RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, p-methyl-α-amyl cinnamic aldehyde, CAS Registry Number 84697-09-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, methyl salicylate, CAS registry number 119-36-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, methyl 2-methylbutyrate, CAS Registry Number 868-57-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Friedrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, amyl salicylate, CAS Registry Number 2050-08-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-methyl-2-(1-methylpropyl)cyclohexyl acetate, CAS Registry number 72183-75-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cis-3-hexenyl benzoate, CAS Registry Number 25152-85-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isoamyl salicylate, CAS Registry Number 87-20-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-oxaspiro[4.5]decan-2-one, 8-(1-methylethyl)-, trans-, CAS Registry Number 4625-90-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-methyl-2-pentanol, CAS registry number 108-11-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2,6-dimethyl-4-heptanol, CAS registry number 108-82-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, heptyl acetate, CAS registry number 112-06-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Friedrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

C9orf72-Associated Dipeptide Repeat Expansions Perturb ER-Golgi Vesicular Trafficking, Inducing Golgi Fragmentation and ER Stress, in ALS/FTD - Jessica Sultana; Audrey M. G. Ragagnin; Sonam Parakh; Sayanthooran Saravanabavan; Kai Ying Soo; Marta Vidal; Cyril Jones Jagaraj; Kunjie Ding; Sharlynn Wu; Sina Shadfar; Emily K. Don; Anand Deva; et al. (Molecular Neurobiology, 2024)
Hexanucleotide repeat expansions (HREs) in the chromosome 9 open reading frame 72 ( C9orf72 ) gene are the most frequent genetic cause of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). Both are debilitating neurodegenerative conditions affecting either motor neurons (ALS) in the brain and spinal cord or neurons in the frontal and/or temporal cortical lobes (FTD). HREs undergo repeat-associated non-ATG (RAN) translation on both sense and anti-sense strands, generating five distinct dipeptide repeat proteins (DPRs), poly-GA, -GR, -GP, -PA and -PR. Perturbed proteostasis is well-recognised in ALS pathogenesis, including processes affecting the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) and Golgi compartments. However, these mechanisms have not been well characterised for C9orf72-mediated ALS/FTD. In this study we demonstrate that C9orf72 DPRs polyGA, polyGR and polyGP (× 40 repeats) disrupt secretory protein transport from the ER to the Golgi apparatus in neuronal cells. Consistent with this finding, these DPRs also induce fragmentation of the Golgi apparatus, activate ER stress, and inhibit the formation of the omegasome, the precursor of the autophagosome that originates from ER membranes. We also demonstrate Golgi fragmentation in cells undergoing RAN translation that express polyGP. Furthermore, dysregulated ER-Golgi transport was confirmed in C9orf72 patient dermal fibroblasts. Evidence of aberrant ER-derived vesicles in spinal cord motor neurons from C9orf72 ALS patients compared to controls was also obtained. These data thus confirm that ER proteostasis and ER-Golgi transport is perturbed in C9orf72-ALS in the absence of protein over-expression. Hence this study identifies novel molecular mechanisms associated with the ER and Golgi compartments induced by the C9orf72 HRE.

Leveraging Maker Learning in STEM to Promote Children’s Interest in Cancer Research: A Pilot Program - Kenneth P. Tercyak; Mary Rose Yockel; Jacqueline Eyl; Chiranjeev Dash; Dorothy Jones-Davis; Marcelo M. Sleiman; Liza Manfred; Dia Stone; Karen Howenstein; Denise Flessate Harley; Mingqian Liu; Catherine J. Scharon; et al. (Journal of Cancer Education, 2024)

Optimizing indoor air quality and energy efficiency in multifamily residences: Advanced passive pipe system parametrics study - L. M. Obeidat; J. R. Jones; D. M. Mahaftha; A. I. Amhamed; O. F. Alrebei (International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 2024)
This research focuses on enhancing natural ventilation in multifamily residential buildings to improve air quality and minimize reliance on mechanical ventilation, thereby reducing energy consumption. The study pioneers the integration of passive pipe systems within structural floor slabs and building envelopes, aiming to overcome the inherent challenges of indoor environmental quality (IEQ) related to design constraints, occupant behavior, and urban context. Our innovative approach, utilizing a novel application of Grasshopper for precise architectural modeling and Ansys for advanced multiphysics simulation, enables a detailed comparative analysis of airflow dynamics across various system configurations. A comprehensive literature review underscores the significance of natural ventilation as a key passive cooling strategy, vital for reducing energy use and enhancing IEQ in the face of urbanization challenges. Our empirical findings reveal that configurations with more inlet and outlet pipes significantly outperform simpler ones, with a notable configuration of 11 pipes (5 × 6) achieving an actual-to-required ventilation rate increase in 158.15%. This evidence highlights the substantial benefits of adopting complex system configurations for improved ventilation efficiency. The study’s outcomes include impactful design recommendations for adopting enhanced natural ventilation strategies in multifamily residential buildings. These recommendations promise to inform sustainable urban planning and building management strategies, offering a scalable solution for cities seeking to balance growth with environmental sustainability. By demonstrating the clear advantages of targeted passive cooling interventions, this research contributes valuable insights toward achieving energy efficiency and superior IEQ in residential buildings, paving the way for future exploration in diverse climatic and urban contexts.

