Analysis of gene expression in mouse brain regions after exposure to 1.9 GHz radiofrequency fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess 1.9 GHz radiofrequency (RF) field exposure on gene expression within a variety of discrete mouse brain regions using whole genome microarray analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult male C57BL/6 mice were exposed to 1.9 GHz pulse-modulated or continuous-wave RF fields for 4 h/day for 5 consecutive days at whole body average (WBA) specific absorption rates of 0 (sham), ∼0.2 W/kg and ∼1.4 W/kg. Total RNA was isolated from the auditory cortex, amygdala, caudate, cerebellum, hippocampus, hypothalamus, and medial prefrontal cortex and differential gene expression was assessed using Illumina MouseWG-6 (v2) BeadChip arrays. Validation of potentially responding genes was conducted by RT-PCR. RESULTS: When analysis of gene expression was conducted within individual brain regions when controlling the false discovery rate (FDR), no differentially expressed genes were identified relative to the sham control. However, it must be noted that most fold changes among groups were observed to be less than 1.5-fold and this study had limited ability to detect such small changes. While some genes were differentially expressed without correction for multiple-comparisons testing, no consistent pattern of response was observed among different RF-exposure levels or among different RF-modulations. CONCLUSIONS: The current study provides the most comprehensive analysis of potential gene expression changes in the rodent brain in response to RF field exposure conducted to date. Within the exposure conditions and limitations of this study, no convincing evidence of consistent changes in gene expression was found in response to 1.9 GHz RF field exposure.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".