PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R H Lovely

Publications and source records attributed to R H Lovely.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Rats are not aversive when exposed to 60-Hz magnetic fields at 3.03 mT.

Thirty-two male rats were tested in two replicates of an experiment to determine whether body currents induced by 60-Hz magnetic fields might lead to avoidance behavior comparable to that which results from exposure to strong 60-Hz electric fields. The test apparatus was a two-compartment Plexiglas shuttlebox enclosed in a sound-attenuating plywood chamber, which in turn was encompassed by two copper bus bars that, when energized, served as a source of 60-Hz magnetic fields. Location of the rat, and traverse activity in the shuttlebox were monitored by nine infra-red photo detectors equally spaced along the length of the apparatus. Rats were divided into 2 groups: 1 group of rats (n = 8 per group per replicate) was sham exposed while rats in the other group (n = 8 per group per replicate) were exposed to a 3.03 mT (30.3 G), 60-Hz magnetic field whenever they traversed to or were located on the side (L or R) predetermined as the exposed side. To control artifact incident to side preference, the side exposed (L or R) was alternated over the exposed rats. Each rat was tested individually in a 1-h session. A 2-factor ANOVA (exposed vs. control, replicate 1 vs. replicate 2) failed to reveal any significant effects due to either factor or to an interaction between factors. These data demonstrate that rats do not avoid exposure to 60-Hz magnetic fields at a flux density of 3.03 mT and further imply that the avoidance by rats of high level 60-Hz electric fields is mediated by something other than the internal body currents induced by the exposure.

Animals↗
PubMed1988

Recent studies in the behavioral toxicology of ELF electric and magnetic fields.

Behavioral responses to ELF electric and magnetic fields are reviewed starting with the simple sensory awareness or detection by an animal and moving on through more-complicated behavioral responses such as behavior that averts exposure. The literature selected in this review is taken primarily from the area of behavioral toxicology. As such, it does not review work on specialized response systems to ELF fields. The most notable of these omitted specialized response systems are electroreception, (see Kalmijn, this volume), which occurs in a number of fish species, and homing/navigation and communication of the location of food that occurs in several species of birds and in honeybees, respectively. The toxicologic orientation of most researches that evaluate the effects of exposure to ELF electric and magnetic fields has been influenced primarily by the "missions" of DOE and the power industry programs to determine the health effects of power frequency (50- and 60-Hz) electric and magnetic fields. Because of these large programmatic efforts, most of the recent research has in fact been done at 50 or 60 Hz. In the context of the above limitations, remarkably few robust behavioral effects have been reported. Those that have been reported probably relate to an animal's perception of the electric field, although there are some exceptions to this generalization. The apparent lack of deleterious effects in animals is consistent with recent studies on humans that have been conducted in the UK. With this in mind, it is tempting to conclude that exposure to an ELF field is a rather innocuous event and, other than possible mini-shocks, is without hazard. However, if this is the case, then what sense are we to make of reports of altered neural function (other than behavior) that result from exposure to ELF fields (e.g., suppressed melatonin and SNAT activity in the rat pineal; efflux of calcium ions from brain cortices; histological change in the cerebellum and hippocampus following perinatal exposure, etc.)? Are these neural effects no more than "noise" to the behaving organism? Possible reasons form the disparity between cell biology, neurochemistry, and behavior have been presented in this chapter, and based on the hypothesized reasons for the existing disparity, a number of experiments were suggested.

Animals↗
PubMed1975

Hormonal dissociation of limbic lesion effects on shuttle box avoidance in rats.

Rats with septal or hippocampal lesions, relative to normal rats, showed facilitated acquisition of a shuttle box avoidance response. The rats with septal lesions were also highly resistant to extinction compared with normal rats. When the same lesion effects were examined in hypophysectiomized rats, the animals with septal lesions continued to show facilitated performance, and those rats with hippocampal lesions performed no differently than nonoperated control animals. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the facilitated avoidance performance found in rats with hippocampal lesions is attributable to lesion-induced changes in hypophyseal activity, but similar changes induced by septal lesions are not.

Acoustic Stimulation↗
PubMed1975

Cochlear microphonics generated by microwave pulses.

Oscillations at 50 kHz have been recorded from the round window of guinea pigs during irradiation by 918-MHz pulsed microwaves. The oscillations promptly follow the stimulas, outlast it by about 200 musec and measure to 50 muV in amplitude. They precede the auditory nerve's response and disappear with death. They are interpreted to be a cochlear microphonic and hence to demonstrate that the microwave auditory effect, in the guinea pig at least, is accompanied by a mechanical disturbance of the hari cells of the cochlea.

Animals↗