What can be learnt from an ecotoxicity database in the framework of the REACh regulation?

Science of the Total Environment

Volumn 409, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 489-494

  Henegar, Adina ^a   Mombelli, Enrico ^a   Pandard, Pascal ^a   Péry, Alexandre R R ^a  

^a INSTITUT NATIONAL DE L ENVIRONNEMENT INDUSTRIEL ET DES RISQUES INERIS   (France)

Author keywords

Aquatic ecotoxicity; Interspecies sensitivity; Physicochemical properties; Risk assessment; Toxicity tests database

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE METHODS; AROMATIC ETHER; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CORRECTION FACTORS; DAPHNIA; DATA SELECTION; ECOTOXICITY; ECOTOXICITY DATA; ECOTOXICOLOGICAL; EXPERIMENTAL TEST; EXPERIMENTAL TESTING; HISTORICAL DATA; INTERSPECIES SENSITIVITY; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTY; RELATIVE SENSITIVITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TESTING STRATEGIES; TOXICITY TESTS DATABASE; TROPHIC LEVEL;

ALGAE; ASTATINE; CHEMICALS; DATA REDUCTION; DATABASE SYSTEMS; ETHERS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SAFETY FACTOR; SAFETY TESTING; TOXICITY;

RISK ASSESSMENT;

ETHER;

DATABASE; ECOTOXICOLOGY; EUROPEAN UNION; NUMERICAL MODEL; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTY; REGULATORY FRAMEWORK; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TOXICITY TEST; TROPHIC LEVEL;

ALGA; AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT; ARTICLE; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DAPHNIA; ECOTOXICITY; ECOTOXICOLOGY; FISH; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SPECIES DIFFERENCE; TOXICITY TESTING;

ANIMALS; CHLOROPHYTA; DAPHNIA; DATABASES AS TOPIC; ECOTOXICOLOGY; EDUCATION; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTANTS; ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION; EUROPEAN UNION; FISHES; FOOD CHAIN; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOXICITY TESTS;

EUROPE; FRANCE;

ALGAE; DAPHNIA;

EID: 78649810280     PISSN: 00489697     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.10.028     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. EC.European Commission Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 18 August 1967 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Off J Eur Communities 1967, L96/1.
2. Hoekzema C.C., Murk A.J., van de Waart B.J., van der Hoeven J.C.M., de Roode D.F. Alternative approaches can greatly reduce the number of fish used for acute toxicity testing. Environ Toxicol Chem 2006, 25:1322-1325.
3. Hutchinson T.H., Barrett S., Buzby M., Constable D., Hartmann A., Hayes E., Huggett D., Laenge R., Lillicrap A.D., Straub J.O., Thompson R.S. A strategy to reduce the numbers of fish used in acute ecotoxicity testing of pharmaceuticals. Environ Toxicol Chem 2003, 22:3031-3036.
4. Jeram S., Riego Sintes J.M., Halder M., Baraibar Fentanes J., Sokull-Klüttgen B., Hutchinson T.H. A strategy to reduce the use of fish in acute ecotoxicity testing of new chemical substances notified in the European Union. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2005, 42:218-224.
5. Lewis M.A. Use of freshwater plants for phytotoxicity testing: a review. Environ Pollut 1995, 87:319-336.
6. OECD Fish acute toxicity test, OECD Guideline for the testing of chemicals, Guideline 203 1992, 25 pp, Paris, France. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3343,en_2649_34377_37051368_1_1_1_1,00.html
7. OECD Daphnia sp. acute immobilisation test, OECD Guideline for the testing of chemicals, Guideline 202 2004, 12 pp, Paris, France. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3343,en_2649_34377_37051368_1_1_1_1,00.html.
8. OECD Freshwater alga and cyanobacteria, growth inhibition test, OECD Guideline for the testing of chemicals, Guideline 201 2006, 9 pp, Paris, France. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,3343,en_2649_34377_37051368_1_1_1_1,00.html.
9. OECD (Q)SAR Application Toolbox Version 1.1: Getting started 2008, Paris, France. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/54/0,3343,en_2649_34373_42923638_1_1_1_1,00.html.
10. OECD The threshold approach for acute fish toxicity testing. Draft document 2010, 10 pp, Paris, France. Available at http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,3343,en_2649_34377_1916638_1_1_1_1,00.html.
11. de Roode D., Hoekzema C., de Vries-Buitenweg S., van de Waart B., van der Hoeven J. QSARs in ecotoxicological risk assessment. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2006, 45:24-35.
12. Tremolada P., Finizio A., Villa S., Gaggi C., Vighi M. Quantitative inter-specific chemical activity relationships of pesticides in the aquatic environment. Aquat Tox 2004, 67:87-103.
13. Wei D., Kisuno A., Kameya T., Urano K. A new method for evaluating biological safety of environmental water with algae, daphnia and fish toxicity ranks. Sci Total Environ 2006, 371:383-390.
14. Weininger D. a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to Methodology and Encoding Rules. J Chem Inf Sci 1988, 28:31-36.
15. Weininger D., Weininger A., Weininger J. SMILES 2. Algorithm for generation of unique SMILES notation. J Chem Inf Sci 1989, 29:97-101.
16. Weyers A., Sokull-Klüttgen B., Baraibar Fentanes J., Vollmer G. Acute toxicity data: a comprehensive comparison of results of fish, Daphnia, and algae tests with new substances notified in the European Union. Environ Toxicol Chem 2000, 19:1931-1933.