EthoCRED:指导报告和评估行为生态毒性研究相关性和可靠性的框架。

IF 11 1区 生物学 Q1 BIOLOGY
Michael G Bertram, Marlene Ågerstrand, Eli S J Thoré, Joel Allen, Sigal Balshine, Jack A Brand, Bryan W Brooks, ZhiChao Dang, Sabine Duquesne, Alex T Ford, Frauke Hoffmann, Henner Hollert, Stefanie Jacob, Werner Kloas, Nils Klüver, Jim Lazorchak, Mariana Ledesma, Gerd Maack, Erin L Macartney, Jake M Martin, Steven D Melvin, Marcus Michelangeli, Silvia Mohr, Stephanie Padilla, Gregory Pyle, Minna Saaristo, René Sahm, Els Smit, Jeffery A Steevens, Sanne van den Berg, Laura E Vossen, Donald Wlodkowic, Bob B M Wong, Michael Ziegler, Tomas Brodin
{"title":"EthoCRED:指导报告和评估行为生态毒性研究相关性和可靠性的框架。","authors":"Michael G Bertram, Marlene Ågerstrand, Eli S J Thoré, Joel Allen, Sigal Balshine, Jack A Brand, Bryan W Brooks, ZhiChao Dang, Sabine Duquesne, Alex T Ford, Frauke Hoffmann, Henner Hollert, Stefanie Jacob, Werner Kloas, Nils Klüver, Jim Lazorchak, Mariana Ledesma, Gerd Maack, Erin L Macartney, Jake M Martin, Steven D Melvin, Marcus Michelangeli, Silvia Mohr, Stephanie Padilla, Gregory Pyle, Minna Saaristo, René Sahm, Els Smit, Jeffery A Steevens, Sanne van den Berg, Laura E Vossen, Donald Wlodkowic, Bob B M Wong, Michael Ziegler, Tomas Brodin","doi":"10.1111/brv.13154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Behavioural analysis has been attracting significant attention as a broad indicator of sub-lethal toxicity and has secured a place as an important subdiscipline in ecotoxicology. Among the most notable characteristics of behavioural research, compared to other established approaches in sub-lethal ecotoxicology (e.g. reproductive and developmental bioassays), are the wide range of study designs being used and the diversity of endpoints considered. At the same time, environmental hazard and risk assessment, which underpins regulatory decisions to protect the environment from potentially harmful chemicals, often recommends that ecotoxicological data be produced following accepted and validated test guidelines. These guidelines typically do not address behavioural changes, meaning that these, often sensitive, effects are not represented in hazard and risk assessments. Here, we propose a new tool, the EthoCRED evaluation method, for assessing the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity data, which considers the unique requirements and challenges encountered in this field. This method and accompanying reporting recommendations are designed to serve as an extension of the \"Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Ecotoxicity Data (CRED)\" project. As such, EthoCRED can both accommodate the wide array of experimental design approaches seen in behavioural ecotoxicology, and could be readily implemented into regulatory frameworks as deemed appropriate by policy makers of different jurisdictions to allow better integration of knowledge gained from behavioural testing into environmental protection. Furthermore, through our reporting recommendations, we aim to improve the reporting of behavioural studies in the peer-reviewed literature, and thereby increase their usefulness to inform chemical regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":133,"journal":{"name":"Biological Reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":11.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EthoCRED: a framework to guide reporting and evaluation of the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity studies.\",\"authors\":\"Michael G Bertram, Marlene Ågerstrand, Eli S J Thoré, Joel Allen, Sigal Balshine, Jack A Brand, Bryan W Brooks, ZhiChao Dang, Sabine Duquesne, Alex T Ford, Frauke Hoffmann, Henner Hollert, Stefanie Jacob, Werner Kloas, Nils Klüver, Jim Lazorchak, Mariana Ledesma, Gerd Maack, Erin L Macartney, Jake M Martin, Steven D Melvin, Marcus Michelangeli, Silvia Mohr, Stephanie Padilla, Gregory Pyle, Minna Saaristo, René Sahm, Els Smit, Jeffery A Steevens, Sanne van den Berg, Laura E Vossen, Donald Wlodkowic, Bob B M Wong, Michael Ziegler, Tomas Brodin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/brv.13154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Behavioural analysis has been attracting significant attention as a broad indicator of sub-lethal toxicity and has secured a place as an important subdiscipline in ecotoxicology. Among the most notable characteristics of behavioural research, compared to other established approaches in sub-lethal ecotoxicology (e.g. reproductive and developmental bioassays), are the wide range of study designs being used and the diversity of endpoints considered. At the same time, environmental hazard and risk assessment, which underpins regulatory decisions to protect the environment from potentially harmful chemicals, often recommends that ecotoxicological data be produced following accepted and validated test guidelines. These guidelines typically do not address behavioural changes, meaning that these, often sensitive, effects are not represented in hazard and risk assessments. Here, we propose a new tool, the EthoCRED evaluation method, for assessing the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity data, which considers the unique requirements and challenges encountered in this field. This method and accompanying reporting recommendations are designed to serve as an extension of the \\\"Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Ecotoxicity Data (CRED)\\\" project. As such, EthoCRED can both accommodate the wide array of experimental design approaches seen in behavioural ecotoxicology, and could be readily implemented into regulatory frameworks as deemed appropriate by policy makers of different jurisdictions to allow better integration of knowledge gained from behavioural testing into environmental protection. Furthermore, through our reporting recommendations, we aim to improve the reporting of behavioural studies in the peer-reviewed literature, and thereby increase their usefulness to inform chemical regulation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biological Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13154\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13154","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

