Literature DB >> 27503632

How we can make ecotoxicology more valuable to environmental protection.

M L Hanson1, B A Wolff2, J W Green3, M Kivi4, G H Panter5, M St J Warne6, M Ågerstrand7, J P Sumpter8.   

Abstract

There is increasing awareness that the value of peer-reviewed scientific literature is not consistent, resulting in a growing desire to improve the practice and reporting of studies. This is especially important in the field of ecotoxicology, where regulatory decisions can be partly based on data from the peer-reviewed literature, with wide-reaching implications for environmental protection. Our objective is to improve the reporting of ecotoxicology studies so that they can be appropriately utilized in a fair and transparent fashion, based on their reliability and relevance. We propose a series of nine reporting requirements, followed by a set of recommendations for adoption by the ecotoxicology community. These reporting requirements will provide clarity on the the test chemical, experimental design and conditions, chemical identification, test organisms, exposure confirmation, measurable endpoints, how data are presented, data availability and statistical analysis. Providing these specific details will allow for a fuller assessment of the reliability and relevance of the studies, including limitations. Recommendations for the implementation of these reporting requirements are provided herein for practitioners, journals, reviewers, regulators, stakeholders, funders, and professional societies. If applied, our recommendations will improve the quality of ecotoxicology studies and their value to environmental protection.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Peer review; Publications; Quality; Relevance; Reliability; Reporting recommendations; Risk assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27503632     DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.160

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Total Environ        ISSN: 0048-9697            Impact factor:   7.963


  9 in total

Review 1.  Scientific integrity issues in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: Improving research reproducibility, credibility, and transparency.

Authors:  Christopher A Mebane; John P Sumpter; Anne Fairbrother; Thomas P Augspurger; Timothy J Canfield; William L Goodfellow; Patrick D Guiney; Anne LeHuray; Lorraine Maltby; David B Mayfield; Michael J McLaughlin; Lisa S Ortego; Tamar Schlekat; Richard P Scroggins; Tim A Verslycke
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 2.992

2.  Future needs and recommendations in the development of species sensitivity distributions: Estimating toxicity thresholds for aquatic ecological communities and assessing impacts of chemical exposures.

Authors:  Scott Belanger; Mace Barron; Peter Craig; Scott Dyer; Malyka Galay-Burgos; Mick Hamer; Stuart Marshall; Leo Posthuma; Sandy Raimondo; Paul Whitehouse
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 2.992

3.  Evidence of citation bias in the pesticide ecotoxicology literature.

Authors:  M L Hanson; L E Deeth; R S Prosser
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 2.823

4.  A Case Study Application of the Aggregate Exposure Pathway (AEP) and Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) Frameworks to Facilitate the Integration of Human Health and Ecological End Points for Cumulative Risk Assessment (CRA).

Authors:  David E Hines; Stephen W Edwards; Rory B Conolly; Annie M Jarabek
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-12-29       Impact factor: 9.028

5.  Coral Ecotoxicological Data Evaluation for the Environmental Safety Assessment of Ultraviolet Filters.

Authors:  Emily E Burns; Iain A Davies
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2021-11-10       Impact factor: 4.218

6.  A call for action: Improve reporting of research studies to increase the scientific basis for regulatory decision-making.

Authors:  Marlene Ågerstrand; Sofie Christiansen; Annika Hanberg; Christina Rudén; Lars Andersson; Sjur Andersen; Henrik Appelgren; Christine Bjørge; Ian Henning Clausen; Dag Markus Eide; Nanna B Hartmann; Trine Husøy; Halldór Pálmar Halldórsson; Marianne van der Hagen; Ellen Ingre-Khans; Adam David Lillicrap; Vibe Meister Beltoft; Anna-Karin Mörk; Mari Murtomaa-Hautala; Elsa Nielsen; Kristín Ólafsdóttir; Jaana Palomäki; Hinni Papponen; Emilie Marie Reiler; Helene Stockmann-Juvala; Tiina Suutari; Henrik Tyle; Anna Beronius
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.446

Review 7.  A Critical Review of the Availability, Reliability, and Ecological Relevance of Arctic Species Toxicity Tests for Use in Environmental Risk Assessment.

Authors:  Rebecca J Eldridge; Benjamin P de Jourdan; Mark L Hanson
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 4.218

8.  Same sensitivity with shorter exposure: behavior as an appropriate parameter to assess metal toxicity.

Authors:  Álvaro Alonso; Alberto Romero-Blanco
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2022-09-16       Impact factor: 2.935

9.  The current knowledge gap on metallothionein mediated metal-detoxification in Elasmobranchs.

Authors:  Rachel Ann Hauser-Davis
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 2.984

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.