Activity Budget and Sociality of the Northern Lesser Galago, Galago senegalensis - Grace Ellison; Martin Jones; Bradley Cain; Caroline M. Bettridge (International Journal of Primatology, 2024)
Complex sociality in primates often is argued to have evolved after the appearance of diurnal activity. Studying the behaviour of nocturnal primates is fundamental to understanding the evolutionary origins of primate behaviour and ecology, yet much less is known about the nature of sociality in nocturnal primate species than their diurnal counterparts. We investigated group size, communication, and social interactions in free-ranging, Northern lesser galagos ( Galago senegalensis ) and present an activity budget and assessment of temporal variation in their behaviour. We collected continuous behavioural data using focal follows at three different stages of the night from individuals at Kwakuchinja, Northern Tanzania. We also collected group size data from Northern lesser galagos at Fongoli, Southeastern Senegal, and Lolldaiga Hills Ranch, Central Kenya. We categorised behaviours and, where sample sizes permitted, used Kruskal–Wallis tests to compare the durations of observed behaviours between the morning (pre-dawn), evening (from dusk), and later in the night. We analysed 140 focal follows (31.4 h of continuous behavioural data) and found that the proportion of time spent foraging, inactive, in locomotion, in self-maintenance, and vigilant, varied across the three stages of the night; galagos spent a great deal of their time inactive in the morning and foraging was more prevalent in the evening. Group size at Kwakuchinja was significantly larger than at Fongoli or LHR. Galagos were in groups of two or more in the majority of encounters at Kwakuchinja (55%; N = 76), rather than alone, but spent most of their nighttime activity alone at Fongoli (79%; N = 185) and LHR (80%; N = 142). Overall vocalisation rates were higher in the morning than other times throughout the night, although contact calls were relatively more frequent in the evening than other times. We recorded both affiliative and agonistic social interactions, but these contributed almost nothing to the overall activity budget. Our preliminary investigation into the social structure of Northern lesser galagos suggests that there are population differences in sociality and that overall, they connect more through vocalisations than through direct social interactions, thereby avoiding some of the potential costs associated with group-living. This variation in social organization suggests that we have more to learn about the drivers of sociality in nocturnal primates and the nature of their social structure.

Positioning nanotechnology to address climate change - Jacob L. Jones; David M. Berube; Maude Cuchiara; Khara Grieger; Elaine A. Cohen Hubal; Sarah J. Karikó; Phillip Strader; Yves Theriault (Environment Systems and Decisions, 2024)

Mitochondrial ribosomal proteins in metastasis and their potential use as prognostic and therapeutic targets - Jasmine M. Bacon; Johanna L. Jones; Guei-Sheung Liu; Joanne L. Dickinson; Kelsie Raspin (Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, 2024)
The mitochondrion is an essential cell organelle known as the powerhouse of the cell. Mitochondrial ribosomal proteins (MRPs) are nuclear encoded, synthesised in the cytoplasm but perform their main functions in the mitochondria, which includes translation, transcription, cell death and maintenance. However, MRPs have also been implicated in cancer, particularly advanced disease and metastasis across a broad range of cancer types, where they play a central role in cell survival and progression. For some, their altered expression has been investigated as potential prognostic markers, and/or therapeutic targets, which is the focus of this review. Several therapies targeting MRPs are currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for use in other diseases, revealing the opportunity for repurposing their use in advanced and metastatic cancer. Herein, we review the evidence supporting key MRPs as molecular drivers of advanced disease in multiple cancer types. We also highlight promising avenues for future use of MRPs as precision targets in the treatment of late-stage cancers for which there are currently very limited effective treatment options.

Ecological but Not Biological Traits of European Riverine Invertebrates Respond Consistently to Anthropogenic Impacts - James S. Sinclair; Rachel Stubbington; Ralf B. Schäfer; Libuše Barešová; Núria Bonada; Zoltán Csabai; J. Iwan Jones; Aitor Larrañaga; John F. Murphy; Petr Pařil; Marek Polášek; Jes J. Rasmussen; et al. (Global Ecology and Biogeography, 2024)
Aim To determine which riverine invertebrate traits respond consistently to anthropogenic impacts across multiple biogeographic regions. Location Europe. Time Period 1981–2021. Major Taxa Studied Riverine invertebrates. Methods We compiled a database of riverine invertebrate community time series for 673 sites across six European countries spanning six freshwater ecoregions. We compared trait responses to anthropogenic impacts (quantified as changes in ‘ecological quality’) among regions for seven ‘ecological’ traits, which reflect habitat preferences, and nine ‘biological’ traits (e.g., morphology or life history), which represent taxon‐specific attributes that can influence ecosystem processes. Results Four ecological traits (current, microhabitat, salinity and trophic preferences) and one biological trait (dispersal mode) responded consistently across regions. These responses were primarily driven by spatial differences among poorer to better quality sites. Responses to temporal changes in quality were comparable but less pronounced. Main Conclusions Consistent responses to anthropogenic impacts across multiple ecological traits indicate these traits may improve broader scale measurements, comparisons and predictions of community responses. However, we could not use ecological traits to identify the actions of specific stressors because multiple traits always responded as a group. Inconsistent responses across almost all biological traits indicated that these traits may be less predictive of impacts across regions. Predictions of how biological traits, and associated ecosystem processes, respond to anthropogenic impacts may be most effective at regional scales where responses are more consistent.

