Journal: Integrative Physiology, 2020, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 231–241
DOI: 10.33910/2687-1270-2020-1-3-231-241
Open access: CC BY-NC 4.0 (Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia)
Institutions: Pavlov Institute of Physiology, Russian Academy of Sciences; Aires Human Genome Research Foundation
Authors: N.G. Lopatina, T.G. Zachepilo, N.A. Dyuzhikova, N.G. Kamyshev, S.V. Surma, I.N. Serov, B.F. Shchegolev
Overview
This Pavlov Institute study used the honeybee (Apis mellifera) to assess how EMF resonators (Aires Defender Pro), WiFi router emissions, and magnetic field changes (weakened or enhanced) affect two distinct memory processes: short-term memory (STM, tested 1 minute after conditioning) and long-term memory (LTM, tested 180 minutes after conditioning). The proboscis extension reflex (PER) conditioning paradigm — a classical honeybee learning assay — was used throughout.
Experimental Design
Two separate experimental series were run. The first tested Aires Defender Pro resonators (6 plates arranged in a Faraday cage) in three conditions: resonators alone, resonators + WiFi router (LinkSys E1200, 2.4 GHz), and WiFi router alone. The second tested magnetic field manipulation: weakened field (0.1 µT inside a shielded cylinder, vs. 45 µT ambient) and enhanced field (200 µT via ring magnets) over 12-hour dark-phase exposures.
Results — EMF Resonator Effects
Short-Term Memory and Food Excitability
Both resonators alone and resonators + WiFi router reduced food excitability and short-term memory retention, comparable to WiFi router alone. This finding indicates that the resonator's modified electromagnetic output affects the electrical reverberations underlying short-term memory consolidation in bees — a biologically active effect at this timescale.
Long-Term Memory — Key Protective Finding
Resonators alone had no negative effect on long-term memory — 88% of bees in both the resonator-exposed and control groups retained the conditioned response at 180 minutes. Notably, the WiFi router alone produced a paradoxical stimulating effect on LTM (above-control retention rates). When resonators were combined with the WiFi router, LTM returned to normal control levels — the resonators cancelled the WiFi-induced LTM disruption and brought memory function back to baseline.
The authors note this LTM-protective pattern is consistent with findings in rats: in Dyuzhikova et al. (2018), resonators similarly blocked WiFi-caused LTM disruption in rat bone marrow and nervous system studies.
Mechanistic Explanation
The paper provides an explicit mechanistic framework for the divergence between STM and LTM findings: short-term memory is based on electrical reverberations in closed neural circuits (direct EM-sensitive process), while long-term memory requires genome-level protein synthesis and synaptic remodeling (a slower, less directly EM-modulated process). The resonator modifies the electromagnetic environment in ways that influence the electrically-based STM process, while protecting the genomic LTM consolidation process against WiFi disruption.
Results — Magnetic Field Effects
Weakened magnetic field (0.1 µT) significantly suppressed both short-term and long-term memory. Enhanced magnetic field (200 µT) had an opposite effect on STM (stimulating) but suppressed LTM — demonstrating the high sensitivity of honeybee cognition to magnetic field changes at both timescales. The paper notes this is the first study to demonstrate magnetic field effects on bee conditioning/memory. These findings are independent of the Aires device effects.
Species Context
The authors cite Thielens et al. (2018) on frequency-dependent resonant absorption in insects: at 2.4 GHz, absorption varies significantly with body size relative to wavelength. The honeybee body (~2 cm) has different resonant absorption characteristics from mammalian subjects, which may partly explain why short-term memory effects in bees differ from the LTM-protective pattern observed in rat studies at the same frequency.
Conclusions
The study demonstrates that both EMF resonators and magnetic field changes affect honeybee cognition, with the magnitude and direction of effects varying by memory phase (STM vs. LTM). The core finding relevant to Aires technology is the long-term memory result: resonators prevent WiFi-induced LTM disruption and return memory to baseline — consistent across bee and rat models. The paper concludes that biological testing of EMF protection devices on multiple timescales and species is essential, as effects differ by memory type and model organism.
Study Details
Conducted in Koltusy, Leningrad Region, Russia, summer 2018 (June–August), on worker bees aged 7–30 days. Statistical analysis: Mann-Whitney and χ² tests. Each experimental series repeated 3–7 times.