The Journal of Membrane Biology

, Volume 246, Issue 12, pp 869–875 | Cite as

Recent Reports of Wi-Fi and Mobile Phone-Induced Radiation on Oxidative Stress and Reproductive Signaling Pathways in Females and Males

  • Mustafa NazıroğluEmail author
  • Murat Yüksel
  • Seyit Ali Köse
  • Mehmet Okan Özkaya
Topical Review


Environmental exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) has been increasing with the increasing demand for communication devices. The aim of the study was to discuss the mechanisms and risk factors of EMR changes on reproductive functions and membrane oxidative biology in females and males. It was reported that even chronic exposure to EMR did not increase the risk of reproductive functions such as increased levels of neoantigens abort. However, the results of some studies indicate that EMR induced endometriosis and inflammation and decreased the number of follicles in the ovarium or uterus of rats. In studies with male rats, exposure caused degeneration in the seminiferous tubules, reduction in the number of Leydig cells and testosterone production as well as increases in luteinizing hormone levels and apoptotic cells. In some cases of male and female infertility, increased levels of oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation and decreased values of antioxidants such as melatonin, vitamin E and glutathione peroxidase were reported in animals exposed to EMR. In conclusion, the results of current studies indicate that oxidative stress from exposure to Wi-Fi and mobile phone-induced EMR is a significant mechanism affecting female and male reproductive systems. However, there is no evidence to this date to support an increased risk of female and male infertility related to EMR exposure.


Infertility Female Male Testosterone Electromagnetic radiation Antioxidant Oxidative stress 



Electromagnetic radiation




Glutathione peroxidase


Polyunsaturated fatty acids




Reactive oxygen species


Specific absorption rate


Superoxide dismutase


Wireless fidelity


Wireless local area networks



We thank Prof. Andreas Daiber (Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany) for helpful discussions on the manuscript. There is no conflict of interest related to any financial support.