Promoting best practices in ocean forecasting through an Operational Readiness Level - E. Alvarez Fanjul; S. Ciliberti; J. Pearlman; K. Wilmer-Becker; P. Bahurel; F. Ardhuin; A. Arnaud; K. Azizzadenesheli; R. Aznar; M. Bell; L. Bertino; S. Behera; et al. (Frontiers in Marine Science, 2024)
Predicting the ocean state in a reliable and interoperable way, while ensuring high-quality products, requires forecasting systems that synergistically combine science-based methodologies with advanced technologies for timely, user-oriented solutions. Achieving this objective necessitates the adoption of best practices when implementing ocean forecasting services, resulting in the proper design of system components and the capacity to evolve through different levels of complexity. The vision of OceanPrediction Decade Collaborative Center, endorsed by the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development 2021-2030, is to support this challenge by developing a “predicted ocean based on a shared and coordinated global effort” and by working within a collaborative framework that encompasses worldwide expertise in ocean science and technology. To measure the capacity of ocean forecasting systems, the OceanPrediction Decade Collaborative Center proposes a novel approach based on the definition of an Operational Readiness Level (ORL). This approach is designed to guide and promote the adoption of best practices by qualifying and quantifying the overall operational status. Considering three identified operational categories - production, validation, and data dissemination - the proposed ORL is computed through a cumulative scoring system. This method is determined by fulfilling specific criteria, starting from a given base level and progressively advancing to higher levels. The goal of ORL and the computed scores per operational category is to support ocean forecasters in using and producing ocean data, information, and knowledge. This is achieved through systems that attain progressively higher levels of readiness, accessibility, and interoperability by adopting best practices that will be linked to the future design of standards and tools. This paper discusses examples of the application of this methodology, concluding on the advantages of its adoption as a reference tool to encourage and endorse services in joining common frameworks.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water in Southeast Los Angeles: Industrial legacy and environmental justice - Julie Von Behren; Peggy Reynolds; Paul M. Bradley; James L. Gray; Dana W. Kolpin; Kristin M. Romanok; Kelly L. Smalling; Catherine Carpenter; Wendy Avila; Andria Ventura; Paul B. English; Rena R. Jones; et al. (Science of The Total Environment, 2024)

Corrigendum to “Lead exposure and source attribution for a mammalian scavenger before and after a culling program” [Sci. Total Environ. 940 (2024) 173686] - Evie M. Jones; Myra E. Finkelstein; Amelia J. Koch; James M. Pay; Menna E. Jones; Rodrigo K. Hamede; Jordan O. Hampton (Science of The Total Environment, 2024)

Methane emissions from proglacial lakes: A synthesis study directed toward Lake Agassiz - Laura S. Brosius; Katey M. Walter Anthony; Thomas V. Lowell; Peter Anthony; Jeffery P. Chanton; Miriam C. Jones; Guido Grosse; Andy J. Breckenridge (Quaternary Science Reviews, 2024)

Methane flux from Beringian coastal wetlands for the past 20,000 years - Matthias Fuchs; Miriam C. Jones; Evan J. Gowan; Steve Frolking; Katey Walter Anthony; Guido Grosse; Benjamin M. Jones; Jonathan A. O'Donnell; Laura Brosius; Claire Treat (Quaternary Science Reviews, 2024)

Dust in the Critical Zone: North American case studies - J. Brahney; R.C. Heindel; T.E. Gill; G. Carling; J.M. González-Olalla; J. Hand; D.V. Mallia; J.S. Munroe; K. Perry; A.L. Putman; S.M. Skiles; B.R. Adams; et al. (Earth-Science Reviews, 2024)

Biochemical, Biomarker, and Behavioral Characterization of the GrnR493X Mouse Model of Frontotemporal Dementia - Denise M. Smith; Geetika Aggarwal; Michael L. Niehoff; Spencer A. Jones; Subhashis Banerjee; Susan A. Farr; Andrew D. Nguyen (Molecular Neurobiology, 2024)

Complementary value of molecular, phenotypic, and functional aging biomarkers in dementia prediction - Andreas Engvig; Karl Trygve Kalleberg; Lars T. Westlye; Esten Høyland Leonardsen; Michael Weiner; Paul Aisen; Ronald Petersen; Clifford R. Jack; William Jagust; John Q. Trojanowski; Arthur W. Toga; Laurel Beckett; et al. (GeroScience, 2024)
DNA methylation age (MA), brain age (BA), and frailty index (FI) are putative aging biomarkers linked to dementia risk. We investigated their relationship and combined potential for prediction of cognitive impairment and future dementia risk using the ADNI database. Of several MA algorithms, DunedinPACE and GrimAge2, associated with memory, were combined in a composite MA alongside BA and a data-driven FI in predictive analyses. Pairwise correlations between age- and sex-adjusted measures for MA (aMA), aBA, and aFI were low. FI outperformed BA and MA in all diagnostic tasks. A model including age, sex, and aFI achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.94 for differentiating cognitively normal controls (CN) from dementia patients in a held-out test set. When combined with clinical biomarkers (apolipoprotein E ε4 allele count, memory, executive function), a model including aBA and aFI predicted 5-year dementia risk among MCI patients with an out-of-sample AUC of 0.88. In the prognostic model, BA and FI offered complementary value (both β s 0.50). The tested MAs did not improve predictions. Results were consistent across FI algorithms, with data-driven health deficit selection yielding the best performance. FI had a stronger adverse effect on prognosis in males, while BA’s impact was greater in females. Our findings highlight the complementary value of BA and FI in dementia prediction. The results support a multidimensional view of dementia, including an intertwined relationship between the biomarkers, sex, and prognosis. The tested MA’s limited contribution suggests caution in their use for individual risk assessment of dementia.

