1985
DOI: 10.1080/10590508509373329
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of carcinogenic agents on aquatic animals: An environmental and experimental overview

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
80
0

Year Published

1991
1991
2000
2000

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 121 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
1
80
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This idea is supported mostly by circumstantial evidence (1)(2)(3)(4)(5). There is, however, a growing body offield-related, laboratory-generated data, which also supports a link between certain kinds of aquatic pollution and cancer in fish (6)(7)(8)(9)(10).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 49%
“…This idea is supported mostly by circumstantial evidence (1)(2)(3)(4)(5). There is, however, a growing body offield-related, laboratory-generated data, which also supports a link between certain kinds of aquatic pollution and cancer in fish (6)(7)(8)(9)(10).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 49%
“…Dietary exposure of rainbow trout to DMBA at 750 ppm for 7 weeks, beginning at 9 weeks of age, can yield over 80% incidence of gastric neoplasia and lesser incidences of liver and gas bladder neoplasia (20). In zebrafish, a maximal incidence of 18°/0 of fish developed neoplasia after receiving 1 (7,12,25). Furthermore, exposure protocols differed between species, and carcinogen uptake has not been measured in these studies.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…Much ofthe literature can be found in the following proceedings, reviews and selected research papers (26,(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36)(37). Reviewers also note that molluscan neoplasms are predominandy ofhemic origin and that the evidence favors a viral rather than a chemical etiology.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%