UV Effects on Animals - i115srv2.vu-wien.ac.ati115srv2.vu-wien.ac.at/.../Lecture_Schauberger/animals_schauberger.pdf · G. Schauberger | Medical Physics & Biostatistics UV Effects

G. Schauberger | Medical Physics & Biostatistics

UV Effects on Animals:Risks of UV Exposure in Animals

G. Schauberger

Medical Physics and BiostatisticsDepartment of Biomedical SciencesUniversity of Veterinary Medicine Vienna

COST 726 – Training School Long term changes and climatology of biologically effective UV radiation over EuropeOctober 6, 2008


Content

• Ambient dose

• Skin dose of animals

• Biological effects– Positive effects: Vitamin D synthesis– Skin– Eye– Ecosystem


Radiation path: Sun – Earth - AnimalSun

Earth surface

Skin surface

Animal

Atmosphere


Sun

Earth surface

Ozone / Aerosols

Cloude cover

Annual and daily variation

Sea level

Radiation path: Sun – Earth


Earth surface - ambient UV radiation

Skin surface - skin dose of animals

Protection: hair coat, vegetation and water

Geometry of the skin surface

Behaviour: Exposure time

Skin type ?

Radiation path: Earth - Animal


Solar spectrum

UV VIS

IR


Biologically effective radiation

0.0001

0.0010

0.0100

0.1000

1.0000

Rel

ativ

e s p

ekt ra

l act

ion

spe c

trum

0.0001

0.0010

0.0100

0.1000

1.0000

Spe

ktra

l ir r

adia

nce

(W/m

² nm

)

300 320 340 360 380 400Wave length (nm)

Erythema Global radiation COLIPA

Erythemal irradiance


Sun

Earth surface

Ozone / Aerosols

Cloude cover

Annual and daily variation

Sea level

Radiation path: Sun – Earth


Ozone


UV radiation / Ozone

less Ozone

mor

eU

V


0

10

20

30

40

50

der s

olar

en U

V-S t

rah l

ung

(SE D

)Ta

g esd

o sis

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330 360Zeit (Tage des Jahres)

Wien - gemessenWien - wolkenlos (Modell)

1997

Annual and daily variationD

aily

dos

e (S

ED

)

Time (JD)







Skin type ?

Radiation path: Earth - Animal


83 MED (49.7%)

60 MED (36.1%)

22 MED (13.3%)

2 MED (0.9%)

OccupationLeisure timeHolidaySolaria

Unprotected Area

UV exposure of the Austrian population

Exposure time


Geometry of the UV radiation field

S0

H0G0

S0 + H0 = G0


Dosimeter

Geometry of the receiving surface


Geometry of the human head






Skin type ?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

Rel

ativ

e f re

quen

cy (

%)

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Inclination

Total headUnprotected sunexposed areas


UV-Albedo and inclinde surfaces

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Rel

ativ

e irr

adia

nce

-90 -60 -30 0 30 60 90Inclination

UV Albedo = 80%

UV Albedo =5%


Transmission of the hair coat

0102030405060708090

100

Tran

smis

sio n

[%

]

0 50 100 150 200Hair density [cm-2]

5

2

10 Sun

pro

tect

ion

fact

or

[ ]


Vegetation: Gras and Trees

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Rel

ativ

e h e

igh t

[]

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0Relative irradiance []

TreeGrass


Spectral Transmission of Water

0102030405060708090

100

Spe

ctra

le T

rans

mis

sion

[%

]

300 400 500 600 700Wavelength [nm]

O

C


Biological-effective Irradiance

10-8

10-7

10-6

10-5

10-4

10-3

DN

A w

eig h

ted

Irrad

ianc

e [W

/ m

² nm

]

290 300 310 320 330 340Wavelength [nm]

OceanCoast

0 m

5 m

10 m

20 m

40 m2 m

5 m

10 m


Biological effects: Skin and Eye

• Vitamin D synthesis

• Erythma• Photosensibilisation• Skin tumor• Cancer eye• Cataract


Dose relationship

deterministicfunctional relationship

(eg erythem, cerato-conjunctivitis, vitamin D synthesis )

stochasticchange of the probability (sg skin cancer)


Vitamin D Synthesis


UV Exposure of Zoo Animals60% of European zoos are using

artificial UV sources

of that

48% only for treating reptiles52% also for mammals and avians


Positive UV effects ?


Erythema


Erythema of pigs


Erythema

MED (J/m²)

Horse 450Pig 121 - 347Cattle 100


Dose Response Function DRF

0.5

maxlogD - logD

-k

ΔEIΔEI =1 + e

ΔEI Difference of the red colour value before and after UV exposure

D UV-Dose (J/m²)ΔEImaxPlateau of the dose-response-

function (maximum value of the erythema index EI

D0,5 Dose of the midpoint of the functionk Slope of the logit function at the

midpoint


DRF 2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Ery

them

a in

dex

1E-01 1 10Dose (MED)

midpoint

plateau

slope


Time course of the UVB erythema

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Ery

them

a in

dex

EI

0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144Time after UVB exposure (h)

hugh doses D > 7 MEDmedium doses 1 MED < D < 7 MEDlow doses D < 1 MED

visibility of the erythema EI > 2.5

UVB


Time course of the UVC erythema

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Eryt

h em

a in

dex

EI

0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132 144Time after UVB exposure (h)

medium doses 1 MED < D < 7 MEDlow doses D < 1 MED

visibility of the erythema

UVC


Photosensibilisation

• Feed: Sheep, pig, sometimes cattle, goat, rarely horse

• Drugs:Phenothiacin, Trypoflavin, Tetracycline, Mansonil and Sulphonamide and Olaquindox- Pigs, fish and farmer


Photosensibilisation


Skin cancer SC• Squamous cell carcinoma SCC• Basal cell carcinoma BCC

• Malignant melanoma

unlikely to metastasize

(spread to otherparts of the body).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Squamous_Cell_Carcinoma.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/80/Basaliom1.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/54/WB032021.JPG


Cancer Eye

Squamous cell carcinoma

Skin cancer


Dose-Response function of SC

I = Da Ab

I Incidence per year (diseases per 100 000 inhabitants)D annual UV dose (UV exposition)A age

a ≈ 2

b ≈ 5


Horse - Cancer Eye I

Variable Range Odds Ratio

Latitude 30-45°N .79

Longitude 76-112°E 1.13

Altitude (ft) 50-5000 1.12

Solar radiation (Langley) 302-442 1.27

Dugan et al., 1991


Horse - Cancer Eye II

Variable Range Odds RatioBreed Mixed Breed 3.1

Pinto 4.5

Apaloosa 7.6

Draft breed 21.6

Colour grey 6.7creamello 13.7

white 26.7Dugan et al., 1991


Cattle - Cancer EyeVariable Range Odds RatioDuration of sunshine (h/a) 1800 - 2299 1.0

2300 - 2599 1.12600 -2899 1.82900 - 3499 2.5

Sea level (ft) bis 1999 1.02000 - 2999 2.83000 - 3999 4.64000 - 9200 3.2

Cloud index 0.40 - 0.49 1.00.50 - 0.59 3.40.60 - 0.69 2.9

Anderson und Badzioch, 1991


SC in animalsSpecies Breed Relative Risk

All skin tumors Malignant tumors

Bovine Hereford 1.6 4.3Equine Crossbreeds 1.3 -Feline - - -Canine Kerry blue terrier 4.4

Norwegian elkhound 2.7

Basset hound 2.6

Boxer 2.4 3.7

Weimaraner 2.2

Scottish terrier 2.1 3.8Priester 1973


Fish - Skin LesionsSpecies AuthorChinook salmon Arctic char

Brockebank and Armstrong (1994)

Hammerhead shark Lowe and Goodman-Lowe (1996)

Northern Anchovy Pacific Mackerel

Hunter et al. (1979)

Rainbow Trout Dunbar (1959) Bullock and Couts (1985)

Salmon McArdle and Bullock (1987), Kaweewatand Hofer (1997), Rodger (1991)

Koi carp Bullock et al. (1983)


Eye

Species / disease Author

Cattle - infectious keratoconjunctivities

Slatter et al. (1982), Kopecky et al. (1980)

Fish - cataract Roberts (1989), Allison (1962)


Ecosystem

• Food chain: 30% of protein is coming from the sea

• Carbon: 10% reduction in plankton equal to the anthropogenic CO2-source

• Variety of species: Increase of UV exposure might reduce the number of species


Thank you for your attention !

UV Effects on Animals - i115srv2.vu-wien.ac.ati115srv2.vu-wien.ac.at/.../Lecture_Schauberger/animals_schauberger.pdf · G. Schauberger | Medical Physics & Biostatistics UV Effects

Documents

UV Effects on Animals - i115srv2.vu-wien.ac.ati115srv2.vu-wien.ac.at/.../Lecture_Schauberger/animals_schauberger.pdf · G. Schauberger | Medical Physics & Biostatistics UV Effects