Two applications of the Consensus Solutions process with collaborative modeling for management of a contentious oyster fishery - Elizabeth W. North; Michael J. Wilberg; Jeff Blair; Lisa Wainger; Jeffrey C. Cornwell; Robert Jones; Chris Hayes; Rasika Gawde; Raleigh Robert Hood; Taylor Goelz; Troy Hartley; Marvin M. Mace; et al. (Frontiers in Marine Science, 2024)
Worldwide, enhancement of oyster populations is undertaken to achieve a variety of goals including support of food production, local economies, water quality, coastal habitat, biodiversity, and cultural heritage. Although numerous strategies for improving oyster stocks exist, enhancement efforts can be thwarted by long-standing conflict among community groups about which strategies to implement, where efforts should be focused, and how much funding should be allocated to each strategy. The objective of this paper is to compare two engagement approaches that resulted in recommendations for multi-benefit enhancements to oyster populations and the oyster industry in Maryland, U.S.A., using the Consensus Solutions process with collaborative simulation modeling. These recommendations were put forward by the OysterFutures Workgroup in 2018 and the Maryland Oyster Advisory Commission (OAC) in 2021. Notable similarities between the efforts were the basic principles of the Consensus Solutions process: neutral facilitation, a 75% agreement threshold, the presence of management agency leadership at the meetings, a scientific support team that created a management scenario model in collaboration with community group representatives, numerous opportunities for representatives to listen to each other, and a structured consensus building process for idea generation, rating, and approval of management options. To ensure meaningful representation by the most affected user groups, the goal for membership composition was 60% from industry and 40% from advocacy, agency, and academic groups in both processes. Important differences between the processes included the impetus for the process (a research program versus a legislatively-mandated process), the size of the groups, the structure of the meetings, and the clear and pervasive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ability of OAC members to interact. Despite differences and challenges, both groups were able to agree on a package of recommendations, indicating that consensus-based processes with collaborative modeling offer viable paths toward coordinated cross-sector natural resource decisions with scientific basis and community support. In addition, collaborative modeling resulted in ‘myth busting’ findings that allowed participants to reassess and realign their thinking about how the coupled human-oyster system would respond to management changes.

Predicting sweetpotato traits using machine learning: Impact of environmental and agronomic factors on shape and size - Hangjin Liu; Shelly Hunt; G. Craig Yencho; Kenneth V. Pecota; Russell Mierop; Cranos M. Williams; Daniela S. Jones (Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 2024)

Combination and summary of ATLAS dark matter searches interpreted in a 2HDM with a pseudo-scalar mediator using 139 fb−1 of s = 13 TeV pp collision data - G. Aad; B. Abbott; K. Abeling; N.J. Abicht; S.H. Abidi; A. Aboulhorma; H. Abramowicz; H. Abreu; Y. Abulaiti; A.C. Abusleme Hoffman; B.S. Acharya; C. Adam Bourdarios; et al. (Science Bulletin, 2024)

Lateglacial Interstadial to mid-Holocene stratigraphy and palynology at Pepper Arden Bottoms, North Yorkshire, UK - James B. Innes; Mairead M. Rutherford; David R. Bridgland; Ben R. Gearey; Malcolm C. Lillie; Wishart A. Mitchell; Charlotte E. O'Brien; Richard T. Jones; Gareth J. Thompson (Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, 2024)

Awareness and Adherence of the 2020 – 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans Amongst Employees and Students at a Southern Health Professions Campus - M. Schmuck; L. Jansen; L. Jones; W. Li (Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2024)

Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder (ARFID) Risk in University Students, Staff, and Faculty - M. Shahan; T. Jones; M. Valliant (Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methyl-5-phenylpentanol, CAS Registry Number 25634-93-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, hexyl formate, CAS registry number 629-33-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, hexyl butyrate, CAS Registry Number 2639-63-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, furfural, CAS Registry Number 98-01-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, octyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 112-14-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, octyl formate, CAS registry number 112-32-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-oxaspiro[4.5]decan-2-one, 8-ethyl-, trans-, CAS Registry Number 91069-40-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, p-mentha-1,8-dien-7-ol, CAS Registry Number 536-59-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 7-isopropyl-1,4-dimethylazulene, CAS registry number 489-84-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-isopropyl-1-methylcyclohexene, CAS registry number 29350-67-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, allyl α-ionone, CAS Registry Number 79-78-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, lauryl acetate, CAS Registry Number 112-66-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-oxaspiro[4.5]decan-2-one, 8-methyl-, CAS Registry number 94201-19-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-methyl-5-phenylpentanol, CAS Registry Number 55066-48-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, nonyl acetate, CAS registry number 143-13-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, octyl butyrate, CAS Registry Number 110-39-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-(methylthio)hexyl acetate, CAS registry number 51755-85-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2,2-dimethyl-3-phenylpropanol, CAS registry number 13351-61-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 5-(cis-3-hexenyl)dihydro-5-methyl-2(3H)furanone, CAS Registry Number 70851-61-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, o-phenyl anisole, CAS registry number 86-26-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, geranyl acetate, CAS registry number 105-87-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, geranyl linalool, CAS registry number 1113-21-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ionone (mixed isomers), CAS registry number 8013-90-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl salicylate, CAS Registry Number 118-61-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-phenyl-3-buten-2-ol, CAS registry number 17488-65-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isopropyl acetate, CAS registry number 108-21-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, hexyl propionate, CAS Registry Number 2445-76-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, α-butylcinnamaldehyde, CAS registry number 7492-44-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, decyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 112-17-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, musk ketone, CAS registry number 81-14-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, veratraldehyde, CAS Registry Number 120-14-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isopropyl butyrate, CAS Registry Number 638-11-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-hydroxybenzoic acid, CAS Registry Number 69-72-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 5-methylfurfural, CAS registry number 620-02-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, hexyl acetate, CAS registry number 142-92-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methyl-4-phenylpentanol, CAS registry number 92585-24-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methyl-4-phenylbutyraldehyde, CAS Registry Number 40654-82-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cis-3-hexenal, CAS Registry Number 6789-80-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM Natural Complex Substance (NCS) fragrance ingredient safety assessment, pinus nigra oil, CAS Registry Number 8000-26-8, RIFM ID 1068-E2.12 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexyl phenylacetate, CAS Registry Number 42288-75-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,4,5,6,6-pentamethylheptan-2-ol, CAS registry number 87118-95-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,3-cyclohexadiene-1-carboxylic acid, 4,6,6-trimethyl-, ethyl ester, CAS Registry Number 100520-15-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2(4H)-benzofuranone, 5,6-dihydro-3,6-dimethyl-, CAS Registry Number 80417-97-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, β-methylphenethyl alcohol, CAS Registry Number 1123-85-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, N-ethyl-N-(3-methylphenyl)propionamide, CAS Registry Number 179911-08-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, allyl cinnamate, CAS Registry number 1866-31-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-hexene, 1-[(2-methyl-2-propenyl)oxy]- (3Z)-, CAS Registry Number 292605-05-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM natural complex substance (NCS) fragrance ingredient safety assessment, lavandin abrialis, CAS registry number 8022-15-9, RIFM ID 1048554 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, rotundone, CAS Registry Number 18374-76-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, methylheptenol, CAS Registry Number 1335-09-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,4-bis(ethoxymethyl)cyclohexane, CAS Registry Number 54889-63-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, bicyclo[2.2.1]heptan-2-ol, 1,3,3-trimethyl-, benzoate, CAS Registry Number 55066-54-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methylbutyl hexanoate, CAS registry Number 2601-13-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, propanoic acid, 2-methyl-, cyclohexyl ester, CAS Registry Number 1129-47-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,7-dimethyl-1,6-nonadien-3-yl acetate, CAS Registry Number 61931-80-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-heptanol, 3,6-dimethyl-, CAS registry number 1247790-47-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl cyclohexanecarboxylate, CAS Registry Number 3289-28-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, linalyl butyrate, CAS Registry Number 78-36-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 6-butyl-2,4-dimethyldihydropyrane, CAS Registry Number 24237-00-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,7-dimethyl-7-methoxyoctan-2-ol, CAS registry number 41890-92-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-isopropyl-N,2,3-trimethylbutyramide, CAS registry number 51115-67-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, piperonyl acetate, CAS registry number 326-61-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, α-propylphenethyl alcohol, CAS registry number 705-73-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, allyl heptanoate, CAS registry number 142-19-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-(4-methylphenoxy)ethanol, CAS Registry Number 15149-10-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, nonanoyl 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzylamide, CAS Registry Number 2444-46-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, allyl hexanoate, CAS Registry Number 123-68-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, phenethyl alcohol, CAS Registry Number 60-12-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, benzenepropanol, a,ß-dimethyl-, CAS Registry Number 56836-93-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-(2-oxopropyl)-2-pentylcyclopentanone, CAS Registry Number 40942-73-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,3,3-trimethyl-2-norbornanyl acetate, CAS registry number 13851-11-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, tetrahydrogeranial, CAS Registry Number 5988-91-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isobornyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 125-12-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, nerolidyl acetate (isomer unspecified), CAS registry number 2306-78-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, oxacyclohexadecane-2,13-dione, CAS registry number 38223-29-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, (Z)-octadec-9-enol, CAS registry number 143-28-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, linalyl acetate, CAS registry number 115-95-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-naphthalenol, 1,2,3,4,4a,5,8,8a-octahydro-2,2,6,8-tetramethyl-, CAS Registry Number 103614-86-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3a,4,5,6,7,7a-hexahydro-4,7-methano-1H-inden-5-yl pivalate, CAS Registry Number 68039-45-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3a,4,5,6,7,7a-hexahydro-4,7-methano-1H-inden-5-yl isobutyrate, CAS Registry Number 67634-20-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, tricyclodecanyl acetate, CAS registry number 64001-15-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, isobornyl propionate, CAS Registry Number 2756-56-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, allyl octanoate, CAS Registry Number 4230-97-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, linalyl formate, CAS registry number 115-99-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, nerol oxide, CAS Registry Number 1786-08-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, l-menthyl D-lactate, CAS registry number 59259-38-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, linalyl propionate, CAS registry number 144-39-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, trichloromethyl phenyl carbinyl acetate, CAS Registry number 90-17-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Residential proximity to toxic metal-emitting industrial sites and toenail metal concentrations in a United States-wide prospective cohort - Meklit Daniel; Jennifer L. Ish; Jessica M. Madrigal; Che-Jung Chang; Kaitlyn G. Lawrence; Jared A. Fisher; Keith E. Levine; Brittany A. Trottier; Rena R. Jones; Dale P. Sandler; Alexandra J. White (Environmental Research, 2024)

