|
|
| Legradi, J. B.; Di Paolo, C.; Kraak, M. H. S.; Van Der Geest, H. G.; Schymanski, E. L.; Williams, A. J.; Dingemans, M. M. L.; Massei, R.; Brack, W.; Cousin, Xavier; Begout, Marie-laure; Van Der Oost, R.; Carion, A.; Suarez-ulloa, V.; Silvestre, F.; Escher, B. I.; Engwall, M.; Nilen, G.; Keiter, S. H.; Pollet, D.; Waldmann, P.; Kienle, C.; Werner, I.; Haigis, A. -c.; Knapen, D.; Vergauwen, L.; Spehr, M.; Schulz, W.; Busch, W.; Leuthold, D.; Scholz, S.; Vom Berg, C. M.; Basu, N.; Murphy, C. A.; Lampert, A.; Kuckelkorn, J.; Grummt, T.; Hollert, H.. |
| The numbers of potential neurotoxicants in the environment are raising and pose a great risk for humans and the environment. Currently neurotoxicity assessment is mostly performed to predict and prevent harm to human populations. Despite all the efforts invested in the last years in developing novel in vitro or in silico test systems, in vivo tests with rodents are still the only accepted test for neurotoxicity risk assessment in Europe. Despite an increasing number of reports of species showing altered behaviour, neurotoxicity assessment for species in the environment is not required and therefore mostly not performed. Considering the increasing numbers of environmental contaminants with potential neurotoxic potential, eco-neurotoxicity should be also... |
| Tipo: Text |
Palavras-chave: Eco-neurotoxicity; Neurotoxicity; EDA; REACH; AOP; Behaviour; Computational toxicity; Ecological; Species. |
| Ano: 2018 |
URL: https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00473/58477/61058.pdf |
| |
