# Sensitivity of Planaria to Weak, Patterned Electric Current and the Subsequent Correlative Interactions with Fluctuations in the Intensity of the Magnetic Field of Earth

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

## 2. Methods

#### 2.1. Planaria

#### 2.2. Electric Field Application

#### 2.3. Behavioral Measures

#### 2.4. Statistical Analysis

## 3. Results

^{2}= 0.14; Figure 4).

## 4. Discussion

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Acknowledgments

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Meyer, C.G.; Holland, K.N.; Papastamatiou, Y.P. Sharks can detect changes in the geomagnetic field. J. R. Soc. Interface
**2004**, 2, 129–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Salazar, V.L.; Krahe, R.; Lewis, J.E. The energetics of electric organ discharge generation in gymnotiform weakly electric fish. J. Exp. Biol.
**2013**, 216, 2459–2468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version] - Bellono, N.W.; Leitch, D.B.; Julius, D. Molecular tuning of electroreception in sharks and skates. Nat. Lett.
**2018**, 558, 122–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Putzier, I.; Kullmann, P.H.; Horn, J.P.; Levitan, E.S. Cav1.3 channel voltage dependence, not Ca2+ selectivity, drives pacemaker activity and amplifies bursts in nigral dopamine neurons. J. Neurosci.
**2009**, 29, 15414–15419. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Liu, Y.; Harding, M.; Pittman, A.; Dore, J.; Striessnig, J.; Rajadhyaksha, A.; Chen, X. Cav1.2 and Cav1.3 L-type calcium channels regulate dopaminergic firing activity in the mouse ventral tegmental area. J. Neurophysiol.
**2014**, 112, 1119–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Chen, J.; Chu, H.; Xiong, H.; Chen, Q.; Zhou, L.; Bing, D.; Liu, Y.; Gao, Y.; Wang, S.; Huang, X.; et al. Expression patterns of CaV1.3 channels in the rat cochlea. Acta Biochim. Biophys. Sin.
**2012**, 44, 513–518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Persinger, M.A. The Weather Matrix and Human Behavior; Praeger Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- McCraty, R. Science of the Heart: Exploring the Role of the Heart in Human Performance (Volume 2); HeartMath: Boulder Creek, CA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, J.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Kotecha, R.; Kirtman, E.G.; Chen, Y.; Huo, X.; Fujiwara, H.; Hemasilpin, N.; deGrauw, T.; et al. Neuromagnetic correlates of developmental changes in endogenous high-frequency brain oscillations in children: A wavelet-based beamformer study. Brain Res.
**2009**, 1274, 28–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pobachenko, S.V.; Kolesnik, A.G.; Borodin, A.S.; Kaliuzhin, V.V. The contingency of the parameters of the human brain electroencephalograms and electromagnetic fields of the Schuman resonator based on monitoring studies. Biofizika
**2006**, 51, 534–538. [Google Scholar] - Saroka, K.S.; Vares, D.E.; Persinger, M.A. Similar spectral power densities within the Schumann resonance and a large population of quantitative electroencephalographic profiles: Supportive evidence for Koenig and Pobachenko. PLoS ONE
**2016**, 11, e0146595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Ribeiro, P.; El-Shehabi, F.; Patocka, N. Classical transmitters and their receptors in flatworms. Parasitology
**2005**, 131, S19–S40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Brown, F.A. Responses of the planarian, Dugesia, and the protozoan, Paramecium, to very weak horizontal magnetic fields. Biol. Bull.
**1962**, 123, 264–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Brown, F.A.; Park, Y.H. Phase-shifting a lunar rhythm in planarians by altering the horizontal magnetic vector. Biol. Bull.
**1965**, 129, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Oviedo, N.J.; Nicolas, C.L.; Adams, D.S.; Levin, M. Establishing and maintaining a colony of planarians. CSH Protocols
**2008**. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Stokely, P.S.; Brown, T.S.; Kuchan, F.; Slaga, T.J. The Distribution of Fresh-Water Triclad Planarians in Jefferson County, Ohio. Ohio J. Sci.
**1965**, 65, 305–318. [Google Scholar] - Murugan, N.J.; Persinger, M.A. Comparisons of responses by planarian to micromolar to attomolar dosages of morphine or naloxone and/or weak pulsed magnetic fields: Revealing receptor subtype affinities and non-specific effects. Int. J. Radiat. Biol.
**2014**, 90, 833–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Rostoker, G. Geomagnetic indices. Rev. Geophys.
**1972**, 10, 935–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Mayaud, P.-N. The aa indices: A 100-year series characterizing the magnetic activity. J. Geophys. Res.
**1972**, 77, 6870–6874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bureau, Y.R.J.; Persinger, M.A. Decreased latencies for limbic seizures induced in rats by lithium-pilocarpine occur when daily average geomagnetic activity exceeds 20 nanoTesla. Neurosci. Lett.
**1995**, 192, 142–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Persinger, M.A. Increased geomagnetic activity and the occurrence of bereavement hallucinations: Evidence for melatonin-mediated microseizuring in the temporal lobe? Neurosci. Lett.
**1988**, 88, 271–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bureau, Y.R.J.; Persinger, M.A. Geomagnetic activity and enhanced mortality in rats with acute (epileptic) limbic lability. Int. J. Biometeorol.
**1992**, 36, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Persinger, M.A.; Richards, P.M. Vestibular experiences of humans during brief periods of partial sensory deprivation are enhanced when daily geomagnetic activity exceeds 15-20 nT. Neurosci. Lett.
**1995**, 194, 69–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Persinger, M.A. Out-of-body-like experiences are more probable in people with elevated complex partial epileptic-like signs during periods of enhanced geomagnetic activity: A nonlinear effect. Percept. Mot. Skills
**1995**, 80, 563–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - O’Connor, R.P.; Persinger, M.A. Brief communication: Increases in geomagnetic activity are associated with increases in thyroxine levels in a single patient: Implications for melatonin levels. Int. J. Neurosci.
**1996**, 88, 243–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] - Galic, M.A.; Persinger, M.A. Lagged association between geomagnetic activity and diminished nocturnal pain thresholds in mice. Bioelectromagnetics
**2007**, 28, 577–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Sukul, N.C.; Croll, N.A. Influence of Potential Difference and Current on the Electrotaxis of Caenorhaditis elegans. J. Nematol.
**1978**, 10, 314–317. [Google Scholar] - Manière, X.; Lebois, F.; Matic, I.; Ladoux, B.; Meglio, J.-M.D.; Hersen, P. Running Worms: C. elegans Self-Sorting by Electrotaxis. PLoS ONE
**2011**, 6, e16637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Salam, S.; Ansari, A.; Amon, S.; Rezai, P.; Selvaganapathy, P.R.; Mishra, R.K.; Gupta, B.P. A microfluidic phenotype analysis system reveals function of sensory and dopaminergic neuron signaling in C. elegans electrotactic swimming behavior. Worm
**2013**, 2, e24558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version] - Van Bladel, J.G. Electromagnetic Fields; IEEE Press: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]

