Elsevier

EXPLORE

Volume 12, Issue 6, November–December 2016, Pages 451-454
EXPLORE

Original research
Rescue of Moribund Chicken Embryos by Extremely Low-Frequency Electric Fields

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.explore.2016.08.005Get rights and content

Background

Modern living is awash with low-frequency electromagnetic radiation raising concern over health effects, birth defects, and infant cancers especially leukemias. Medical/scientific opinion is ambivalent, especially regarding possible mechanisms of action despite our bodies׳ many electric currents.

Aims

Are some cancers induced by morphogenetic changes rather than direct mutation? We wished to see if morphogenetic effects of weak, extremely low-frequency electric (ELF) fields in embryonated hen׳s eggs could induce cancers, knowing that such treatment is usually deleterious. We report a pilot study intended to reveal a promising cell source in which to search for cancer cells by established methods and then to check for DNA damage.

Methods

Stored (5°C for 1–36 days) fresh, fertile hens׳ eggs were incubated (38°C, total five or six days) in presence or absence of a weak ELF oscillating electric field (1–40 V/cm, 1–50 Hz and two to six days). Separated embryos were assessed for development stage.

Results

Storage of untreated eggs (>12 days, 5°C) allows a steady loss of normal embryo formation at 38°C (few viable by 25 days, half-life ~18 days). Surprisingly, incubation in a weak ELF field during the period of declining viability significantly (P: 0.03–0.0001) improved viability and condition of the embryos (new half-life ~21 days), rather than the expected converse. Thus for a few days, the field could keep viable some embryos that would otherwise not have survived.

Conclusions

The rescued embryos and their untreated controls seem the most promising place to seek any carcinogenic effects of ELF fields. The nature of the presumed critical component keeping them viable during 5°C storage is at least of equal interest.

Introduction

After decades of debate, aversion to living near high-voltage power lines remains high among the general public, possibly (and not surprisingly) because of anecdotal and some epidemiological evidence of associated birth defects or childhood cancers. Many large trials and reviews1 have invariably given negative or inconclusive results, again not surprisingly given the near impossibility of comparing dosages actually received. Similarly, modern living gives almost universal exposure to low-frequency electric fields via cell phones, Wi-Fi hubs, electric blankets, and multiple appliances, although we know our hearts, brains, and almost all the rest of us depend on tiny internal electric currents all the time. Another concern expressed is the apparent lack of identified mechanisms for harmful action, especially cancer induction.

However, it has long been known that individual living cells carry small-surface electrical charges and that such potentials and associated electrical currents may drive certain steps in early ontogeny.2, 3 Fertilized ova exhibit surface clusters of ion channels and pumps, heritable organelles conferring electric poles and secure orientation systems on each daughter cell. Extremely small electric currents can modify differentiation and recently the concept of a bioelectric code may explain why specific voltage values induced specific embryonic structures in alien loci, e.g., eye formation in gut areas.4 Electric fields induce changes in charge distribution in nearby conductors and fluctuating electric fields induce fluctuating charge distributions, i.e., electric currents. In vivo biochemical processes are modified in very weak electrostatic fields oscillating at extremely low frequencies (ELF).5, 6 Meanwhile, the exact relation between applied AC electric fields and endogenous (chemical) DC fields remains to be understood.

Several reports describe usually adverse changes in chick embryos induced by ELF fields.7 We wished to adapt this system, familiar to us from virus studies, to search for cancer induction by ELF fields. The following results describe a pilot study to identify the most promising target for this work, using AC electrostatic gradients (plates) rather than electromagnetic fields (coils).

Section snippets

Source of Eggs

Batches of 100 fertile, un-incubated hens׳ eggs (White Leghorn: Bimbimbi Poultry Farm, Mernda, Victoria, Australia) from a single day׳s production were received within two days of laying and at once stored at 5°C. Viability (normal embryos at 38°C) was 100% from this reliable supplier if incubated within eight days of receipt. Without special consideration, University Ethics Guidelines disallowed treated eggs from hatching and all eggs were euthanized by 11 days׳ incubation.

Incubation

Two or more random

Loss and Rescue of Embryo Viability After 5°C Storage

Unlike most embryonic work, fertile eggs for virus studies may often conveniently be pre-stored (5°C, <10 days), as growth of pox and influenza viruses is not affected provided the amnion is normal. We first explored the effects of storage time on ELF irradiation. At 5°C, the proportion of normal live embryos progressively drops in a fairly smooth sigmoidal manner, with no loss at 10 days, 50% viability at 17–19 days and zero by 25 days. But, in contrast to expectations from the literature, ELF

Discussion

Clearly most chick embryos “not surviving” storage at 5°C in this study could reproducibly be revived if 38°C incubation included a weak ELF oscillating electric field and provided the storage time was not too long. This was surprising as some harmful effect of irradiation was expected from most published results with this system. But some rescued embryos remained faulty (one even had two heads), while no such defects were seen over many years from this reliable supplier if storage was less

Conclusions

Storage of fertile hens׳ eggs at 5°C for more than 10 days causes a steady loss of viability that for a few days is reversible by incubation in a weak, ELF electric field. The embryonic system thus rescued is not identified. The most promising cell sources to search for possible cancer induction by ELF fields should be those embryos rescued by ELF fields compared with their untreated controls.

Acknowledgments

This work was done and funded in-house while the author was a tenured staff member of the Institute of Advanced Studies of the Australian National University, from which he is now retired. He remains an Emeritus Visiting Fellow.

References (9)

  • Magnetic Field Exposure and Cancer. National Cancer Institute Fact Sheet 2014. Available at:...
  • L.F. Jaffe

    Control of development by ionic currents

  • K.R. Robinson et al.

    Left/right, up/down: the role of endogenous electrical fields as directional signals in development, repair and invasion

    Bioessays

    (2003)
  • A. Tseng et al.

    Cracking the bioelectric code. Probing endogenous ionic controls of pattern formation

    Commun Integr Biol

    (2013)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

View full text