ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024
Missing Genomic Resources for the Next Generation of Environmental Risk Assessment.
Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring gene expression as a sublethal endpoint in gammarids exposed to pesticides: insights from next-generation sequencing.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Unlocking the future of environmental safety: a framework for integrating new approach methodologies in decision-making.NAM journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Environmental risk assessment traditionally relies on a wide range of in vivo testing to assess the potential hazards of chemicals in the environment. These tests are often time-consuming and costly and can cause test organisms' suffering. Recent developments of reliable low-cost alternatives, both in vivo- and in silico-based, opened the door to reconsider current toxicity assessment. However, many of these new approach methodologies (NAMs) rely on high-quality annotated genomes for surrogate species of regulatory risk assessment. Currently, a lack of genomic information slows the process of NAM development. Here, we present a phylogenetically resolved overview of missing genomic resources for surrogate species within a regulatory ecotoxicological risk assessment. We call for an organized and systematic effort within the (regulatory) ecotoxicological community to provide these missing genomic resources. Further, we discuss the potential of a standardized genomic surrogate species landscape to enable a robust and nonanimal-reliant ecotoxicological risk assessment in the systems ecotoxicology era.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.