Journal of Basic and Clinical Pathophysiology

Journal of Basic and Clinical Pathophysiology

The effect of static magnetic field on Paramecium caudatum under calcium channel blockade with magnesium sulfate

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Atefeh Babazadeh
Manizheh Karami
Department of Biology, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Shahed University, Tehran, Iran.
10.22070/jbcp.2025.19902.1190
Abstract
Background and Objective: According to evidence, the effect of static magnetic field (SMF) against motor learning deficits has been attributed to the effect of the field on calcium (Ca) channel conductance, but it is not fully understood. We treated Paramecium caudatum with a Ca channel blocker, magnesium sulfate (MgSO4), in the presence or absence of SMF.
Materials and Methods: P. caudatum was collected from temporary ponds, specifically identified, and cultured on straw. After sequential passage, the pure medium was divided into two media and placed in standard laboratory conditions or SMF (72 hours). A small drop (0.1 mL) of each medium was placed on the slide and studied 25 times under x4 magnification during 30 seconds period with 5 seconds intervals. The control groups only received 1 μL of distilled water. Different doses of MgSO4 (1, 4, 8, 16 and 32 μg/μL) were used in both conditions. The swimming and avoidance behavior of the animal was recorded live, and after fixation, the pellicular motor system, Ca channel and macronucleus were carefully examined. All data were analyzed using ANOVA.
Results: The swimming movements of animals in the field were intensely reduced when treated with MgSO4. The use of the blocker also caused the destruction of some pellicular and macronucleus structures in the presence of SMF.
Conclusion: With the use of MgSO4, the adverse effects of SMF on the motility and structure of Paramecium were enhanced, indicating that Ca ions play an important role in the protective effects of the magnetic field.
Keywords
Paramecium caudatum
Static magnetic field
Swimming
Avoiding
Magnesium sulfate
1. Karami M. Invertebrate zoology, Shahed University Publications, 10th ed. 2022.
2. Allen RD. Fine structure of membranous and microfibrillar systems in the cortex of Paramecium caudatum. The Journal of Cell Biology. 1974; 49(1):1-20.
3. Elices I, Kulkarni A, Escoubet N, Pontani LL, Prevost AM, Brette R. An electrophysiological and kinematic model of Paramecium, the “swimming neuron”. PLoS Computational Biology. 2023; 19(2):e1010899.
4. Lynn D. The ciliated protozoa: characterization, classification, and guide to the literature (3rd ed.). Springer science and business media. Netherlands, 2008.
5. Filipek J, Kraigher B, Tepuš B, Kokol V, Mandic-Mulec I. Effects of low-density static magnetic fields on the growth and activities of wastewater bacteria Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas putida. Bioresource Technology. 2012; 120:225-32
6. Fujiwara Y, Tomishige M, Itoh Y, Fujiwara M, Shibata N, Kosaka T. Effect of horizontal strong static magnetic field on swimming behaviour of Paramecium caudatum. Molecular Physics. 2010. 10.1080/00268970600643556.
7. Fojit L, Strasak L, Vetterl V, Smarda J. Comparison of the low - frequency magnetic field on bacteria Escherichia coli, Leclercia adecarboxylata and Staphylococcus aureus. Bioelectrochemistry. 2004; 63 (1-2):337-41.
8. Friedman J, Kraus S, Hauptman Y, Schiff Y, Seger R. Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies. Biochemical Journal. 2007; 405 (3):559-68.
9. Ahmadianpour MR, Abdolmaleki P, Moula SJ, Hosseinkhani S. Effect of Static Magnetic Field on Apoptosis Induction and Altering the Cell Cycle of T-lymphoblastoid Cells.  Internal medicine Today. 2012; 18(3):87-94.
10. Chang WH, Chen LT, Sun JS, Lin FH. Effect of pulse - burst electromagnetic field stimulation on osteoblast cell activities. Bioelectromagnetic: Journal of the Bioelectromagnetic Society. 2004; 25 (6):457- 65.
