Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24352829›Full record

ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2014

Toxicological effects of the sunscreen UV filter, benzophenone-2, on planulae and in vitro cells of the coral, Stylophora pistillata.

C A Downs, Esti Kramarsky-Winter, John E Fauth, Roee Segal, Omri Bronstein, Rina Jeger, Yona Lichtenfeld, Cheryl M Woodley, Paul Pennington, Ariel Kushmaro and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Sublethal effects of contaminants on marine habitat-forming species: a review and meta-analysis.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Toxics · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Development of a Survey of Sunscreen Use and Attitudes among Adults in Two Coastal States, 2019.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. UV-filter pollution: current concerns and future prospects.Environmental monitoring and assessment · 2021
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

C A DownsHaereticus Environmental Laboratory, P.O. Box 92, Clifford, VA, 24533, USA, cadowns@haereticus-lab.org.
Esti Kramarsky-Winter
John E Fauth
Roee Segal
Omri Bronstein
Rina Jeger
Yona Lichtenfeld
Cheryl M Woodley
Paul Pennington
Ariel Kushmaro
Yossi Loya
Tel Aviv University · ILBen-Gurion University of the Negev · ILNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration · USNanyang Technological University · SGUniversity of Central Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Benzophenone-2 (BP-2) is an additive to personal-care products and commercial solutions that protects against the damaging effects of ultraviolet light. BP-2 is an "emerging contaminant of concern" that is often released as a pollutant through municipal and boat/ship wastewater discharges and landfill leachates, as well as through residential septic fields and unmanaged cesspits. Although BP-2 may be a contaminant on coral reefs, its environmental toxicity to reefs is unknown. This poses a potential management issue, since BP-2 is a known endocrine disruptor as well as a weak genotoxicant. We examined the effects of BP-2 on the larval form (planula) of the coral, Stylophora pistillata, as well as its toxicity to in vitro coral cells. BP-2 is a photo-toxicant; adverse effects are exacerbated in the light versus in darkness. Whether in darkness or light, BP-2 induced coral planulae to transform from a motile planktonic state to a deformed, sessile condition. Planulae exhibited an increasing rate of coral bleaching in response to increasing concentrations of BP-2. BP-2 is a genotoxicant to corals, exhibiting a strong positive relationship between DNA-AP lesions and increasing BP-2 concentrations. BP-2 exposure in the light induced extensive necrosis in both the epidermis and gastro dermis. In contrast, BP-2 exposure in darkness induced autophagy and autophagic cell death.The LC50 of BP-2 in the light for an 8 and 24 hour exposure was 120 parts per million (ppm) and 165 parts per billion (ppb), respectively. The LC50s for BP-2 in darkness for the same time points were 144 parts per million and 548 parts per billion [corrected].

Indexed as

Ultraviolet RaysAnimalsAnthozoaBenzophenonesCoral ReefsFiltrationLarvaLethal Dose 50Microscopy, Electron, TransmissionNo-Observed-Adverse-Effect LevelRegression AnalysisSunscreening AgentsToxicity Tests2,2',4,4'-tetrahydroxybenzophenoneBenzophenonesSunscreening Agents

Identifiers

PMID24352829
OpenAlexW1997849837

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.