A strategy to reduce the use of fish in acute ecotoxicity testing of new chemical substances notified in the European Union

Jeram, Sonja; Sintes, Juan M. Riego; Halder, Marlies; Fentanes, J. Baraibar; Sokull-Klüttgen, Birgit; Hutchinson, Thomas H.

doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2005.04.005

Cited by 67 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It takes into consideration that often only the lowest value of the acute toxicity in species of three trophic levels (daphnia, algae, fish), i.e. the most sensitive test species, is considered for regulatory purposes and for about 80% of the substances, fish is not the most sensitive test species (Weyers et al, 2000, Hutchinson et al, 2003, Jeram et al, 2005. The threshold approach was originally described as threshold/step-down approach by Hutchinson et al (2003) for pharmaceuticals, then applied to chemicals and other substances (Jeram et al, 2005;Hoekzema et al, 2006).…”

Section: B) Threshold Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment

2009

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: B) Threshold Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment

2009

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, regarding cosmetics and the use of chemicals tested under REACH, it should be borne in mind that only substances produced/imported in volumes >10 t are tested in fish. the Threshold Approach (= Upper Threshold Concentration [UTC] stepdown approach, (Jeram et al, 2005)) for acute aquatic toxicity testing is based on a retrospective analysis of data in the New Chemicals Database carried out by ECVAM and the ECB. Its validity for the reduction of the numbers of fish was endorsed by ESAC in 2006.…”

Section: Consideration 5: Regulatory Acceptance Is (Once Again) the Bmentioning

confidence: 99%

Food for thought ... on alternative methods for cosmetics safety testing

Hartung

2008

ALTEX

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In 2008, the NC3Rs began a dedicated program of work in the area of ecotoxicology, supported by a working group of experts in the field across academia, government agencies (including regulators), contract research organizations, and industry (principally agrochemicals, personal care products, and petrochemicals). The projects initiated within the NC3Rs Ecotoxicology Working Group over the past 6 y have largely focused on reducing the use of fish in the safety assessment of industrial chemicals and agrochemicals (Creton et al 2010;Creton et al 2013;Burden et al 2014;Creton et al 2014), and build on the earlier 3Rs-related work of some members of the group (Douglas et al 1986;Hutchinson et al 2003;Jeram et al 2005). This paper summarizes discussions held at a recent workshop of the NC3Rs Ecotoxicology Working Group, which considered the future of animal use in the ecotoxicity testing required for product or substance registration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing the 3Rs in regulatory ecotoxicology: A pragmatic cross‐sector approach

Burden

Benstead

Clook

et al. 2015

Integr Environ Assess Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ecotoxicity testing of chemicals for prospective environmental safety assessment is an area in which a high number of vertebrates are used across a variety of industry sectors. Refining, reducing, and replacing the use of animals such as fish, birds, and amphibians for this purpose addresses the ethical concerns and the increasing legislative requirements to consider alternative test methods. Members of the UK-based National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) Ecotoxicology Working Group, consisting of representatives from academia, government organizations, and industry, have worked together over the past 6 y to provide evidence bases to support and advance the application of the 3Rs in regulatory ecotoxicity testing. The group recently held a workshop to identify the areas of testing, demands, and drivers that will have an impact on the future of animal use in regulatory ecotoxicology. As a result of these discussions, we have developed a pragmatic approach to prioritize and realistically address key opportunity areas, to enable progress toward the vision of a reduced reliance on the use of animals in this area of testing. This paper summarizes the findings of this exercise and proposes a pragmatic strategy toward our key long-term goals-the incorporation of reliable alternatives to whole-organism testing into regulations and guidance, and a culture shift toward reduced reliance on vertebrate toxicity testing in routine environmental safety assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2016;12:417-421. © 2015 SETAC

show abstract

A strategy to reduce the use of fish in acute ecotoxicity testing of new chemical substances notified in the European Union

Cited by 67 publications

References 10 publications

Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment

Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment

Food for thought ... on alternative methods for cosmetics safety testing

Advancing the 3Rs in regulatory ecotoxicology: A pragmatic cross‐sector approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About