**Figure 2.**A picture of the t-maze that was used for this experiment. It was created by filling a plastic dish with paraffin wax and molding the “T” shape into this. During testing it was filled with ~7 mL of President’s Choice spring water.

**Figure 3.**Drawing of the t-maze and the layout of all the arms. The electrodes were placed at Line B, in either Arm 1 or Arm 2. The planaria were placed in the bottom of the starting arm and allowed to roam free for 5 min. The arms that they visited and the time for them to cross Line C.

**Figure 4.**Percent of planaria per day of experiment that made contact with an electrode while in the t-maze. There were 19 days of experiments in the Thomas group and 17 days of experiments in the sham group. Error bars represent standard error of the mean (SEM).

**Figure 5.**Pearson correlation coefficients of the average daily Ap (planetary geomagnetic index) indices on days before and after the day of experiment, with the standard deviation of the total number of arms each planaria visited while in the t-maze. Extra-large data points in the Thomas condition were significant in Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation tests and were more than 2 z-scores from their respective point in the Sham group. Ap indices refer to a measurement of fluctuations in the intensity of the geomagnetic field.

**Figure 6.**Correlation between the standard deviation (SD) in the total number of arms visited by the planaria and the geomagnetic storm indices 4 days before the experiment. (

**A**) In the sham-exposed planaria with the Ap index. (

**B**) In the Thomas-exposed planaria with the Ap index. (

**C**) In the Thomas treated planaria with the AA index. Ap (planetary) and AA (antipodal) indices refer to measurements of fluctuations in the intensity of the geomagnetic field.

**Table 1.**Results of analysis of variance (ANOVA) in the planaria behavior variables recorded during their maze exploration. SD refers to the standard deviation values calculated for the 3–5 planaria measured for each day an experiment was conducted.

Planaria Behaviour Measurements | Sham Mean (SEM) | Thomas Mean (SEM) | F Statement for Effect of Field | |
---|---|---|---|---|

Percent that entered arm of electrode | 36.2 (6.29) | 23.0 (6.53) | F(1,35) = 2.07, p = 0.160 | |

Time to cross Line C (seconds) | Mean | 102.0 (13.9) | 97.8 (11.7) | F(1,35) = 0.28, p = 0.599 |

SD | 45.3 (7.80) | 47.7 (8.55) | F(1,35) = 0.00, p = 0.995 | |

Time to cross Line A (seconds) | Mean | 119.2 (9.77) | 106.0 (10.7) | F(1,35) = 1.00, p = 0.325 |

SD | 62.9 (7.28) | 54.4 (8.83) | F(1,35) = 1.66, p = 0.206 | |

Total number of arms visited | Mean | 0.97 (0.09) | 0.84 (0.11) | F(1,35) = 0.80, p = 0.377 |

SD | 0.50 (0.10) | 0.74 (0.13) | F(1,35) = 1.82, p = 0.187 | |

Percent that touched an electrode | 4.31 (2.97) | 18.8 (5.27) | F(1,35) = 5.67, p = 0.023; Ω^{2} = 0.14 |

**Table 2.**Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients for the daily average of the total amount of arms visited with the Ap indices of days surrounding the day of experiment. Ap indices refer to a measurement of fluctuations in the intensity of the geomagnetic field.

