1972 - persinger, persinger, ossenkopp & glavin - international journal of biometeorology -...

7/30/2019 1972 - Persinger, Persinger, Ossenkopp & Glavin - International Journal of Biometeorology - Behavioral Changes in

1/8

Int. J. Biometeor. 1972, vol. 16, number 2, pp. 155-162

Behavioral Changes in Adult Rats Exposed to ELFMagnetic Fieldsby

M i c ha e l A . Pe r s i n ge r * , M i l o A . Pe r s i n ge r ** , K . P. O s s e nko ppand G.B. Gla v in * * *

155

ELF (extrem ely low frequency) ele ctroma gnetic f ie lds and waves with intensit iessimilar to and slightly larger than those which occur in nature have been shownto be associa ted with changes in react ion time (Fr iedm an, Beek er and Bachman,1967; KSnig, 1962; Re it er , 1964), and ve rbal behav ior (KSnig, 1962; Ludwig andMecke , 1968) in human sub jec ts.

Hamsters exposed to naturally occurring atmospherics show decrements inambu lato ry activ ity (Ludwig and Mecke, 1968). Exposu re to artifi cial fields(1 v/m ) with ca rr ie r fre que nci es of 10-100 kHz and 20, 10 or 5 Hz impu lses isassociat ed with a s im ila r de cre ase in ambulation. Mice exposed to a t im e-v ary ingfiel d of 1.75 Hz, and 5 Hz (40 v) also show a de cr ea se in ambul ato ry a cti vit y(Altmann, 1969). Acco rdin g to Ludwig and Mecke (1968) the rem ov al of ei th er theE or H component of the applied field is followed by an incr ea se in activity thenext day.In a se ri es of unpublished exp erim ent s (Pe rsi nge r, 1967), rats that had been

expo sed during a 368 day pe rio d to an ELF (0.5 Hz), 3-30 gaus s ro tat ing m agne ticfield (RMF), showed a marke d, significant inc rea se in intrag roup ag gr ess iv ebehavior, after 140 days of exposu re. In two other sep arat e ex per ime nts , RMF -exposed adult rat s, when rem ove d fro m the field showed a significant inc re as e inopen field activity and er ro rs during Y-maz e acquisi t ion. Although prenatal ex-posure to ELF-RMFs have shown to be associated with a variety of consequentbehavioral changes (Persin ger, 1969, 1971; Per sin ge r and Fost er , 1970; Pe r-singe r and Pea r, 1971), it was decided to furt her explo re the poss ible beha vio ralmodificat ions in connection with adult "chro nic " exposure to these fields . Sincein the initial studies, changes in open field behavi or were o bser ved, it was de-cided to rep lica te this study using controls that would min imi ze poss ible ex-pe r imente r b ias .

ME THOD

SUBJECTS . In thre e ex pe ri me nt s (Exp eri me nts I, II and III), 16, 15, and 12mal e naive rats, 30, 160, and 100 days of age, re sp ec ti ve ly , at the beginn ing ofthe experim ents were used as subjects . The subjects were selecte d from Sprag ue-Dawley, Holtzman and Wistar s trains in Exper iment s I-III resp ecti vely .APPARATUS. Two rotating magnetic field (RMF) apparatus w ere used. Es se n-tially, the RMFs were created by two horseshoe magnets rotating in opposite di-rec tio ns about their m ajo r axes at 30 ro t/ mi n (0.5 Hz). The magne ts in appara tusA, a dia gra m of which has been published ear li er (Pe rsi ng er and Pe ar , 1971)were rotated by an electr ic motor that drove a pulley-shaft system to which themagne ts were attac hed. In apparatus B, shown in Fig. 1, each magnet was turnedby a separate variable speed trans missi on. In Expe rime nts I-III , the majo r axes*) Dept of Psychology , Laurentian Un iver sity, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada.**) R. C. Br ow n Co. Dallas, Texas, USA.***) Dept Ps yc h. , Uni ve rsi ty of Manitoba, Winnipeg Manitoba, Canada.Received 22 June 1971


