Search

Within EU approval policies, most dispersant ecotoxicity testing considers lethal concentrations for marine adult species, overlooking the embryotoxicological effects. Here we studied the ecotoxicity of two commercial dispersant formulations (dispersant A and B) on the embryogenesis of the ascidian Ciona robusta. Embryotoxicity and phenotypic alterations stated that dispersant B resulted more toxic than A (EC50 value of 44.30 and 160 μg mL−1, respectively) and induced severe larvae malformations at lower concentrations. Furthermore, the analysis of genes involved in different cellular response pathways indicated that those belonging to biotransformation were upregulated by dispersant A treatment, likely related to the presence of hydrocarbons. Instead, dispersant B induced cas8 gene downregulation, probably as a result of the prolonged exposure to mixture components. Our preliminary findings support the use of the C. robusta embryotoxicity test as a valuable tool for dispersant approval procedures, by providing sub-lethal responses on marine invertebrates closely related to vertebrates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A research project has been performed to the request of the RAMOGE Executive Secretariat to identify differences between dispersant approval procedures in France and Italy and propose ways to harmonize them. A collaborative study has been conducted by CEDRE (Centre of Documentation, Research and Experimentation on Accidental Water Pollution) and ISPRA (Italian Institute for Environmental Protection and Research) to: a) compare current approval procedures in Italy and France with identification of differences and commonalities; b) carry out toxicity tests using both procedures on two selected dispersants; c) propose a common approach between Italy and France. The results showed that, because of the differences in ecotoxicological tests and in the evaluation criteria used, the outcomes on the same products could be different in Italy and in France. Both tested dispersants met the French requirements for approval (LC 50 ≥ 10 times reference toxicant), while only one dispersant met the Italian approval criterion (EC 50 > 10 mg/L). A possible way of harmonizing the approval procedures could be to increase the number of test organisms in the French procedure, which currently only uses one crustacean species. Furthermore, a common criterion for toxicity assessment should be discussed and agreed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]