Acetylglutamine Differentially Associated with First-Time Versus Recurrent Stroke - Naruchorn Kijpaisalratana; Zsuzsanna Ament; Amit Patki; Varun M. Bhave; Alana C. Jones; Ana-Lucia Garcia Guarniz; Catharine A. Couch; Mary Cushman; D. Leann Long; M. Ryan Irvin; W. Taylor Kimberly (Translational Stroke Research, 2024)

The Toxicology Investigators Consortium 2023 Annual Report - Adrienne Hughes; Alexandra Amaducci; Sharan L. Campleman; Shao Li; Mari Costantini; Meghan B. Spyres; Hannah Spungen; Jessica Kent; Alyssa Falise; Rachel Culbreth; Paul M. Wax; Jeffery Brent; et al. (Journal of Medical Toxicology, 2024)

Population structure of the Atlantic angel shark (Squatina dumeril) in United States waters of the western North Atlantic Ocean - Andrew T. Fields; William B. Driggers; Christian M. Jones; David S. Portnoy (Environmental Biology of Fishes, 2024)

The Chemistry of the Defensive Secretions of Three Species of Millipedes in the Genus Brachycybe - Paige Banks; Emma M. Funkhouser; Angie M. Macias; Brian Lovett; Shelby Meador; Arden Hatch; H. Martin Garraffo; Kaitie C. Cartwright; Matt T. Kasson; Paul E. Marek; Tappey H. Jones; Emily Mevers (Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2024)
Millipedes have long been known to produce a diverse array of chemical defense agents that deter predation. These compounds, or their precursors, are stored in high concentration within glands (ozadenes) and are released upon disturbance. The subterclass Colobognatha contains four orders of millipedes, all of which are known to produce terpenoid alkaloids—spare the Siphonophorida that produce terpenes. Although these compounds represent some of the most structurally-intriguing millipede-derived natural products, they are the least studied class of millipede defensive secretions. Here, we describe the chemistry of millipede defensive secretions from three species of Brachycybe : Brachycybe producta , Brachycybe petasata , and Brachycybe rosea . Chemical investigations using mass spectrometry-based metabolomics, chemical synthesis, and 2D NMR led to the identification of five alkaloids, three of which are new to the literature. All identified compounds are monoterpene alkaloids with the new compounds representing indolizidine (i.e. hydrogosodesmine) and quinolizidine alkaloids (i.e. homogosodesmine and homo-hydrogosodesmine). The chemical diversity of these compounds tracks the known species phylogeny of this genus, rather than the geographical proximity of the species. The indolizidines and quinolizidines are produced by non-sympatric sister species, B. producta and B. petasata , while deoxybuzonamine is produced by another set of non-sympatric sister species, B. rosea and Brachycybe lecontii . The fidelity between the chemical diversity and phylogeny strongly suggests that millipedes generate these complex defensive agents de novo and begins to provide insights into the evolution of their biochemical pathways.

Field-based assessment of the effect of conventional and biodegradable plastic mulch film on nitrogen partitioning, soil microbial diversity, and maize biomass - Martine Graf; Lucy M. Greenfield; Michaela K. Reay; Rafael Bargiela; Peter N. Golyshin; Richard P. Evershed; Charlotte E.M. Lloyd; Gwion B. Williams; David R. Chadwick; Davey L. Jones (Applied Soil Ecology, 2024)

Conversion of rainforest to both traditional and industrial oil palm systems changes the biodiversity, web-building, and prey capture of understory spiders (Liberia, West Africa) - Michael D. Pashkevich; Brogan L. Pett; Cicely A.M. Marshall; Jean-Pierre Caliman; Benedictus Freeman; Marshall M. Guahn; Peter M. Hadfield; Matthew T. Hendren; Morris T. Jah; Tiecanna Jones; Ari Saputra; Rudy H. Widodo; et al. (Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2024)