2/8

156

TOP VIEW

I" 3 0 c m "1 z--MICROMETER~ NTROL

-

SIDE VIEW Z/VARIABLE SPEED TRANMISSIONDRIVEN BY I/4 HP I-PHASE-60-115 VOLT MOTORIf ~-ALUMINUMCHANNEL

VIEW 'A -A '

Fi g . 1. RM F-ap p a ra t u s B . E x p o s u re a r ea w as b e t w een t h e t wo mag n e t s .o f the magnet s we re a l l igned in a NW-SE d i r ec t io n in Menom onee Fa l l s , Wis -cons in ; Madison , Wiscons i n , and Knoxvi l l e , Tenn ess ee , USA, res pec t iv e ly , andro t a t ed i n e i t h e r a co u n t e r - c l o ck w i s e { E x p e r i men t s I- II ) o r c l o ck w i s e (E x p e r i men tI II ) d i rec t ion with respe c t to the NW di rec t ion . The in tens i ty o f the RMF s (asmeas u red b y a Raw s o n -L u s h G au s s m e t e r ) i n t he ex p o s u re cag es i n w h ich t he r a t swer e housed , var i ed f rom 3-30 gauss (average abou t 10 gauss ) wi th RMF -ap -par a tus A to 3-50 gauss (aver age abou t 20 gauss ) wi th appar a tus B. More d e ta i l sc o n c e r n i n g t he c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e s e f i e l d s a r e r e p o r t e d e l s e w h e r e ( P e r s i n g e r ,1969; Ossenk opp, Kol t ek and Pe rs ing er , 1971).

OPEN FIELD APPARATUS. For Experiments I and II , a 40 cm x 40 cm brownwooden plank divided in to 16 squa re s w as used as the open f ield . A 60 cm ma son i tewal l p re ven ted the ra t s f rom esca p ing f ro m the open f i e ld . I l lumina t ion o f thef i e ld was fu rn i she d by a 75-w inca ndes cen t l igh t 100 cm above the f i e ld ' s su r fac e .Since the open f i e ld was in the sa me roo m as the home cage , the backgroundsound p re ssu re l eve l avera ged 72 db .

Fo r Ex pe ri me nt III, the wooden f loor of a 120 em x 120 ~m open f ield co ve re dwith whi te o il c lo th was divided in to 16 squ ar es . The 50 cm high wal ls we re alsocov ere d wi th whi te oi l c lo th . I l lumina t ion was fu rn i she d by a 20-w f lu ore sce n tlamp 150 cm above the sur fa ce of the open f ield . Since the open f ield , in th is ex-per ime nt , was not in the sam e roo m as the RMF, the backgrou nd sound p re ssu releve l , supp l i ed by a whi te no i se gener a to r , aver aged 72 db.

PROC EDURE . Anim als of a g iven condi t ion we re house d in grou ps in one of twoplas t i c cag es (27 x 50 x 30 cm) . The cages wer e co ver ed wi th wi re mes h tops andwi th car dbo ard on a l l four s ides , so tha t l igh t f ro m each cage ' s l amp en te red on lyth rough the top. One cage in each ex per ime nt was p laced be tween the magne t s o fe i th er RMF appara tus A (Expe r im ent III) o r appara tus B (Ex per ime nts I and I I) .S ince the motor in appar a tus A was sec ure d to a p lywood bas e and p roduc ed s omevibra t ion , the cage was p laced on a p la t fo r m 1 .3 cm above and independen t o f thebase . The o ther cage was p laced in the con t r o l a re a 2 m f ro m the nea res t magnet .Al though a Raw son -Lu sh Gaus sme ter showed no dev ia t ion a t th i s d i s t ance , a


3/8

1 5 7c o m p a s s (3 c m n e e d l e ) r e g i s t e r e d a 1 - 3 c h a n g e i n d e c l i n a t i o n . T h e r a t s w e r ee x p o s e d to t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l ( R M F a n d c o n t r o l ) c o n d i t i o n s in E x p e r i m e n t s I - II , o n2 J u n e 1 9 6 6 , 2 J a n u a r y 1 9 6 7 a n d 1 3 J u n e 1 9 6 9 .

