Neurodevelopmental anomalies of the hippocampus in rats exposed to weak intensity complex magnetic fields throughout gestation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been increasing interest on the possible harmful effects of prenatal exposure to magnetic fields. To investigate the effect of weak intensity magnetic fields on the prenatal brain, pregnant Wistar rats were continuously exposed to one of four intensities (reference: 5-20 nT; low 30-50 nT; medium 90-580 nT; high 590-1200 nT) of a complex magnetic field sequence designed to interfere with brain development. As adults, rats exposed to the low-intensity (30-50 nT) complex magnetic field displayed impairments in contextual fear learning and showed anomalies in the cytological and morphological development of the hippocampus. In particular, low-intensity exposures resulted in a reduction in overall hippocampal size and promoted subtle dysgenesis of the CA1 and CA3 regions. In contrast, exposure to weaker or stronger intensities of the same complex magnetic field pattern did not interfere with hippocampal development or fear behavior. These findings suggest that prenatal exposure to complex magnetic fields of a narrow intensity window during development can result in subtle but permanent alterations in hippocampal microstructure and function that can have lasting effects on behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".