11. Atak Ç, Çelik Ö, Olgun A, Alikamanoğlu S, Rzakoulieva A. Effect of magnetic field on peroxidase activities of soybean tissue culture. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment. 2007; 21 (2):166-71.
12. Sheikhmohammadi M, Karami M, Hajnorouzi A. Effectiveness of Fe2O3 nanoparticles more than magnetic field against the destructive effect of colchicine on Paramecium caudatum. Journal of Basic & Clinical Pathophysiology. 2022; 10 (Issue 1):30-37.
13. Rosen MS, Rosen AD. Magnetic field influence on Paramecium motility. Life Science. 1990; 46 (21):1509-1515.
14. Hemmersbach-Krause R, Briegleb W, Hader D. P, Plattner H. Gravity effects on Paramecium cells: An analysis of possible sensory function of trichocysts and of simulated weightlessness on trichocyst exocytosis. European Journal of Protistology. 1991; 27(1):85-92.
15. Miyamoto H, Yamaguchi H, Ikehara T, Kinouchi Y. Effects of electromagnetic fields on  ( ) uptake by HeLa cells. Biological effects of magnetic and electromagnetic fields. Plenum Press. 1996; 101-119.
16. Ikehata M, Koana T, Suzuki Y, Shimizu H, Nakagawa M. Mutagenicity and comutagenicity of static magnetic fields detected by bacterial mutation assay. Mutation Research-Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis. 1999; 427(2):147-56.
17. Daryl S. Contributions to mechanism of chemotactic response in Paramecium caudatum Animal Behavior. 1963; 11(2):393-394.
18. Miyakoshi J. Effect of static magnetic fields at the cellular level. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. 2005; 87(2-3):213-23.
19. Zhang B, Yuan X, Lv H, Che J, Wang S, Shang P. Biophysical mechanisms underlying the effects of static magnetic fields on biological systems. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. 2023; 177:14-23.
20. Uryash A, Flores V, Adams JA, Allen P, Lopez JR. Memory and learning deficits are associated with Ca2+ dyshomeostasis in normal aging. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience. 2020; 12:224.
21. Sakhnini L, Alrahim MN. Protective effect of pretreatment with calcium channel blockers on motor coordination deficit of mice due to exposure to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields. Bahrain Medical Bulletin. 2019; 41(3):150-154.
22. Volker Ullrich, Hans, Jürgen Apell. Check for updates electromagnetic fields and calcium signaling by the voltage dependent anion channel. Open Journal of Veterinary Medicine. 2021; 1(1).
23. Azimi S, Mozdarani H, Mahmoudzadeh A. Induction of DNA damage, apoptosis and micronuclei in peripheral blood lymphocytes following injection of contrast media in patients with abdominal CT scan. International Journal of Radiation Research. 2017; 15(2):149-155.
24. Mohajer JK, Nisbet A, Velliou E, Ajaz M, Schettino G. Biological effects of static magnetic field exposure in the context of MR-guided radiotherapy. British Journal of Radiology. 2019; 92(1094):e20180484.
25. Haga N. Micromanipulation in Paramecium: From non‐mendelian inheritance to the outlook for versatile micromachines. Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology. 2022; 69(5):e12909.
26. Berger JD. Autogamy in Paramecium. Cell cycle stage-specific commitment to meiosis. Experimental Cell Research. 1986; 166(2):475-85.
27. Wichterma R. The Biology of Paramecium Plenum Press. NewYork. A Division of Plenum Publishing Corporation, Spring Street, New York. 1986.
28. Cavalier-Smith T. Kingdom Protozoa and its 18 phyla. Microbiological Reviews. 1993; 57(4):953-994.
29. Imam T. The complexities in the classification of protozoa: a challenge to parasitologists. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences. 2011; 2(2):e63805.
30. Zawoiski EJ. A method for counting Protozoa. Proceedings of the Pennsylvania Academy of Science. 1954; 28:276-279.
31. Guevorkian K, Valles, Jr JM. Aligning Paramecium caudatum with Static Magnetic Field. Biophysical Journal. 2006; 90(8):3004-3011.
Journal of Basic and Clinical Pathophysiology
Volume 14, Issue 2
January 2026
Pages 19-30