S a n i c el w a s u s e d a s a b s o r b e n t m a t e r i a l i n t h e c a g e s a n d w a s r e m o v e d o n c e e v e r yf i v e d a y s in o r d e r t o m i n i m i z e h a n d l i n g o f s u b j e c t s . D u r i n g c l e a n i n g , t h e R M F -e x p o s e d r a t s w e r e o u t o f t h e f i e ld f o r 3 - 4 m i n . I l l u m i n a t i o n t h r o u g h o u t t h e e x -p e r i m e n t s w a s c o n s t a n t a n d w a s f u r n i s h e d b y a 2 0 - w f l u o r e s c e n t l a m p 4 5 c ma b o v e e a c h c ag e . T e m p e r a t u r e a v e r a g e d 2 5 + 2 C , b u t d i d n o t v a r y b y m o r et h a n 0 .5 C b e t w e e n t h e R M F a n d c o n t r o l c ag e'~ B a c k g r o u n d s o u n d p r e s s u r e l e v e l( a s m e a s u r e d b y a B a n d K p r e c i s i o n s o u n d l e v e l m e t e r ) a v e r a g e 6 7 + 3 d b i n t h ee x p o s u r e a r e a o f R M F - a p p a r a t u s A ( f r o m t h e m o t o r ) a n d 6 5 + 4 d b i n t h e c o n t r o la r e a . A s a c o m p a r i s o n , t h e b a c k g r o u n d s o u n d p r e s s u r e l e v e l - in t h e d e p a r t m e n t ' sm a i n c o l o n y r o o m w a s 6 2 + 2 d b . O t h e r p h y s i c a l v a r i a b l e s w e r e n o t r e c o r d e d .R a t s r e c e i v e d P u r i n a f o od a nd w a t e r a d ] i b i tu m .

W h e n t h e s u b j e c t s h a d b e e n e x p o s e d to t he R M F a n d c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n s f o r 2 1d a y s ( E x p e r i m e n t s I a n d II) o r 3 0 d a y s ( E x p e r i m e n t I II ), e a c h r a t w a s p l a c e d i n ac a r r y i n g c a g e a n d t a k e n t o t h e o p e n f i e l d a t t h e o t h e r s i d e o f t h e r o o m ( E x p e r i -m e n t s I a n d II) o r in a n o t h e r r o o m . T h e l a t t e r p r o c e d u r e t o o k 3 0 s e c . T h e r a tw a s i m m e d i a t e l y p l a c e d u p o n o n e o f t h e c o r n e r s q u a r e s o f t h e o p e n f i e l d . T h en u m b e r o f s q u a r e s t r a v e r s e d i n 3 0 s e c ( E x p e r i m e n t I a n d II) o r 1 2 0 s e c ( E x p e r i -m e n t III ) w a s r e c o r d e d . A t t h e en d o f t h e t e s t , t h e r a t w a s t a i l m a r k e d { E x p e r i -m e n t s I a n d II) o r e a r - p u n c h e d ( E x p e r i m e n t I II ), a n d r e t u r n e d t o t h e c a r r y i n gc a g e . A f t e r t h e f i e l d h a d b e e n s p o n g e d w i t h 0 . 4 % a c e t i c a c i d ( v i n e g a r ) t h e r a t w a st a k e n to a t e m p o r a r y g r o u p h o u s i n g f o r a g i v e n c o n d i t i o n u n t il th e c o m p l e t i o n o ft h e e x p e r i m e n t . A t t h a t t i m e a l l r a t s w e r e r e t u r n e d t o t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c a g e s .