行为分析作为亚致死毒性的一个广泛指标,一直备受关注,并已成为生态毒理学的一个重要分支学科。与亚致死生态毒理学的其他既定方法(如生殖和发育生物测定)相比,行为研究最显著的特点是采用的研究设计范围广泛,考虑的终点也多种多样。同时,环境危害和风险评估是保护环境免受潜在有害化学品危害的监管决策的基础,通常建议按照公认和有效的测试准则来编制生态毒理学数据。这些指南通常不涉及行为变化,这意味着危害和风险评估中无法体现这些通常很敏感的影响。在此,我们提出了一种新的工具--EthoCRED 评估方法,用于评估行为生态毒性数据的相关性和可靠性,该方法考虑到了这一领域的独特要求和所遇到的挑战。该方法和随附的报告建议旨在作为 "生态毒性数据报告和评估标准(CRED)"项目的延伸。因此,EthoCRED 既能适应行为生态毒理学中的各种实验设计方法,又能在不同辖区的政策制定者认为合适的监管框架中随时实施,以便更好地将从行为测试中获得的知识整合到环境保护中。此外,通过我们的报告建议,我们旨在改进同行评审文献中的行为研究报告,从而提高其在化学品监管方面的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
EthoCRED: a framework to guide reporting and evaluation of the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity studies.

Behavioural analysis has been attracting significant attention as a broad indicator of sub-lethal toxicity and has secured a place as an important subdiscipline in ecotoxicology. Among the most notable characteristics of behavioural research, compared to other established approaches in sub-lethal ecotoxicology (e.g. reproductive and developmental bioassays), are the wide range of study designs being used and the diversity of endpoints considered. At the same time, environmental hazard and risk assessment, which underpins regulatory decisions to protect the environment from potentially harmful chemicals, often recommends that ecotoxicological data be produced following accepted and validated test guidelines. These guidelines typically do not address behavioural changes, meaning that these, often sensitive, effects are not represented in hazard and risk assessments. Here, we propose a new tool, the EthoCRED evaluation method, for assessing the relevance and reliability of behavioural ecotoxicity data, which considers the unique requirements and challenges encountered in this field. This method and accompanying reporting recommendations are designed to serve as an extension of the "Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Ecotoxicity Data (CRED)" project. As such, EthoCRED can both accommodate the wide array of experimental design approaches seen in behavioural ecotoxicology, and could be readily implemented into regulatory frameworks as deemed appropriate by policy makers of different jurisdictions to allow better integration of knowledge gained from behavioural testing into environmental protection. Furthermore, through our reporting recommendations, we aim to improve the reporting of behavioural studies in the peer-reviewed literature, and thereby increase their usefulness to inform chemical regulation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biological Reviews
Biological Reviews 生物-生物学
CiteScore
21.30
自引率
2.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biological Reviews is a scientific journal that covers a wide range of topics in the biological sciences. It publishes several review articles per issue, which are aimed at both non-specialist biologists and researchers in the field. The articles are scholarly and include extensive bibliographies. Authors are instructed to be aware of the diverse readership and write their articles accordingly. The reviews in Biological Reviews serve as comprehensive introductions to specific fields, presenting the current state of the art and highlighting gaps in knowledge. Each article can be up to 20,000 words long and includes an abstract, a thorough introduction, and a statement of conclusions. The journal focuses on publishing synthetic reviews, which are based on existing literature and address important biological questions. These reviews are interesting to a broad readership and are timely, often related to fast-moving fields or new discoveries. A key aspect of a synthetic review is that it goes beyond simply compiling information and instead analyzes the collected data to create a new theoretical or conceptual framework that can significantly impact the field. Biological Reviews is abstracted and indexed in various databases, including Abstracts on Hygiene & Communicable Diseases, Academic Search, AgBiotech News & Information, AgBiotechNet, AGRICOLA Database, GeoRef, Global Health, SCOPUS, Weed Abstracts, and Reaction Citation Index, among others.
×
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