↓ Skip to main content

18 GHz electromagnetic field induces permeability of Gram-positive cocci

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
10 Mendeley
Title
18 GHz electromagnetic field induces permeability of Gram-positive cocci
Published in
Scientific Reports, June 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep10980
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nguyen, The Hong Phong, Shamis, Yury, Croft, Rodney J, Wood, Andrew, McIntosh, Robert L, Crawford, Russell J, Ivanova, Elena P, The Hong Phong Nguyen, Yury Shamis, Rodney J. Croft, Andrew Wood, Robert L. McIntosh, Russell J. Crawford, Elena P. Ivanova

Abstract

The effect of electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures at the microwave (MW) frequency of 18 GHz, on four cocci, Planococcus maritimus KMM 3738, Staphylococcus aureus CIP 65.8(T), S. aureus ATCC 25923 and S. epidermidis ATCC 14990(T), was investigated. We demonstrate that exposing the bacteria to an EMF induced permeability in the bacterial membranes of all strains studied, as confirmed directly by transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and indirectly via the propidium iodide assay and the uptake of silica nanospheres. The cells remained permeable for at least nine minutes after EMF exposure. It was shown that all strains internalized 23.5 nm nanospheres, whereas the internalization of the 46.3 nm nanospheres differed amongst the bacterial strains (S. epidermidis ATCC 14990(T)~ 0%; Staphylococcus aureus CIP 65.8(T) S. aureus ATCC 25923, ~40%; Planococcus maritimus KMM 3738, ~80%). Cell viability experiments indicated that up to 84% of the cells exposed to the EMF remained viable. The morphology of the bacterial cells was not altered, as inferred from the scanning electron micrographs, however traces of leaked cytosolic fluids from the EMF exposed cells could be detected. EMF-induced permeabilization may represent an innovative, alternative cell permeability technique for applications in biomedical engineering, cell drug delivery and gene therapy.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 10 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 30%
Student > Master 2 20%
Unspecified 2 20%
Student > Bachelor 1 10%
Researcher 1 10%
Other 1 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 20%
Unspecified 2 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 20%
Physics and Astronomy 1 10%
Chemistry 1 10%
Other 2 20%

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 17 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,368,835
of 8,392,157 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#26,879
of 37,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,681
of 259,468 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#2,343
of 3,351 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,392,157 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 37,277 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 259,468 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,351 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.