A n i m a l s w e r e a g a i n t e s t e d i n t h e o p e n f i e ld a f t e r 2 5 d a y s o f e x p o s u r e ( E x p e r i -m e n t s I a n d I I, a n d 30 d a y s o f e x p o s u r e ( E x p e r i m e n t I , I I a n d II I) . I n E x p e r i m e n tII I, t h e a n i m a l s w e r e a g a i n t e s t e d a f t e r 3 5 , 4 0 , 4 5 , a n d 5 0 d a y s o f e x p o s u r e . A l lr a t s i n E x p e r i m e n t I II w e r e t e s t e d b y a t e c h n i c i a n w h o d id n o t k n o w w h e t h e r a r a th a d b e e n e x p o s e d t o t h e R M F o r c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n s . S u b j e c t s w e r e t e s t e d b e t w e e n2 1 : 0 0 a n d 2 4 : 0 0 h r .

R E S U L T ST h e a v e r a g e n u m b e r o f s q u a r e s t r a v e r s e d i n 3 0 s e c ( E x p e r i m e n t I a n d II) o r1 2 0 s e c ( E x p e r i m e n t I II ) f o r R M F - e x p o s e d a n d c o n t r o l r a t s i n t h e t h r e e e x p e r i -m e n t s i s p r e s e n t e d i n F i g . 2 . In E x p e r i m e n t I , t h e R M F - e x p o s e d r a t s , a f t e r 2 1 ,

2 5 a n d 3 0 d a y s o f R M F e x p o s u r e , a v e r a g e d 1 0 . 3 + 2 . 4 (S D), 1 1 . 1 + 3 . 8 a n d1 2 . 3 + 3 . 5 s q u a r e s i n 3 0 s e c , w h i l e t h e c o n t r o l s a v e r a g e d 1 1 . 5 + ~ . 4 , 7 . 9 +_ 3 . 2 ,a n d 6 . 8 + 9 . 1 s q u a r e s . T h i s d i f f e r e n c e w a s f o u nd b y a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e t o b es i g n i f i c a n t (p < 0 . 0 5 ; F = 5 . 6 8 ) . A s u m m a r y o f t h e a n a l y s i s i s r e p o r t e d i n T a b l e 1.I n E x p e r i m e n t I I, t h e R M F - e x p o s e d a v e r a g e d 1 1 . 0 + 3 . 6 , 1 5 . 2 + 4 . 9 , a n d 1 4. 9 +3 . 3 s q u a r e s i n 3 0 s e c , a f t e r 2 1 , 2 5 a n d 3 0 d a y s o f e x p o s u r e , w h i l e t h e c o n t r o lr a t s a v e r a g e d 1 1 . 8 + 5 . 3 , 6 . 1 + 3 . 9 , a n d 5 . 0 + 4 . 7 s q u a r e s d u r i n g t h i s t i m e .T h i s d i f f e r e n c e w a s s i g n i f i c a n t (p < 0 . 0 1 ; F = 8 . 8 7 , T a b l e 1 ) . I n E x p e r i m e n t I II ,w h e r e t h e r a t s w e r e r u n f o r 1 20 s e e in t h e o p e n f i e ld p e r s e s s i o n , t h e R M F - e x -p o s e d r a t s a f t e r 3 0 , 3 5, 4 0 , 4 5 a n d 5 0 d a y s o f e x p o s u r e t r a v e r s e d 3 6 . 0 + 8 . 9 ,3 2 . 5 + 1 3 . 4 , 2 4 . 7 + 1 3 . 3 , 1 9 . 2 + 1 2 . 0 a nd 1 3 . 4 + 8 . 6 s q u a r e s w h i le t he c o n t r o l sa v e r a g e d 2 9 . 1 + 1 3 .8 , 2 5 . 1 + 1 5 . 0 , 1 1 . 6 + 1 0 . 2 , 4 . 4 _ + 6 . 3 , a n d 4 . 0 + 5 . 4 s q u a r e so n t h e s e d a y s . -T h i s d i f f e r e n c e w a s f o u n d b y a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e t o b e s i g n i f i c a n to n l y b e y o n d t h e 0 . 1 0 l e v e l ( F = 4 . 2 7) . ( In t h e a n a l y s i s o f t h e d a t a f r o m E x p e r i -m e n t I II , t h e s q u a r e s t r a v e r s e d b y e a c h g r o u p i n e a c h o f t h e 2 m i n i n t h e o p e nf i e l d w e r e d i f f e r e n t i a t e d , s o t h a t a 2 ( t r e a t m e n t s ) x 2 ( m i n ) x 5 ( d ay s ) d e s i g n w a su s e d . )


