405(6785):417-8.
  27. Kwee S, Raskmark P. Changes in cell proliferation due to environmental non-ionizing radiation: 2. Microwave radiation. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg. 1998;44(2):251-5.
  28. Kwee S, Raskmark P, Velizarov S. Changes in cellular proteins due to environmental non-ionizing radiation. I. Heat-shock proteins. Electromagn Biol Med. 2001;20(2):141-52.
  29. Shallom JM, Di Carlo AL, Ko D, Penafiel LM, Nakai A, Litovitz TA. Microwave exposure induces Hsp70 and confers protection against hypoxia in chick embryos. J Cell Biochem. 2002;86(3):490-6.
  30. Mezhevikina LM, Khramov RN, Lepikhov KA. [The simulation of the cooperative effect of development in a culture of early mouse embryos after irradiation with electromagnetic waves in the millimeter range]. Ontogenez. 2000;31(1):27-31. Russian.
  31. Grigor'ev IuG. [Biological effects of mobile phone electromagnetic field on chick embryo (risk assessment using the mortality rate)]. Radiats Biol Radioecol. 2003;43(5):541-3. Russian.
  32. Poole C. Invited commentary: evolution of epidemiologic evidence on magnetic fields and childhood cancers. Am J Epidemiol. 1996;143(2):129-32.
  33. Boerjan ML, den Daas JH, Dieleman SJ. Embryonic origins of health: long-term effects of IVF in human and livestock. Theriogenology. 2000;53(2):537-47.