Regional‐scale disturbances drive long‐term decline of inshore coral reef fish assemblages in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park - Daniela M. Ceccarelli; Murray Logan; Richard D. Evans; Geoffrey P. Jones; Marji Puotinen; Caroline Petus; Garry R. Russ; Tane Sinclair‐Taylor; Maya Srinivasan; David H. Williamson (Global Change Biology, 2024)
Anthropogenic pressure is increasing the variety and frequency of environmental disturbance events, limiting recovery and leading to long‐term declines in wild plant and animal populations. Coral reefs and associated fish assemblages are inherently dynamic due to their susceptibility to a host of disturbances, but regional‐scale nuances in the drivers of long‐term change frequently remain poorly resolved. Here, we examine the effects of multiple potential drivers of change in coral reef fish assemblages across 4 inshore regions of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (GBRMP), Australia, over 12–14 years (2007–2021). Each region had a unique disturbance history, in conjunction with long‐term changes in physical and habitat variables. Phases of recovery were apparent in the years between disturbance events at all locations, but these were not long enough to prevent substantial declines in reef fish density (by 33%–72%) and species richness (by 41%–75%) throughout the study period. The main drivers of change in fish assemblages varied among regions; however, the most rapid changes followed cyclone and flood events. Limited recovery periods resulted in temporal shifts in fish species composition from typically coral‐associated to algae‐associated. Most trophic groups declined in density except farmers, grazers, omnivores and parrotfish. No‐take marine reserves (NTMRs) had small and inconsistent effects on total fish assemblages, but delivered benefits for fishery‐targeted piscivores. Our findings suggest that coral reef responses to local stressors and cumulative escalating climate change impacts are highly variable at regional scales, and that small NTMRs are unlikely to mitigate the impacts of increasingly frequent climatic disturbances. Nearshore coral reefs worldwide are high‐value habitats that are either already degraded or vulnerable to degradation and the loss of important fish groups. Global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must be coupled with effective local management that can support the functioning and adaptive capacity of coral reefs.

Assessing the global prevalence of wild birds in trade - Paul F. Donald; Eresha Fernando; Lauren Brown; Michela Busana; Stuart H. M. Butchart; Serene Chng; Alicia de la Colina; Juliana Machado Ferreira; Anuj Jain; Victoria R. Jones; Rocio Lapido; Kelly Malsch; et al. (Conservation Biology, 2024)
Trade represents a significant threat to many wild species and is often clandestine and poorly monitored. Information on which species are most prevalent in trade and potentially threatened by it therefore remains fragmentary. We used 7 global data sets on birds in trade to identify species or groups of species at particular risk and assessed the extent to which they were congruent in terms of the species recorded in trade. We used the frequency with which species were recorded in the data sets as the basis for a trade prevalence score that was applied to all bird species globally. Literature searches and questionnaire surveys were used to develop a list of species known to be heavily traded to validate the trade prevalence score. The score was modeled to identify significant predictors of trade. Although the data sets sampled different parts of the broad trade spectrum, congruence among them was statistically strong in all comparisons. Furthermore, the frequency with which species were recorded within data sets was positively correlated with their occurrence across data sets, indicating that the trade prevalence score captured information on trade volume. The trade prevalence score discriminated well between species identified from semi‐independent assessments as heavily or unsustainably traded and all other species. Globally, 45.1% of all bird species and 36.7% of globally threatened bird species had trade prevalence scores ≥1. Species listed in Appendices I or II of CITES, species with large geographical distributions, and nonpasserines tended to have high trade prevalence scores. Speciose orders with high mean trade prevalence scores included Falconiformes, Psittaciformes, Accipitriformes, Anseriformes, Bucerotiformes, and Strigiformes. Despite their low mean prevalence score, Passeriformes accounted for the highest overall number of traded species of any order but had low representation in CITES appendices. Geographical hotspots where large numbers of traded species co‐occur differed among passerines (Southeast Asia and Eurasia) and nonpasserines (central South America, sub‐Saharan Africa, and India). This first attempt to quantify and map the relative prevalence in trade of all bird species globally can be used to identify species and groups of species that may be at particular risk of harm from trade and can inform conservation and policy interventions to reduce its adverse impacts.

Local molecular and connectomic contributions of tau-related neurodegeneration - Fardin Nabizadeh; Michael W. Weiner; Paul Aisen; Ronald Petersen; Clifford R. Jack; William Jagust; John Q. Trojanowski; Arthur W. Toga; Laurel Beckett; Robert C. Green; Andrew J. Saykin; John Morris; et al. (GeroScience, 2024)

Defining an ageing-related pathology, disease or syndrome: International Consensus Statement - Emma Short; Ian M. Adcock; Bilal Al-Sarireh; Ann Ager; Ramzi Ajjan; Naveed Akbar; Michael A. Akeroyd; Ghada Alsaleh; Ghada Al-Sharbatee; Kambiz Alavian; Winfried Amoaku; Julie Andersen; et al. (GeroScience, 2024)
Around the world, individuals are living longer, but an increased average lifespan does not always equate to an increased health span. With advancing age, the increased prevalence of ageing-related diseases can have a significant impact on health status, functional capacity and quality of life. It is therefore vital to develop comprehensive classification and staging systems for ageing-related pathologies, diseases and syndromes. This will allow societies to better identify, quantify, understand and meet the healthcare, workforce, well-being and socioeconomic needs of ageing populations, whilst supporting the development and utilisation of interventions to prevent or to slow, halt or reverse the progression of ageing-related pathologies. The foundation for developing such classification and staging systems is to define the scope of what constitutes an ageing-related pathology, disease or syndrome. To this end, a consensus meeting was hosted by the International Consortium to Classify Ageing-Related Pathologies (ICCARP), on February 19, 2024, in Cardiff, UK, and was attended by 150 recognised experts. Discussions and voting were centred on provisional criteria that had been distributed prior to the meeting. The participants debated and voted on these. Each criterion required a consensus agreement of ≥ 70% for approval. The accepted criteria for an ageing-related pathology, disease or syndrome were (1) develops and/or progresses with increasing chronological age; (2) should be associated with, or contribute to, functional decline or an increased susceptibility to functional decline and (3) evidenced by studies in humans. Criteria for an ageing-related pathology, disease or syndrome have been agreed by an international consortium of subject experts. These criteria will now be used by the ICCARP for the classification and ultimately staging of ageing-related pathologies, diseases and syndromes.