Day | Sham | Thomas | Fischer r to z Score |
---|---|---|---|

−6 days | r = −0.132; rho = −0.156 | r = 0.476 *; rho = 0.653 * | z = −1.78; p = 0.075 |

−5 days | r = −0.389; rho = −0.354 | r = 0.283; rho = 0.359 | - |

−4 days | r = −0.373; rho = −0.304 | r = 0.465 *; rho = 0.449 | - |

−3 days | r = −0.179; rho = −0.098 | r = 0.478 *; rho = 0.531 * | z = −1.92; p = 0.055 |

−2 days | r = −0.334; rho = −0.181 | r = 0.151; rho = 0.156 | - |

−1 day | r = −0.467; rho = −0.272 | r = 0.128; rho = 0.036 | - |

Day 0 | r = −0.338; rho = −0.058 | r = 0.111; rho = 0.112 | - |

+1 day | r = 0.170; rho = 0.313 | r = −0.008; rho = 0.042 | - |

+2 days | r = 0.013; rho = 0.128 | r = −0.218; rho = −0.305 | - |

+3 days | r = −0.175; rho = −0.137 | r = −0.386; rho = −0.400 | - |

+4 days | r = −0.024; rho = 0.021 | r = −0.484 *; rho = −0.374 | - |

+5 days | r = 0.188; rho = 0.196 | r = −0.380; rho = −0.352 | - |

+6 days | r = 0.060; rho = 0.070 | r = −0.474 *; rho = −0.235 | - |

**Table 3.**Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients for the daily standard deviation of the total amount of arms visited with the Ap indices of days surrounding the day of experiment. Ap indices refer to a measurement of fluctuations in the intensity of the geomagnetic field.

Day | Sham | Thomas | Fischer r to z Score |

−6 days | r = −0.220; rho = −0.314 | r = 0.763 **; rho = 0.692 * | z = −3.35, p < 0.001 |

−5 days | r = −0.208; rho = −0.201 | r = 0.509 *; rho = 0.461 * | z = −2.11, p = 0.035 |

−4 days | r = −0.215; rho = −0.154 | r = 0.737 **; rho = 0.561 * | z = −3.18, p = 0.002 |

−3 days | r = −0.218; rho = −0.137 | r = 0.587 *; rho = 0.556 * | z = −2.44, p = 0.015 |

−2 days | r = 0.055; rho = 0.085 | r = 0.173; rho = 0.250 | - |

−1 day | r = 0.128; rho = −0.022 | r = 0.223; rho = 0.225 | - |

Day 0 | r = 0.162; rho = 0.034 | r = 0.254; rho = 0.324 | - |

+1 day | r = 0.260; rho = 0.098 | r = 0.039; rho = 0.048 | - |

+2 days | r = 0.277; rho = 0.192 | r = −0.101; rho = −0.356 | - |

+3 days | r = 0.241; rho = 0.195 | r = −0.495 *; rho = −0.529 * | z = 2.15, p = 0.032 |

+4 days | r = 0.200; rho = 0.322 | r = −0.555 *; rho = −0.428 | - |

+5 days | r = 0.106; rho = 0.270 | r = −0.523 *; rho = −0.486 * | z = 1.88, p = 0.060 |

+6 days | r = 0.380; rho = 0.435 | r = −0.450; rho = −0.288 | - |

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Hossack, V.; Persinger, M.; Dotta, B. Sensitivity of Planaria to Weak, Patterned Electric Current and the Subsequent Correlative Interactions with Fluctuations in the Intensity of the Magnetic Field of Earth. *J* **2020**, *3*, 79-89.
https://doi.org/10.3390/j3010008

**AMA Style**

Hossack V, Persinger M, Dotta B. Sensitivity of Planaria to Weak, Patterned Electric Current and the Subsequent Correlative Interactions with Fluctuations in the Intensity of the Magnetic Field of Earth. *J*. 2020; 3(1):79-89.
https://doi.org/10.3390/j3010008

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Hossack, Victoria, Michael Persinger, and Blake Dotta. 2020. "Sensitivity of Planaria to Weak, Patterned Electric Current and the Subsequent Correlative Interactions with Fluctuations in the Intensity of the Magnetic Field of Earth" *J* 3, no. 1: 79-89.
https://doi.org/10.3390/j3010008