The contribution of larval zebrafish transcriptomics to chemical risk assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1999) requires human health and environmental risk assessments be conducted for new substances prior to their manufacture or import. While this toxicity data is historically obtained using rodents, in response to the international effort to eliminate animal testing, Health Canada is collaborating with the National Research Council (NRC) of Canada to develop a New Approach Method by refining existing NRC zebrafish models. The embryo/larval zebrafish model evaluates systemic (whole body) general toxicity which is currently unachievable with cell-based testing. The model is strengthened using behavioral, toxicokinetic and transcriptomic responses to assess non-visible indicators of toxicity following chemical exposure at sub-phenotypic concentrations. In this paper, the predictive power of zebrafish transcriptomics is demonstrated using two chemicals; Raloxifene and Resorcinol. Raloxifene exposure produced darkening of the liver and malformation of the nose/mandible, while Resorcinol exposure produced increased locomotor activity. Transcriptomic analysis correlated differentially expressed genes with the phenotypic effects and benchmark dose calculations determined that the transcriptomic Point of Departure (POD) occurred at subphenotypic concentrations. Correlating gene expression with apical (phenotypic) effects strengthens confidence in evaluation of chemical toxicity, thereby demonstrating the significant advancement that the larval zebrafish transcriptomics model represents in chemical risk assessment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".