4/8

1 5 8

o 15w

n~w

rYoo I0w13C0or)w 5(.9


5/8

T A B L E 1. A n a l y s i s o f v a r i a n c e f o r t he m e a n n u m b e r o f s q u a r e s t r a v e r s e d b yR M F - e x p o s e d a nd c o n t r o l r a t s (dr = d e g r e e s - o f - f r e e d o m )

159

S o u r c e M S [ d f [ F

T r e a t m e n t ( T )E r r o r ( a )D a y s ( D )T x DE r r o r ( b )

T r e a t m e n t ( T )E r r o r ( a )D a y s ( D )D x TE r r o r ( b )

T r e a t m e n t ( T )E r r o r ( a )D a y s ( D )D x TM i n u t e s ( M )M x TM x DM x T x DE r r o r ( b )

E x p e r i m e n t I7 4 . 91 3 . 21 0 . 14 7 . 21 2 . 8

114

22

28

5.67**

0.793.69

E x p e r i m e n t I I4 0 . 74 6 . 1

4 . 01 3 3 . 8

8 . 4E x p e r i m e n t I I I

113

22

26

8 . 8 7 * * *

0 . 6 01 5 . 9

7 3 0 . 21 7 1 . 26 9 3 . 3

3 4 . 94 1 0 . 7

1 4 . 52 2 . 75 6 . 22 2 . 9

110

441144

91

4 . 2 7 *

3 0 . 2 9 * * *1 . 5 3

1 7 . 9 40 . 6 30 . 9 92 . 4 6

*) p < 0 .1 0 .* * ) p < 0 . 0 5 .***) p < 0 .01 .

DISC USSION

T h e r e s u l t s o f t he t hr e e e x p e r i m e n t s h a v e d e m o n s t r a t e d t ha t th e r e m o v a l o fm a l e r a t s w h i c h h a v e b e e n e x p o s e d to a n E L F - r o t a t i n g m a g n e t i c f i e l d ( R M F ) f o r2 1 - 50 d ay s i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n a m b u l a t o r y b e h a v i o r . T h er e l i a b i l i t y o f t h i s e f f e c t i s s u g g e s t e d s i n c e a s i m i l a r i n c r e a s e d a c t i v i t y in t h eR M F - e x p o s e d g r o u p , r e l a t i v e t o t he c o n t r o l g r o u p , w a s a l s o o b s e r v e d i n a d i f -f e r e n t t e s t i n g a p p a r a t u s b y a n o t h e r e x p e r i m e n t e r w h o d id n o t k n ow w h e t h e r a r a tw a s f r o m t h e R M F o r c o nt r o l c o n di t i o n. T h e g r e a t e r r e l a t i v e d e c r e a s e i n a c t i v i ty


6/8

160of the control grou ps in the thre e e xpe rime nts , following the fi rst day of testing,also implies the consistency of the effect.

The results are compatable with previously reported experiments using differentappa ratu s, int ens iti es and wave for m. A~tmann (1969) and Ludwig and Mecke(1968) found that ELF fields were associated with a decrease in activity. Removalof the applied fields might, the ref ore , be expecte d to produce a "com pen sat ory "in cr ea se ("reboun d") in acti vity . Ludwig and Mecke (1968) do indic ate that re -moval of the ELF field used in their study was followed by an inc rea se in activity,although it occurred on the following day.

