↓ Skip to main content

Glial markers and emotional memory in rats following acute cerebral radiofrequency exposures

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Glial markers and emotional memory in rats following acute cerebral radiofrequency exposures
Published in
Environmental Science and Pollution Research, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11356-016-7758-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amélie Barthélémy, Amandine Mouchard, Marc Bouji, Kelly Blazy, Renaud Puigsegur, Anne-Sophie Villégier

Abstract

The widespread mobile phone use raises concerns on the possible cerebral effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF). Reactive astrogliosis was reported in neuroanatomical structures of adaptive behaviors after a single RF EMF exposure at high specific absorption rate (SAR, 6 W/kg). Here, we aimed to assess if neuronal injury and functional impairments were related to high SAR-induced astrogliosis. In addition, the level of beta amyloid 1-40 (Aβ 1-40) peptide was explored as a possible toxicity marker. Sprague Dawley male rats were exposed for 15 min at 0, 1.5, or 6 W/kg or for 45 min at 6 W/kg. Memory, emotionality, and locomotion were tested in the fear conditioning, the elevated plus maze, and the open field. Glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP, total and cytosolic fractions), myelin basic protein (MBP), and Aβ1-40 were quantified in six brain areas using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. According to our data, total GFAP was increased in the striatum (+114 %) at 1.5 W/kg. Long-term memory was reduced, and cytosolic GFAP was increased in the hippocampus (+119 %) and in the olfactory bulb (+46 %) at 6 W/kg (15 min). No MBP or Aβ1-40 expression modification was shown. Our data corroborates previous studies indicating RF EMF-induced astrogliosis. This study suggests that RF EMF-induced astrogliosis had functional consequences on memory but did not demonstrate that it was secondary to neuronal damage.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Student > Master 6 17%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Neuroscience 5 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Psychology 4 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Other 9 25%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2016.
All research outputs
#21,420,714
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#7,000
of 9,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,936
of 326,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Science and Pollution Research
#135
of 183 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,883 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 183 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.