The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Test No. 114: Viscosity of Liquids
Abstract
This Test Guideline describes methods to measure the viscosity of liquids. Most of the methods listed are appropriate for the investigation of Newtonian liquids. The measurement of non-Newtonian liquids is possible with the rotational viscometer. Viscosity measurements are carried out according to five methods: the capillary viscometer, the flow cup, the rotational viscometer, the rolling ball viscometer and the drawing ball viscometer. Each determination of viscosity should be made at a temperature of 20°C and at 40°C. At least two determinations should be made at each temperature. The viscosity measurement is to be carried out according to the standards in the case of capillary and forced ball viscometers. In the case of rotational viscometers, the specification of a viscosity is appropriate only for Newtonian fluids. For non- Newtonian fluids, the results obtained are preferred in table or graph form, preferably in the order of increasing shear rate.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“OECD GD 114 is important because it explicitly addresses differences between cytostasis measures in the in vitro micronucleus test (OECD, 2012).”
From Cytotoxicity across OECD methods is not a single endpoint: context-dependent roles, variability and implications for decision-making (2026) · cites this paper as OECD, 2012
In the citing paper
“It shows that RPD, RICC and CBPI are not interchangeable and that their variability can influence concentration selection.”
From Cytotoxicity across OECD methods is not a single endpoint: context-dependent roles, variability and implications for decision-making (2026) · cites this paper as OECD, 2012
In the citing paper
“It shows that RPD, RICC and CBPI are not interchangeable and that their variability can influence concentration selection.”
From Cytotoxicity across OECD methods is not a single endpoint: context-dependent roles, variability and implications for decision-making (2026) · cites this paper as OECD, 2012
In the citing paper
“In mutagenicity testing, excessive cytotoxicity or cytostasis may cause misleading positives through oxidative stress, nuclease activation, impaired DNA repair, disturbed cell-cycle progression, chromosomal mis-segregation or selective survival of damaged cells (OECD, 2012,2016,2023; Fowler et al., 2012; Azqueta et al., 2022).”
From Cytotoxicity across OECD methods is not a single endpoint: context-dependent roles, variability and implications for decision-making (2026) · cites this paper as OECD, 2012
In the citing paper
“OECD GD 114 analyzed cytotoxic and cytostatic measures for the in vitro micronucleus test and showed that RPD, relative increase in cell counts (RICC) and CBPI differ in sensitivity, dynamic range and variability (OECD, 2012).”
From Cytotoxicity across OECD methods is not a single endpoint: context-dependent roles, variability and implications for decision-making (2026) · cites this paper as OECD, 2012
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Guidance Document on Good In Vitro Method Practices (GIVIMP)
OECD (2018) · OECD Series on Testing and Assessment · doi:10.1787/9789264304796-en · Cited by 161
Self-citationThoma, T., Löhr, L., Demuth, P., Hambruch, N., Oesch, F., & Landsiedel, R. (2026) · NAM Journal · doi:10.1016/j.namjnl.2026.100126
Metadata
- Authors
- OECD
- Venue
- OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 1
- Publisher
- OECD
- Published
- 2012-10-02
- ISSN
- 2074-5753
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
