The Effect of Electromagnetic Radiation on Yeast

Jamison BeirigerGrade 11

Central Catholic High School

Problem

• Electromagnetic Radiation constantly emitted by millions of cell phones and WIFI transmitters worldwide can have adverse effects on human cells.

Electromagnetic Radiation

• According to Cindy Sage, the "most rapidly growing environmental pollutant in today's environment is probably electromagnetic fields (EMF) including radiofrequency radiation."

• Some adverse effects include: sleep disturbances, heart palpitations, migraines, and general poor health.

• Almost everybody today carries a cellular device emitting these frequencies constantly.

Frequencies Tested• WIFI• 5 GHz• Strong signal

meant for longer distances.

• Cell Phone 3G • 1900 MHz• Constantly

emitted by cell phones.

• Radio Waves• 3 GHz• Long range

signals transmitted by huge towers.

Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Yeast)

• Easy to grow and culture

• Unicellular

• Most studied cell in the world

• Aerobic and anaerobic cell respiration

• Similar cell cycle, biochemistry and genetics to other eukaryotic cells, like those in humans

Purpose:

To determine if electromagnetic radiation has a significant effect on the survivorship of yeast.

Null Hypothesis

• Electromagnetic radiation will not significantly affect the survivorship of yeast.

Alternate Hypothesis

• Electromagnetic radiation will significantly affect the survivorship of yeast.

Materials:

Bunsen BurnersSpread BarIncubatorEthanolMatchesVortexKlett Spectrophotometer

YeastLatex GlovesMicropipettesMicro tubes3 Metal containersAction Tec MI424-WRRevE WIFI Router2 EMR Transmitters Sterile Dilution Fluid (SDF) (per 1 liter) (100mM KH2PO4, 100mM K2HPO4, 10mM MgSO4, 1mM NaCl)• YEPD media and agar plates (1%

yeast extract, 2% peptone, 2% glucose (dextrose), 1.5% agar)

Procedure1. Saccharomyces cerevisiae was grown overnight in

sterile YEPD media.2. Samples of the overnight culture were added to fresh

media in a sterile sidearm flask.3. The culture was placed in an incubator at 30°C until a

density of 50 Klett spectrophotometer units was reached. This represents a cell density of approximately 107 cells/mL.

4. The culture was diluted in sterile dilution fluid to a concentration of approximately 105 cells/mL.

5. 0.1 mL of this yeast culture was added to 9.9 mL of SDF, resulting in a concentration of approximately103 cells/mL.

Procedure Continued

7. This solution was then vortexed and allowed to sit at room temperature for 15 minutes.

8. While this was occurring, transmitters were placed in metal containers at the frequencies being tested.

9. After vortexing to evenly suspend the cells, 100 µL aliquots were removed from the tubes and spread on YEPD agar plates.

10.Immediately after plating, 16 plates were placed in each of the three containers in a room at 30°C.

Procedure (Continued)

11.After 24 hours, 8 plates from each box were removed and added to the area with the control.

12.When 2 days had passed, all of the plates were removed, including those with the control.

13.The resulting colonies were counted visually. Each colony was assumed to have arisen from one cell.

Plate Allocation

Day 116 Plates

Frequency: 5 GHz

Day 116 Plates

Frequency: 3 GHz

Day 28 Plates

Frequency: 5 GHz

Day 28 Plates

Frequency: 1900 MHz

Day 116 Plates

Frequency: 1900 MHz

Day 28 Plates

Frequency: 3 GHz

Box 1 – WIFI Box 3 – 3GBox 2 – Radio

1 Day 2 Days0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Results

Control3 GHz - Radio1900 MHz - 3G5 GHz - WIFI3

Time of Cell Exposure to the Variable

Num

ber o

f Col

onie

s Co

unte

dP Value = 0.000961

P Value = 0.003479

P Value = 0.00034

P Value = 0.000403 P Value = 0.000106

Two Factor P Value = 0.478543

ANOVA• Abbreviation for analysis of variance• Statistical test comparing variation within and

between experimental groups

•If the P- value is lower than the alpha value (.05), then the result is significant (a result of the variable influence) Sample ANOVA (not used in experiment)

Anova: Single Factor

SUMMARYGroups Count Sum Average Variance

0% no UV 6 464 77.33333 140.66670% UV 6 189 31.5 91.5

ANOVASource of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Between Groups 6302.083 1 6302.083 54.2893 2.4E-05 4.964603Within Groups 1160.833 10 116.0833

Total 7462.917 11

Key Questions:1. Did Radio over time have a significant effect on Yeast survivorship?

P Value = 0.000961, YES2. Did 3G over time have a significant effect on Yeast?

P Value = 0.003479,YES

3. Did WIFI over time have a significant effect on Yeast?P Value = 0.00034, YES

4. Was there significant variation between the groups at 1 day of exposure?

P Value = 0.000403, YES

5. Was there significant variation between the groups at 2 days of exposure?

P Value = 0.000106, YES

Alpha = .05

T Critical= 3.49 (Significant)

Variable Concentration T Value Interpretation

Radio 3.29456 Insignificant

3G 1.17513 Insignificant

WIFI 4.53265 Significant

Dunnett’s Test Analysis: 1 Day

T Critical= 3.49 (Significant)

Variable Concentration T Value Interpretation

Radio 3.60087 Significant

3G 2.94946 Insignificant

WIFI 5.42846 Significant

Dunnett’s Test Analysis: 2 Days

CONCLUSIONS

The null hypothesis can be rejected at two days exposure for both Radio and WIFI frequencies. It can also be rejected at the one day exposure for WIFI. This is the only variable that was significant with only one day exposure.

LIMITATIONSOnly three frequencies were tested (out of 1000s)Only one microorganisms were testedSlight variations in plating and/or exposure timeOnly one type of exposure

Only tested two time periods

Only used one transmitter per container

Slight electromagnetic radiation from outside

Only 8 replicates for each

Future Studies

• Test these effects over long term periods• Test the progression of these effects (linear or

logistic)• Test different cells, maybe human cells• Test remediation methods from this damage• Test natural filters against this damage

References

• http://skepdic.com/emf.html• http://www.exploreyeast.com/• http://chemwiki.ucdavis.edu/Physical_Chemistry/Spectr

oscopy/Fundamentals/Electromagnetic_Radiation• http://www.safespaceprotection.com/electrostress-from

-wireless-routers.aspx• http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/0

9/21/cell-phone-wifi-radiation.aspx• http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/10-s

hocking-facts-health-dangers-wifi/