Such an inc reas e of ambulatory activity following remov al fro m the EL F-R MFcould account for the inc rea sed e rr or s (Pe rsi nge r, 1967) displayed by the RMF-exposed animals during Y-maz e acquisi t ion, as noted ear l ie r . "Scampe ring" orincreased ambulator behavior as the animal approached the maze arms might in-ter fere with alley discrimina tion. Per sin ger (1967) indeed repor ted that theRMF-exposed rats left the start box and ran down the alley "faster" than the con-trol an imals. This behavior could be int erp ret ed as being asso ciat ed with theRM F-e xpo sed rats' relatively "less" habituation to testing situations. Thus,while the control rats were displaying less activity in the ope n field and few ererr ors in the maz e over test days, the RMF -e xpo sed rats contin ued to exhibitbe ha vi or s ass oci ate d with initial ex po su re s to the test situation. In this context,it could be argue d that the RMF was interfering with the phys ico- chem ical pro-cesses associated with what has been termed "memory" . Possible physiologicalcorrelates of RMF- expo sure have been noted in another pape r (Persinger, Glavinand Osse nkop p, 1972).Despit e the cons iste ncy of the ope n field results, consi derab le within gro up

variability was obs erv ed since such tests are influenced by a multitude of unco n-trolled envir onmen tal variables. It is strongly suggest ed by the expe rime nter sthat further re sea rc h con cer ne d with the effects of ELF mag net ic fields (as wellas other environme ntal variables), upon behavior incorporate the use of moreprecise operant techniques. Thes e techniques utilize the basic rein forc emen tschedules (Ferster and Skinner, 1957) that control behavior. Oper ant techniquesafford greater stimulus control, and mini mize participation of the expe rime nterand expe rime nter error (Sidman, 1960). In addition, operant proc edur es havebee n sh own to differentiate the behavi oral effects of prenatal ex pos ure to ELF -magne tic fields (Persing er and Foster, 1970; Pers inge r and Pear, 1971), whic hwe re not sho wn in other testing situations.

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T SThis rese arch was comp lete d at the University of Wiscons in, Madi son, and the

University of Tenn esse e, Knoxville. The authors thank Prof esso rs Robe rt E.Bowm an, University of Wiscon sin, and Erne st Furchtgott, University of Ten-nessee, for sponsor ing the research . Than ks also to Prof. D. W. Dunlop, DrGerry Harding, Raul DeLuna, Everett Magagnos , William S. Foster IV, Mac A.Thom pson , Violet Knight Persinger , Viola H. Glavin, and Kary n Y. Fowl er fortheir technical assistance.


7/8

161REFERENCES

ALTM ANN, G. (1969) : Die physiologische Wirk ung elektrischer Felder aufOrganism en. Arch. Meteor. Geoph. Bioklim. B,17 : 269-29 0.

FERSTER, C.B. and SKINNER, B.F. (1957): Schedules of Reinforce ment.Appleton-Century-Crofts, N.Y.

F R I E D M A N , H . , B E C K E R , R . O . and BACH MAN, C.H. (1967): Effect of mag-netic fields on reaction time perf orma nce. Natur e~.Lond.), 213: 949-956.

KONI G, H.L. (1962) : Uber den Einfluss bes onde rs niederfrequen ter elek-trischer Vorg tnge in der Atmo spht re auf die Umwe lt.Z. angew. Bader-u. Klimahei]k., 9:481-501 .

LUDW IG, W. and MECK E, R. (1968): Wirk ung kiinstlicher Atm osph eri cs aufStinger. Arch. Mete or. Geoph . Bioklim. B, 16 :251-261.

OSSENKOPP , K.P., KOLTEK, T. and PERSINGE R, M.A. (1972): Prenatal ex-posu re to an ELF- low intensity rotating magn eticfield and inc reas es in thyroid and testicle weigh t inrats. Devel op. Psycho biol. (in press).

PERS INGE R, M.A. (1971) : Prenatal expos ure to an ELF Rotating Magn etic field,ambu lato ry behavior and lunar distance at birth: ACorrelation. Psychol. Rep., 28 : 435-438.