  1. Aït-Aïssa S, Billaudel B, Poulletier de Gannes F, Ruffié G, Duleu S, Hurtier A, Haro E, Taxile M, Athané A, Geffard M, Wu T, Wiart J, Bodet D, Veyret B, Lagroye I (2012) In utero and early-life exposure of rats to a Wi-Fi signal: screening of immune markers in sera and gestational outcome. Bioelectromagnetics 33:410–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aitken RJ, Bennetts LE, Sawyer D, Wiklendt AM, King BV (2005) Impact of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation on DNA integrity in the male germline. Int J Androl 28:171–179CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Atasoy HI, Gunal MY, Atasoy P, Elgun S, Bugdayci G (2013) Immunohistopathologic demonstration of deleterious effects on growing rat testes of radiofrequency waves emitted from conventional Wi-Fi devices. J Pediatr Urol 9:223–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Avendaño C, Mata A, Sanchez Sarmiento CA, Doncel GF (2012) Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril 97:39–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen L, Hu JY, Wang SQ (2012) The role of antioxidants in photoprotection: a critical review. J Am Acad Dermatol 67:1013–1024CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dasdag S, Ketani MA, Akdag Z, Ersay AR, Sari I, Demirtas OC, Celik MS (1999) Whole-body microwave exposure emitted by cellular phones and testicular function of rats. Urol Res 27:219–223CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dasdag S, Zulkuf Akdag M, Aksen F, Yilmaz F, Bashan M, Mutlu Dasdag M, Salih Celik M (2003) Whole body exposure of rats to microwaves emitted from a cell phone does not affect the testes. Bioelectromagnetics 24:182–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Dasdag RJ, Bennetts LE, Sawyer D, Wiklendt AM, King BV (2005) Impact of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation on DNA integrity in the male germline. Int J Androl 28:171–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Ulukaya E, Uzunlar AK, Yegin D (2008) Mobile phone exposure does not induce apoptosis on spermatogenesis in rats. Arch Med Res 39:40–44CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Esmekaya MA, Ozer C, Seyhan N (2011) 900 MHz pulse-modulated radiofrequency radiation induces oxidative stress on heart, lung, testis and liver tissues. Gen Physiol Biophys 30:84–89CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Forgács Z, Somosy Z, Kubinyi G, Bakos J, Hudák A, Surján A, Thuróczy G (2006) Effect of whole-body 1800 MHz GSM-like microwave exposure on testicular steroidogenesis and histology in mice. Reprod Toxicol 22:111–117CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Gul A, Celebi H, Uğraş S (2009) The effects of microwave emitted by cellular phones on ovarian follicles in rats. Arch Gynecol Obstet 280:729–733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Guney M, Ozguner F, Oral B, Karahan N, Mungan T (2007) 900 MHz radiofrequency-induced histopathologic changes and oxidative stress in rat endometrium: protection by vitamins E and C. Toxicol Ind Health 23:411–420CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Imai N, Kawabe M, Hikage T, Nojima T, Takahashi S, Shirai T (2011) Effects on rat testis of 1.95-GHz W-CDMA for IMT-2000 cellular phones. Syst Biol Reprod Med 57:204–209CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kesari KK, Kumar S, Behari J (2010) Mobile phone usage and male infertility in Wistar rats. Indian J Exp Biol 48:987–992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kesari KK, Kumar S, Behari J (2011) Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic wave exposure from cellular phones on the reproductive pattern in male Wistar rats. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 164:546–559CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kesari KK, Kumar S, Nirala J, Siddiqui MH, Behari J (2013) Biophysical evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic field effects on male reproductive pattern. Cell Biochem Biophys 65:85–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim KB, Byun HO, Han NK, Ko YG, Choi HD, Kim N, Pack JK, Lee JS (2010) Two-dimensional electrophoretic analysis of radio-frequency radiation-exposed MCF7 breast cancer cells. J Radiat Res 51:205–213CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Kismali G, Ozgur E, Guler G, Akcay A, Sel T, Seyhan N (2012) The influence of 1800 MHz GSM-like signals on blood chemistry and oxidative stress in non-pregnant and pregnant rabbits. Int J Radiat Biol 88:414–419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Kovacic P, Somanathan R (2008) Unifying mechanism for eye toxicity: electron transfer, reactive oxygen species, antioxidant benefits, cell signaling and cell membranes. Cell Membr Free Radic Res 1:56–69Google Scholar
  21. Kumar S, Kesari KK, Behari J (2011) The therapeutic effect of a pulsed electromagnetic field on the reproductive patterns of male Wistar rats exposed to a 2.45-GHz microwave field. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 66:1237–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. La Vignera S, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D’Agata R, Calogero AE (2012) Effects of the exposure to mobile phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature. J Androl 33:350–356CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lavranos G, Balla M, Tzortzopoulou A, Syriou V, Angelopoulou R (2012) Investigating ROS sources in male infertility: a common end for numerous pathways. Reprod Toxicol 34:298–307CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee HJ, Lee JS, Pack JK, Choi HD, Kim N, Kim SH, Lee YS (2009) Lack of teratogenicity after combined exposure of pregnant mice to CDMA and WCDMA radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res 172:648–652CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Leszczynski D, Xu Z (2010) Mobile phone radiation health risk controversy: the reliability and sufficiency of science behind the safety standards. Health Res Policy Syst 8:1478–1505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mailankot M, Kunnath AP, Jayalekshmi H, Koduru B, Valsalan R (2009) Radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR from GSM 0.9/1.8 GHz) mobile phones induces oxidative stress and reduces sperm motility in rats. