4.4 Article

An international cross-laboratory survey on fish vitellogenin analysis: Methodological challenges and opportunities for best practice

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2023.105501

关键词

Endocrine activity; Fish; Vitellogenin; Variability; Laboratory practice; Survey; 3Rs

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Vitellogenin is a biomarker used to assess endocrine activity of certain chemicals. However, its measurement can be variable, leading to concerns about the accuracy of results. A survey of testing laboratories highlighted the challenges in assessing Vitellogenin and suggested improvements in measurement methods.
Vitellogenin (VTG) is a biomarker for possible endocrine activity of chemicals acting via the estrogen, androgen, or steroidogenesis pathways. VTG is assessed in standardised fish guideline studies conducted for regulatory safety assessment of chemicals. VTG data can be highly variable leading to concerns for potential equivocal, false positive and/or negative outcomes. Consequently, additional fish testing may be required to address uncertainties in the VTG response, and possibly erroneous/missed identification of endocrine activity. To better understand the technical challenges of VTG assessment and reporting for regulatory purposes, a survey was sent to 27 testing laboratories performing these analyses. The survey results from 16 respondents (6 from the UK, 3 from the USA, and 7 from the EU) were analysed and discussed in a follow-up webinar. High variability in background VTG concentrations was widely acknowledged and thought to be associated with fish batch, husbandry, laboratory practices, and several methodological aspects. These include sample collection and storage, VTG quantification, data handling, and the benchmarks used for data acceptability. Information gathered in the survey provides a basis for improving and harmonizing the measurement of VTG in fish, and an opportunity to reassess the suitability of current acceptability criteria in test guidelines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据