Metabolic transformation of environmentally-relevant brominated flame retardants in Fauna: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past few decades, production trends of the flame retardant (FR) industry, and specifically for brominated FRs (BFRs), is for the replacement of banned and regulated compounds with more highly brominated, higher molecular weight compounds including oligomeric and polymeric compounds. Chemical, biological, and environmental stability of BFRs has received some attention over the years but knowledge is currently lacking in the transformation potential and metabolism of replacement emerging or novel BFRs (E/NBFRs). For articles published since 2015, a systematic search strategy reviewed the existing literature on the direct (e.g., in vitro or in vivo) non-human BFR metabolism in fauna (animals). Of the 51 papers reviewed, and of the 75 known environmental BFRs, PBDEs were by far the most widely studied, followed by HBCDDs and TBBPA. Experimental protocols between studies showed large disparities in exposure or incubation times, age, sex, depuration periods, and of the absence of active controls used in in vitro experiments. Species selection emphasized non-standard test animals and/or field-collected animals making comparisons difficult. For in vitro studies, confounding variables were generally not taken into consideration (e.g., season and time of day of collection, pollution point-sources or human settlements). As of 2021 there remains essentially no information on the fate and metabolic pathways or kinetics for 30 of the 75 environmentally relevant E/BFRs. Regardless, there are clear species-specific and BFR-specific differences in metabolism and metabolite formation (e.g. BDE congeners and HBCDD isomers). Future in vitro and in vivo metabolism/biotransformation research on E/NBFRs is required to better understand their bioaccumulation and fate in exposed organisms. Also, studies should be conducted on well characterized lab (e.g., laboratory rodents, zebrafish) and commonly collected wildlife species used as captive models (crucian carp, Japanese quail, zebra finches and polar bears).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".