PERSINGE R, M.A., GLAVIN, G.B. and OSSENKOPP , K.P. (1972): Physiologi-cal cha nge s in adult rats exp ose d to an EL F rotatingmag net ic field. Int. J. Bio me teo r., 16 : 163-17 2.

PERS INGE R, M.A. and PEAR , J.J. (1972): Prenatal expo sure to an ELF-rotating magne tic field and subsequent increase inconditioned suppression. Develop. Ps ychobiol.,

PERS INGE R, M.A. and FOST ER, IV, W.S . (1970): ELF rotating magne tic fields:prenatal expos ure and adult behavior. Arch. Mete or.Geoph. Bioklim. B, 18 : 363-369.PERSINGER, M.A. (1969) :Open-field behavior in rat s exposed pre nata lly to alow intensity - low freque ncy, rotat ing magn eticfield. Develop. Ps ych obi ol., 2 : 168-171.PERSINGER, M.A. (1967) : The effect s of puls atin g mag neti c fie lds upon thebehavior and gross physiological changes of the albinorat . Unpublished Undergrad. Thesis . Universi ty ofWisconsin, Madison, Wis c., USA. Copyright Dec.1967, Reg. -/-/ A976151.REITER , R. (1964) : Atmosp heri c Ele ct ric ity and Natural Radioa ctive .In: Medical Climatology. S.N. Licht (ed.), WaverleyPress , N.Y.SIDMAN, M. (1960) :Ta ct ic s of Scient ific Re se ar ch . Basi c Books, N.Y.

ABS TRAC T.- In two exp eri ment s, male ra ts that had been exposed to an ELF(0.5 Hz), 3-50 gauss ro tating magneti c field (RMF) for 21-30 days, displayedsignificant ly (p < 0.05) g re at er ambula tory beha vior (activity) than the controlgroup in an open field test, when remo ved from the RMF. In a third e xpe rim entrat s w ere exposed to a differe nt RMF apparatus (3-30 gauss), and tested in adifferent open field for longer duration. Again the RMF -ex pos ed group displayedgr ea te r activi ty (p < 0.10) than the control group.


8/8

162ZUSAMMENFASSUNG. - In zwei Untersuchungen zeigten m~nnliche Ratten,dieeinem ELF (0, 5 Hz) 3-50 Gauss rotie rende n magne tisch en Feld (RMF) filr 21-30Tage ausge setzt wurde n, in einem Open- Field Test signifikant (p < 0, 05) mehrBewegungsaktivit~t als die Kontrollgruppe,nachdem sie yon dem RMF entferntwurden. In einer dritten Untersuchung wurden Ratten in einem anderen RMF Ge-r~t gehalte n und in einem ander en Open- Field fiir lfingere Zeit getestet. Wiede rzeigte die Grupp e, die dem RMF ausge setzt war, me hr Bewegungsaktiv it~it(p < 0, i0)al s die Kontr ollgr uppe.

RES UME .- Lors de deux ess a i s , on a p lac6 des ra t s m ale s dans un champ magn6-t iqae tourna nt (CMT) de 3 h 50 gau ss et des t r~s b as se fr~ que nce (FTB) (0, 5 Hz).Apr~s 21 h 30 jours de ce t ra i t em ent , on l es a rem is dans des cond i t ions nor ma-les . Leur act iv i t6 (m arch e) 6tai t p lus 61ev6e que cel l e d 'un group e de contr61e etce la de faon s ign i f i ca t ive (p < 0 , 05). Dans un t ro i s i~ me e ssa i , d ' a u t r es ra t s fu -re nt p lac6 s dans un autre app are i l (3 h 30 gauss) et exa min 6s e nsui te dans unaut re c ham p ouver t sur une plus longue p6r iode . Le group e t rai t~ a d~ploy6 dansce ca s 6gal eme nt une plus gr ande act iv i t6 qu 'un groupe de contr ble (p < 0 , 10) .

1972 - persinger, persinger, ossenkopp & glavin - international journal of biometeorology -...

Documents