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 64:561–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Merhi ZO (2012) Challenging cell phone impact on reproduction: a review. J Assist Reprod Genet 29:293–297PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Nawrot PS, McRee DI, Galvin MJ (1985) Teratogenic, biochemical, and histological studies with mice prenatally exposed to 2.45-GHz microwave radiation. Radiat Res 102:35–45CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Nazıroğlu M (2007) New molecular mechanisms on the activation of TRPM2 channels by oxidative stress and ADP-ribose. Neurochem Res 32:1990–2001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Nazıroğlu M, Tokat S, Demirci S (2012a) Role of melatonin on electromagnetic radiation-induced oxidative stress and Ca2+ signaling molecular pathways in breast cancer. J Recept Signal Transduct Res 32:290–297CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nazıroğlu M, Ciğ B, Doğan S, Uğuz AC, Dilek S, Faouzi D (2012b) 2.45-GHz wireless devices induce oxidative stress and proliferation through cytosolic Ca2+ influx in human leukemia cancer cells. Int J Radiat Biol 88:449–456CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Nazıroğlu M, Yoldaş N, Uzgur EN, Kayan M (2013) Role of contrast media on oxidative stress, Ca2+ signaling and apoptosis in kidney. J Membr Biol 246:91–100CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Oksay T, Naziroğlu M, Doğan S, Güzel A, Gümral N, Koşar PA (2012) Protective effects of melatonin against oxidative injury in rat testis induced by wireless (2.45 GHz) devices. Andrologia 10:1111–12044Google Scholar
  34. Ono T, Saito Y, Komura J, Ikehata H, Tarusawa Y, Nojima T, Goukon K, Ohba Y, Wang J, Fujiwara O, Sato R (2004) Absence of mutagenic effects of 2.45 GHz radiofrequency exposure in spleen, liver, brain, and testis of lacZ-transgenic mouse exposed in utero. Tohoku J Exp Med 202:93–103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Otto M, von Mühlendahl KE (2007) Electromagnetic fields (EMF): do they play a role in children’s environmental health (CEH)? Int J Hyg Environ Health 210:635–644CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Özkaya MO, Nazıroğlu M (2010) Multivitamin and mineral supplementation modulates oxidative stress and antioxidant vitamin levels in serum and follicular fluid of women undergoing IVF. Fertil Steril 94:2465–2466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Pinto R, Lopresto V, Galloni P, Marino C, Mancini S, Lodato R, Pioli C, Lovisolo GA (2010) Dosimetry of a set-up for the exposure of newborn mice to 2.45-GHZ Wi-Fi frequencies. Radiat Prot Dosim 140:326–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Poulletier de Gannes F, Billaudel B, Haro E, Taxile M, Le Montagner L, Hurtier A, Ait Aissa S, Masuda H, Percherancier Y, Ruffié G, Dufour P, Veyret B, Lagroye I (2012) Rat fertility and embryo fetal development: influence of exposure to the Wi-Fi signal. Reprod Toxicol 36C:1–5Google Scholar
  39. Salama N, Kishimoto T, Kanayama HO, Kagawa S (2010) Effects of exposure to a mobile phone on sexual behavior in adult male rabbit: an observational study. Int J Impot Res 22:127–133CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Saygın M, Caliskan S, Karahan N, Koyu A, Gumral N, Uguz A (2011) Testicular apoptosis and histopathological changes induced by a 2.45 GHz electromagnetic field. Toxicol Ind Health 27:455–463CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sommer AM, Grote K, Reinhardt T, Streckert J, Hansen V, Lerchl A (2009) Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (UMTS) on reproduction and development of mice: a multi-generation study. Radiat Res 171:89–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Takahashi S, Imai N, Nabae K, Wake K, Kawai H, Wang J, Watanabe S, Kawabe M, Fujiwara O, Ogawa K, Tamano S, Shirai T (2010) Lack of adverse effects of whole-body exposure to a mobile telecommunication electromagnetic field on the rat fetus. Radiat Res 173:362–372CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Tice RR, Hook GG, Donner M, McRee DI, Guy AW (2002) Genotoxicity of radiofrequency signals. I. Investigation of DNA damage and micronuclei induction in cultured human blood cells. Bioelectromagnetics 23:113–126CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Tola EN, Mungan MT, Uğuz AC, Nazıroğlu M (2013) Intracellular Ca2+ and antioxidant values induced positive effect on fertilization ratio and oocyte quality of granulosa cells in patients undergoing in vitro fertilisation. Reprod Fertil Dev 25:746–752CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mustafa Nazıroğlu
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Murat Yüksel
    • 2
  • Seyit Ali Köse
    • 2
  • Mehmet Okan Özkaya
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Biophysics, Medical FacultySuleyman Demirel UniversityIspartaTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical FacultySuleyman Demirel UniversityIspartaTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Physiology and BiophysicsWeill Cornell Medical College in Qatar, Qatar FoundationDohaQatar

Personalised recommendations