Advertisement

Effect of Photobiomodulation by Red and Infrared Laser Radiation on Motility of Paramecium caudatum

  • N. N. PetrishchevEmail author
  • G. V. Papayan
  • L. V. Chistyakova
  • A. V. Struy
  • D. R. Faizullina
Comparative and Ontogenic Physiology
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

To evaluate the effects of photobiomodulation, we used laser devices with wavelengths of 662 nm (ALOD-01; Alcom Medica, Russia) and 808 nm (ALPH-01 Diolan; NPP VOLO, Russia) and an energy density of 1–15 J/cm2. The experiments were carried out on the infusoria Paramecium caudatum (Alveolata: Ciliophora: Oligohymenophora: Peniculia). The results were evaluated before as well as 5, 10, 30, 60 min and 24 h after irradiation. 5 min after exposure to red light (662 nm), motor activity of P. caudatum increased vs. control and then decreased within 60 minutes. 24 h after irradiation at an energy density of 15 J/cm2, the speed of P. caudatum was 52% of the initial (73% in the control) (p < 0.05). Immediately since exposure to infrared radiation (808 nm) and during the first hour, motor activity tended to decrease. 24 h later, the speed decrement was significantly less than in the control. The data obtained indicate that changes in the functional state of P. caudatum arise immediately after irradiation and persist for a long time, leading either to an increased (808 nm) or a decreased (662 nm) resistance at the same values of a radiation energy density. The peculiarities of the P. caudatum response to red vs. infrared radiation appear to be due to the differences between primary photoacceptors and appropriate signaling pathways, which come into action immediately upon their excitation.

Key words

Paramecium caudatum low-level laser therapy photobiomodulation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Chow, R.T., Dose dilemmas in low level laser therapy–the effects of different paradigms and historical perspectives, Laser Therapy, 2000, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 102–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Conlan, M.J., Rapley, J.W., and Cobb, C.M., Biostimulation of wound healing by low-energy laser irradiation, a review, J. Clin. Periodontol., 1996, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 492–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Oron, U.Y.T., Oron, A., Mordechovitz, D., Shofti, R., Hayam, G., Dror, U., Gepstein, L., Wolf, T., Haudenschild, C., and Haim, S.B., Lowenergy laser irradiation reduces formation of scar tissue after myocardial infarction in rats and dogs, Circulation, 2001, no. 103, pp. 296–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Freitas, L.F. and Hamblin, M.R., Proposed mechanisms of photobiomodulation or low-level light therapy, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron., 2016, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lubart, R., Lavi, R., Friedmann, H., and Rochkind, S., Photochemistry and photobiology of light absorption by living cells, Photomed. Laser Surg., 2006, no. 24, pp. 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bolton, P., Young, S., and Dyson, M., Macrophage responsiveness to light therapy with varying power and energy densities, Laser Ther., 1991, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karu, T.I. and Kolyakov, S.F., Exact action spectra for cellular responses relevant to phototherapy, Photomed. Laser Surg., 2005, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 355–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lanzafame, R.J., Stadler, I., Kurtz, A.F., Connelly, R., Peter, T.A., Timothy, P.A., Brondon, P., and Olson, D., Reciprocity of exposure time and irradiance on energy density during photoradiation on wound healing in a murine pressure ulcer model, Lasers Surg. Med., 2007, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 534–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Passarella, S. and Karu, T., Absorption of monochromatic and narrow band radiation in the visible and near IR by both mitochondrial and non-mitochondrial photoacceptors results in photobiomodulation, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B, 2014, vol. 140, pp. 344–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karu, T.I., Afanasyeva, N.I. Kolyakov, S.F., Pyatibrat, L.V., and Welser, L., Changes in absorbance of monolayer of living cells induced by laser radiation at 633, 670, and 820 nm, IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron., 2001, vol. 7, pp. 982–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lane, N., Cell biology: power games, Nature, 2006, vol. 443, pp. 901–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shiva, S. and Gladwin, M.T., Shining a light on tissue NO stores: near infrared release of NO from nitrite and nitrosylated hemes, J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol., 2009, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hardie, R.C., Photosensitive TRPs, Mammalian Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) Cation Channels, Nilius, B. and Flockerzi, V., Eds., Switzerland, 2014, pp. 795–826.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mylonakis, E., Ausubel, F.M., Gilmore, M., and Casadeval, A., Recent Advances on Model Hosts, New York, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhou, M., Xia, H., Xu, Y., Xin, N., Liu, J., and Zhang, S., Anesthetic action of volatile anesthetics by using Paramecium as a model, J. Huazhong Univ. Sci. Technol. Med. Sci., 2012, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 410–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saib, A., Berrebbah, H., Berredjem, M., and Djebara, M.R., Cytotoxic study of three derivatives amidophosphonates on alternative cellular model: Paramecium tetraurelia, Toxicol. Res., 2014, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 395–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Petrishchev, N.N., Yantareva, L.I., and Fokin, S.I., Dependence of the effect of infrared laser radiation on power flux density and functional state of a biological object (infusoria Spirostomum ambiguum), Lazer Med., 2005, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 43–48.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Protisty: rukovodstvo po zoologii (Protists: Handbook of Zoology), Alimov, A.F., Ed., St. Petersburg, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Amaroli, A., Ravera, S., Parker, S., Panfoli, I., Benedicenti, A., and Benedicenti, S., Effect of 808 nm diode laser on swimming behavior, food vacuole formation and endogenous ATP production of Paramecium primaurelia (Protozoa), Photochem. Photobiol., 2015, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 1150–1155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Svidersky, V.L., Lobzin, Yu.V., Gorelkin, V.S., and Plotnikova, S.I., Motor activity of infusoria: theoretical and practical aspects, Zh. Evol. Biokhim. Fiziol., 2007, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 379–390.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amaroli, A., Benedicenti, A., Ferrando, S., Parker, S., Selting, W., Gallus, L., and Benedicenti, S., Photobiomodulation by infrared diode laser: effects on intracellular calcium concentration and nitric oxide production of Paramecium, Photochem. Photobiol., 2016, vol. 91, no. 5, pp. 854–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tawada, K. and Oosawa, F., Responses of Paramecium to temperature change, J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 1972, vol. 19, pp. 53–57.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tuchin, V., Tissue optics and photonics: light–tissue interaction, J. Biomed. Photonics Eng., 2015, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 98–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Malvin, G.M., Cecava, N., and Nelin, L.D., Nitric oxide production and thermoregulation in Paramecium caudatum, Acta Protozool., 2003, vol. 42, pp. 259–267.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roszer, T., The Biology of Subcellular Nitric Oxide, The Netherlands, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. N. Petrishchev
    • 1
    Email author
  • G. V. Papayan
    • 1
  • L. V. Chistyakova
    • 2
  • A. V. Struy
    • 1
  • D. R. Faizullina
    • 1
  1. 1.Pavlov First St. Petersburg State Medical UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia
  2. 2.St. Petersburg State UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations