The connection with photoexcitation has led to interest in a group of blue-sensitive photoreceptive proteins known as cryptochromes (figure 5a). Those molecules, which are quite different from the usual proteins involved in vision, are often involved in timing and biological rhythms in plants and animals and were recently shown to cue the mass coral spawnings on the Great Barrier Reef. They are attractive candidates for magnetoreceptors because they are found in the eyes of magnetoreceptive birds during migration and have a chromophore that forms radical pairs after photoexcitation. In the proposed reaction, an electron is donated to the chromophore FAD (flavin adenine dinucleotide) from one of the tryptophan amino acids in the protein (figure 5b).
Surprisingly, the best evidence that cryptochromes function in magnetoreception has come from plants. Intrigued by persistent but controversial reports of weak magnetic fields affecting plant growth, a group of researchers led by Margaret Ahmad studied the growth of the small mustard plant Arabidopsis thaliana, the botanists' equivalent of the laboratory rat. Plants raised in a magnetic field of 500 µT grew much more slowly than did control plants raised in the 50-µT geomagnetic field, but the inhibitory effect of the field occurred only when the plants were raised under blue light (the color that cryptochromes detect). Similar experiments in darkness, in red light, and with mutant plants that had no cryptochrome gene showed no growth inhibition in either field. The finding demonstrated that cryptochrome mediates a field-affected process, though not necessarily that cryptochrome itself mediates the magnetic effect.
The photoexcitation possibility has inspired a large number of experiments—mostly performed by Wolfgang Wiltschko, Roswitha Wiltschko, and John Phillips—that have examined animals' magnetic orientation behavior under different wavelengths of light, on the assumption that the candidate molecules are in the visual system. The orientation behavior of many species has been found to change under specific wavelengths and intensities, but the results have been bewildering, with different intensities and wavelengths of lights leading to orientation in the correct direction in Earth's field, to random movements, or to orientation in the wrong direction. The data are difficult to interpret, since they do not fit the absorption spectra of any known photoreceptive molecule. An examination of the experiments on birds reached only two general conclusions: Magnetic orientation is disrupted when animals are exposed to light levels above 1012 photons/(s·cm2) or to light at wavelengths greater than 565 nm (figure 6). Because dimmer, blue light occurs after sunset, the time when the birds begin to migrate, it is possible that the ambient light simply signals the birds that it is time to begin orienting in the appropriate migratory direction rather than affecting any compass mechanism (twilight has a visible irradiance less than 1012 photons/(s·cm2) and is, of course, blue). However, the pattern of responses is also consistent with the cryptochrome hypothesis because long-wavelength light temporarily deactivates the molecule.
A frequency of 1.315 MHz matches the electron spin resonance in the geomagnetic field. Hence, RF fields of that frequency should interfere with the radical-pair mechanism. In 2005 Peter Thalau and his colleagues found that an oscillating magnetic field of that frequency, with an intensity of 0.48 µT, disrupted the orientation of the European robin. That followed work by Ritz that showed that a 7-MHz field (0.47 µT) and RF noise (0.085 µT at 0.1–10 MHz) both disrupted orientation in the same animal. But in each case, the effect might be attributable to the induced electric field. Both Ritz and Thalau found that the RF fields did not disrupt magnetic orientation when the oscillating field was parallel to the geomagnetic field, which appears to be a good control for nonspecific effects. One caveat, however, is that RF experiments on known radical-pair reactions found effects regardless of how the RF field was aligned relative to the ambient field.
Where next?
Biological systems often make ingenious use of physical principles, and magnetoreception appears to be no exception. All three proposed mechanisms can, in principle, get useful information from the weak geomagnetic field. However, with the exception of magnetotactic bacteria, no mechanism has been conclusively established.
Electromagnetic induction is based on straightforward principles and appears to be within the capabilities of sharks and rays, but its use has not been directly demonstrated. The hypotheses based on ferrimagnetic minerals have the best morphological evidence and a solid theoretical background. The most recent work in homing pigeons also appears to get past the concern that the magnetic minerals are just contaminants.
The radical-pair mechanism is fascinating but enigmatic. The conditions for its success are extremely strict. However, evolution has built some equally improbable chemical factories, including the photosynthesis reaction center, which can split water molecules using visible light. The biggest hurdle for the radical-pair mechanism is not theoretical but how to find the actual molecules involved. Through no fault of the investigators, the current evidence for the radical-pair hypothesis is maddeningly circumstantial. Cryptochrome is photosensitive, is found in migratory birds, and forms radical pairs, but it has no direct links to magnetoreception. The RF data are certainly suggestive, but they will be more so if future experiments reveal an action spectrum in which some, but not all, frequencies have an effect. In theory, such specificity should exist.
Magnetoreception research began with behavioral studies on relatively large migratory animals, but those animals may not be ideal for understanding the mechanism. It may be better to continue the work with zebrafish or fruit flies, two magnetoreceptive species that are also model systems for studying cellular and molecular processes. Regardless of the experimental system used, the solution to the long-standing mystery of magnetoreception in animals will almost certainly come from a fascinating interplay of biology and physics.
We thank Rainer Johnsen for a critical reading of earlier versions of this manuscript and for helpful discussions. The research was supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation (IOB-0444674 to Johnsen; IOS-0718991 to Lohmann).
Sönke Johnsen is an associate professor of biology at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. Ken Lohmann is a professor of biology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.