# WEB-047 — 3.6 GHz: mosquito development and nutritional susceptibility

Why this matters
Wildlife exposure questions need experiments that measure both the field and the organism’s response. This study did that for mosquito larvae, including larvae on a poorer diet. It found development changes whose interpretation depended on exposure intensity and heating.

Id: WEB-047

Author: De Borre et al.

Full Authors: Eline De Borre; Charles De Massia; Matthieu N Boone; Pie Müller; Arno Thielens

Year: 2025

Title: Exposure to 5G-NR electromagnetic fields affects larval development of Aedes aegypti mosquito

Journal: Scientific reports

Citation: Eline De Borre; Charles De Massia; Matthieu N Boone; Pie Müller; Arno Thielens. Exposure to 5G-NR electromagnetic fields affects larval development of Aedes aegypti mosquito. Scientific reports. 2025. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-32816-y.

Doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-32816-y

Pmid: 41449204

Topic: Insect development; Nutritional susceptibility; Contemporary wireless ecology

Verification Group: Original text reviewed

Record Role: Original text reviewed

Featured: False

Exposure: 3.6 GHz continuous wave for 5 days; 46.2 or 182.6 V/m. Reported representative absorbed power 1.2 or 18.7 µW; dose varied with larval size and position.

Design: Aedes aegypti larvae; two feeding regimes, sham controls, chamber characterisation and anatomical dosimetry; 3360 larvae across experiments.

Finding: Development slowed at the lower exposure, particularly with poorer nutrition; stronger exposure caused dielectric heating and altered development timing/adult size.

Statistics: See the original results; effect sizes were not independently recalculated.

Boundary: Despite the title’s 5G-NR wording, methods used continuous wave. Insect dose metrics cannot be compared directly with human local-SAR limits. Diet, water temperature and developmental stage affect interpretation.

Related: Ghent insect-dosimetry programme; not a study of satellite exposure.

Protection Question: Which exposure conditions reproduce this finding, and what would establish its relevance beyond the experimental model?

Access: Original methods/results and interpretation reviewed; raw data and supplements were not independently audited.

Locator: Original methods and results

Notice: Linked Europe PMC/PubMed notice fields checked 21 October 2026; no correction/retraction surfaced for this record. Publisher/citation screening is not exhaustive.

Funding: See original disclosure; funding details were not established in this check.

Conflicts: Authors report no competing interests/conflicts; declaration checked, not independently audited.

Source Url: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-32816-y

Retrieval Links: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-32816-y | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41449204/ | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12828023/

Verification Date: 2026-10-21

Discovery Id: TARGETED-20261021-20

Technology Tracks: 5g

Technology Connection: Relevant carrier-frequency research; the record distinguishes actual 5G modulation from other laboratory waveforms.

Publication Type: Original journal research

Study Setting: Wildlife

Browse Categories: environment