16 research outputs found

    A critical analysis of the biological impacts of plasticizers on wildlife

    No full text
    This review provides a critical analysis of the biological effects of the most widely used plasticizers, including dibutyl phthalate, diethylhexyl phthalate, dimethyl phthalate, butyl benzyl phthalate and bisphenol A (BPA), on wildlife, with a focus on annelids (both aquatic and terrestrial), molluscs, crustaceans, insects, fish and amphibians. Moreover, the paper provides novel data on the biological effects of some of these plasticizers in invertebrates, fish and amphibians. Phthalates and BPA have been shown to affect reproduction in all studied animal groups, to impair development in crustaceans and amphibians and to induce genetic aberrations. Molluscs, crustaceans and amphibians appear to be especially sensitive to these compounds, and biological effects are observed at environmentally relevant exposures in the low ng l−1 to ”g l−1 range. In contrast, most effects in fish (except for disturbance in spermatogenesis) occur at higher concentrations. Most plasticizers appear to act by interfering with the functioning of various hormone systems, but some phthalates have wider pathways of disruption. Effect concentrations of plasticizers in laboratory experiments coincide with measured environmental concentrations, and thus there is a very real potential for effects of these chemicals on some wildlife populations. The most striking gaps in our current knowledge on the impacts of plasticizers on wildlife are the lack of data for long-term exposures to environmentally relevant concentrations and their ecotoxicity when part of complex mixtures. Furthermore, the hazard of plasticizers has been investigated in annelids, molluscs and arthropods only, and given the sensitivity of some invertebrates, effects assessments are warranted in other invertebrate phyla

    Scapula fractures: interobserver reliability of classification and treatment

    Full text link
    OBJECTIVES:There is substantial variation in the classification and the management of scapula fractures. The first purpose of this study was to analyze the interobserver reliability of the OTA/AO and the New International Classification of scapula fractures. The second purpose was to assess the proportion of agreement among orthopaedic surgeons on operative or nonoperative treatment. DESIGN:: Web-based reliability study SETTING:: Independent orthopaedic surgeons from several countries were invited to classify scapular fractures in an online survey. PARTICIPANTS:One-hundred and three orthopaedic surgeons evaluated 35 movies of 3DCT-reconstruction of selected scapular fractures, representing a full spectrum of fracture patterns. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:Fleiss' kappa (Îș) was used to assess the reliability of agreement between the surgeons. RESULTS:: The overall agreement on the OTA/AO Classification was moderate for the types (A, B, and C, Îș = 0.54) with a 71% proportion of rater agreement (PA) as well as for the nine groups (A1 to C3, Îș = 0.47) with a 57% PA. For the New International Classification, the agreement about the intra-articular extension of the fracture (Fossa (F), Îș = 0.79) was substantial, the agreement about a fractured body (Body (B), Îș = 0.57) or process was moderate (Process (P), Îș = 0.53), however PAs were more than 81%. The agreement on the treatment recommendation was moderate (Îș = 0.57) with a 73% PA. CONCLUSIONS:The New International Classification was more reliable. Body and process fractures generated more disagreement than intra-articular fractures and need further clear definitions
    corecore