The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A framework for prioritizing fragrance materials for aquatic risk assessment
Abstract
More than 2,100 chemically defined organic chemicals are listed in the Research Institute of Fragrance Materials/Flavor and Extract Manufacturers' Association (RIFM/FEMA) Database that are used as ingredients of fragrances for consumer products. An approach was developed for prioritizing these fragrance materials for aquatic risk assessment by first estimating the predicted environmental concentration (PEC) of these fragrance materials in the aquatic environment based upon their physicochemical properties and annual volume of use. Subsequently, an effect level was predicted with a general quantitative structure—activity relationship (QSAR) for aquatic toxicity, and a predicted no-effect concentration (PNEC) was calculated from this effect level by using an assessment factor (AF) that accounts for uncertainty in the toxicity QSAR prediction. A conservative AF of 106 was applied to the endpoint predicted by the QSAR to provide an adequate margin of safety in the calculation of the PNEC. The PEC was compared to the PNEC to characterize the risk to freshwater aquatic organisms (e.g., Daphnia magna and Pimephales promelas). If the ratio of PEC to PNEC was below one, the material was considered to have negligible environmental risk and to be acceptable for the aquatic environment at current use levels. If this ratio exceeded one, the PNEC was refined by using more specific QSAR models (Ecological Structure—Activity Relationships [ECOSAR]). If the ratio continued to exceed one, the material became a candidate for further aquatic risk assessment procedures, which involve iterative steps to refine the PEC, the PNEC, or both by using measured ecotoxicological endpoints. Prioritization for this latter process can be based upon the magnitudes of the estimated PEC:PNEC ratios. When using the first tier of this approach, only 568 of 2,141 fragrance materials (26.5%) in the RIFM/FEMA Database had PEC:PNEC ratios greater than one. This percentage decreased to only 164 materials (7.7%) when PNECs were derived with ECOSAR. Comparison of predicted PECs and PNECs with those based upon measured data confirmed the conservatism and low risk for type I errors associated with the framework. These combined exercises demonstrated the ability of this highly precautionary risk-based screening approach to quickly prioritize a large number of materials without benefit of experimental ecotoxicological or fate data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Ferrari, B., Mons, R., Vollat, B., Fraysse, B., Paxēaus, N., Giudice, R. L., Pollio, A., & Garric, J. (2004) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1897/03-246 · Cited by 559
Ranking and prioritization of environmental risks of pharmaceuticals in surface waters
Sanderson, H., Johnson, D. J., Reitsma, T., Brain, R. A., Wilson, C. J., & Solomon, K. R. (2004) · Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2003.12.006 · Cited by 437
Emerging and legacy contaminants across land-use gradients and the risk to aquatic ecosystems
Sardiña, P., Leahy, P., Metzeling, L., Stevenson, G., & Hinwood, A. (2019) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.133842 · Cited by 67
Metadata
- Authors
- Salvito, D. T., Senna, R. J., & Federle, T. W.
- Venue
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-06-01
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1301-1308
- ISSN
- 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8618
- OpenAlex
- W2079222364
- Cited by
- 1,891
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A framework for prioritizing fragrance materials for aquatic risk assessment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/etc.5620210627
- The paper
- Salvito, D. T., Senna, R. J., & Federle, T. W. (2002). A framework for prioritizing fragrance materials for aquatic risk assessment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620210627
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.