Is environmental risk assessment possible with the alternatives to acute fish toxicity test? Case study with pharmaceuticals

IF 6 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Marie Mlnaříková, Marek Pípal, Lucie Bláhová, Luděk Bláha
{"title":"Is environmental risk assessment possible with the alternatives to acute fish toxicity test? Case study with pharmaceuticals","authors":"Marie Mlnaříková,&nbsp;Marek Pípal,&nbsp;Lucie Bláhová,&nbsp;Luděk Bláha","doi":"10.1186/s12302-024-01015-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Acute fish toxicity test (AFT) is one of the cornerstones of environmental risk assessment (ERA) of chemicals for the aquatic environment. Despite many efforts to find an alternative able to fully replace the test, there is still lasting pressure from stakeholders for AFT results. </p><h3>Results</h3><p>Here, we present the results of a case study with eight pharmaceuticals from various pharmaceutical groups with different levels of expected toxicity to fish. Selected compounds were tested in two validated alternative tests—fish embryo toxicity test with zebrafish (<i>Danio rerio</i>) (zFET) and in vitro RTgill-W1 assay according to their corresponding OECD guidelines TG 236 and TG 249, respectively. Data for AFT were collected from PubMed and ECOTOX knowledgebase databases, and acute toxicity to fish was further predicted in silico by the ECOSAR program. Predicted environmental risks (risk quotients, RQ, calculated using the exposure data from NORMAN) from both zFET and RTgill-W1 well correlated with the average RQs based on AFT LC50s. The strongest and most significant correlation was observed while comparing the AFT results with the median of combined alternative methods (zFET, RTgill-W1, ECOSAR).</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This proposed approach combining experimental data with modeling could serve as a reliable tool for predictions of environmental risks promoting the 3R alternatives to acute fish toxicity testing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":546,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Sciences Europe","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12302-024-01015-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Sciences Europe","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12302-024-01015-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Acute fish toxicity test (AFT) is one of the cornerstones of environmental risk assessment (ERA) of chemicals for the aquatic environment. Despite many efforts to find an alternative able to fully replace the test, there is still lasting pressure from stakeholders for AFT results.

Results

Here, we present the results of a case study with eight pharmaceuticals from various pharmaceutical groups with different levels of expected toxicity to fish. Selected compounds were tested in two validated alternative tests—fish embryo toxicity test with zebrafish (Danio rerio) (zFET) and in vitro RTgill-W1 assay according to their corresponding OECD guidelines TG 236 and TG 249, respectively. Data for AFT were collected from PubMed and ECOTOX knowledgebase databases, and acute toxicity to fish was further predicted in silico by the ECOSAR program. Predicted environmental risks (risk quotients, RQ, calculated using the exposure data from NORMAN) from both zFET and RTgill-W1 well correlated with the average RQs based on AFT LC50s. The strongest and most significant correlation was observed while comparing the AFT results with the median of combined alternative methods (zFET, RTgill-W1, ECOSAR).

Conclusions

This proposed approach combining experimental data with modeling could serve as a reliable tool for predictions of environmental risks promoting the 3R alternatives to acute fish toxicity testing.

用急性鱼类毒性试验的替代品进行环境风险评估可行吗?药品案例研究
背景急性鱼类毒性试验(AFT)是对水生环境中的化学品进行环境风险评估(ERA)的基石之一。尽管为找到一种能够完全取代该试验的替代方法做出了许多努力,但利益相关者对急性鱼类毒性试验结果的压力仍然持续存在。结果在此,我们介绍了一项案例研究的结果,研究对象是来自不同制药集团、对鱼类具有不同程度预期毒性的八种药物。根据相应的 OECD 指南 TG 236 和 TG 249,对选定的化合物进行了两种有效替代试验--斑马鱼(Danio rerio)鱼胚胎毒性试验(zFET)和体外 RTgill-W1 试验。从 PubMed 和 ECOTOX 知识库中收集了 AFT 数据,并通过 ECOSAR 程序对鱼类的急性毒性进行了进一步预测。zFET 和 RTgill-W1 预测的环境风险(风险商数,RQ,利用 NORMAN 的暴露数据计算得出)与基于 AFT 半数致死浓度的平均风险商数有很好的相关性。在将 AFT 结果与综合替代方法(zFET、RTgill-W1、ECOSAR)的中位数进行比较时,观察到了最强且最显著的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Sciences Europe
Environmental Sciences Europe Environmental Science-Pollution
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
1.70%
发文量
110
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: ESEU is an international journal, focusing primarily on Europe, with a broad scope covering all aspects of environmental sciences, including the main topic regulation. ESEU will discuss the entanglement between environmental sciences and regulation because, in recent years, there have been misunderstandings and even disagreement between stakeholders in these two areas. ESEU will help to improve the comprehension of issues between environmental sciences and regulation. ESEU will be an outlet from the German-speaking (DACH) countries to Europe and an inlet from Europe to the DACH countries regarding environmental sciences and regulation. Moreover, ESEU will facilitate the exchange of ideas and interaction between Europe and the DACH countries regarding environmental regulatory issues. Although Europe is at the center of ESEU, the journal will not exclude the rest of the world, because regulatory issues pertaining to environmental sciences can be fully seen only from a global perspective.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信