Adam S. Dawe firstname.lastname@example.org
Continuous Wave and simulated GSM exposure at 1.8 W/kg and 1.8 GHz do not induce hsp16-1 heat-shock gene expression in Caenorhabditis elegans
Dawe, Adam S.; Nylund, Reeta; Leszczynski, Dariusz; Kuster, Niels; Reader, Tom; de Pomerai, David I.
Dariusz Leszczynski email@example.com
Niels Kuster firstname.lastname@example.org
Tom Reader email@example.com
David I. de Pomerai firstname.lastname@example.org
Recent data suggest that there might be a subtle thermal explanation for the apparent induction by radiofrequency (RF) radiation of transgene expression from a small-heat-shock-protein (hsp16-1) promoter in the nematode, Caenorhabditis elegans. The RF fields used in the C. elegans study were much weaker (SAR 5-40 mW kg-1) than those routinely tested in many other published studies (SAR ~2 W kg-1). To resolve this disparity, we have exposed the same transgenic hsp16-1::lacZ strain of C. elegans (PC72) to higher intensity RF fields (1.8 GHz; SAR ~1.8 W kg-1). For both continuous wave (CW) and Talk-pulsed RF exposures (2.5 h at 25C), there was no indication that RF exposure could induce reporter expression above sham control levels. Thus, at much higher induced RF field strength (close to the maximum permitted exposure from a mobile telephone handset), this particular nematode heat-shock gene is not up-regulated. However, under conditions where background reporter expression was moderately elevated in the sham controls (perhaps as a result of some unknown co-stressor), we found some evidence that reporter expression may be reduced by ~15% following exposure to either Talk-pulsed or CW RF fields.
|Journal Article Type||Article|
|Publication Date||Jan 1, 2008|
|Peer Reviewed||Peer Reviewed|
|APA6 Citation||Dawe, A. S., Nylund, R., Leszczynski, D., Kuster, N., Reader, T., & de Pomerai, D. I. (2008). Continuous Wave and simulated GSM exposure at 1.8 W/kg and 1.8 GHz do not induce hsp16-1 heat-shock gene expression in Caenorhabditis elegans. Bioelectromagnetics, 29(2), doi:10.1002/bem.20366|
|Copyright Statement||Copyright information regarding this work can be found at the following address: http://eprints.nottingh.../end_user_agreement.pdf|
|Additional Information||The definitive version is available at www3.interscience.wiley.com|
Copyright information regarding this work can be found at the following address: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/end_user_agreement.pdf
You might also like
Progress, challenges and opportunities for Red Listing
Which traits do observers use to distinguish Batesian mimics from their models?
Why many Batesian mimics are inaccurate: evidence from hoverfly colour patterns