Cytotoxicity and cell membrane interactions of choline-based ionic liquids: Comparing amino acids, acetate, and geranate anions - Mohamad El Mohamad; Qi Han; Brendan Dyett; Haitao Yu; Sara Edgecomb; Mercedes C. Pride; Claylee M. Chism; Angela Roberts; Deauntaye Jones; Eden E.L. Tanner; Calum J. Drummond; Tamar L. Greaves; et al. (Chemosphere, 2024)

Environmental impacts of selected metal cations for phosphorus capture in natural waters: A synthesis - Mumtahina Riza; Khara D. Grieger; Madison D. Horgan; JoAnn M. Burkholder; Jacob L. Jones (Chemosphere, 2024)

Plastic pollution and human pathogens: Towards a conceptual shift in risk management at bathing water and beach environments - David M. Oliver; Rebecca Metcalf; Davey L. Jones; Sabine Matallana-Surget; David N. Thomas; Peter Robins; Constance L. Tulloch; Benjamin M. Cotterell; Gwion Williams; Joseph A. Christie-Oleza; Richard S. Quilliam (Water Research, 2024)

P19-45 Data management for image-based characterisation of 2D nano-materials - P.P. Ankli; A. Ali; S. Hodzic; A. Logachov; K. Maciejczuk; A. Milochiv; S. Hardy; B. Hardy; S. Novak; E. Kranjc; V. Kononenko; S. Saje; et al. (Toxicology Letters, 2024)

P06-10 NGS-based discovery of circulating microRNA biomarkers of drug-induced pancreatic injury (DIPI) - P. Szatmary; A. Evans; A. Jones; D. Latawiec; W. Cai; A. Kattakayam; C. Goldring; G. Beyer; S. Sirtl; I. Alvarez-Alvarez; W. Bailey; B. Ackermann; et al. (Toxicology Letters, 2024)

In-situ mapping of monocrystalline regions on Mars - Brendan J. Orenstein; Michael W.M. Jones; David T. Flannery; Austin P. Wright; Scott Davidoff; Michael M. Tice; Luke Nothdurft; Abigail C. Allwood (Icarus, 2024)

Coupled atmosphere-ocean response of the southwest Pacific to deglacial changes in Atlantic meridional overturning circulation - Shaun R. Eaves; Andrew N. Mackintosh; Joel B. Pedro; Helen C. Bostock; Matthew T. Ryan; Kevin P. Norton; Bruce W. Hayward; Brian M. Anderson; Feng He; Richard S. Jones; Andrew M. Lorrey; Rewi M. Newnham; et al. (Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2024)

Anticipating how rain-on-snow events will change through the 21st century: lessons from the 1997 new year’s flood event - Alan M. Rhoades; Colin M. Zarzycki; Benjamin J. Hatchett; Héctor Inda-Diaz; William Rudisill; Benjamin Bass; Eli Dennis; Anne Heggli; Rachel McCrary; Seth McGinnis; Mohammed Ombadi; Stefan Rahimi-Esfarjani; et al. (Climate Dynamics, 2024)
The California-Nevada 1997 New Year’s flood was an atmospheric river (AR)-driven rain-on-snow (RoS) event and remains the costliest in their history. The joint occurrence of saturated soils, rainfall, and snowmelt generated inundation throughout northern California-Nevada. Although AR RoS events are projected to occur more frequently with climate change, the warming sensitivity of their flood drivers across scales remains understudied. We leverage the regionally refined mesh capabilities of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (RRM-E3SM) to recreate the 1997 New Year’s flood with horizontal grid spacings of 3.5 km across California, with forecast lead times of up to 4 days, and across six warming levels ranging from pre-industrial conditions to $$+3.5\,^°$$ + 3.5 ∘ C. We describe the sensitivity of the flood drivers to warming including AR duration and intensity, precipitation phase, intensity and efficiency, snowpack mass and energy changes, and runoff efficiency. Our findings indicate current levels of climate change negligibly influence the flood drivers. At warming levels $$\ge 1.7\,^°$$ ≥ 1.7 ∘ C, AR hazard potential increases, snowpack nonlinearly decreases, antecedent soil moisture decreases (except where the snowline retreats), and runoff decreases (except in the southern Sierra Nevada where antecedent snowpack persists). Storm total precipitation increases, but at rates below warming-induced increases in saturation-specific humidity. Warming intensifies short-duration, high-intensity rainfall, particularly where snowfall-to-rainfall transitions occur. This study highlights the nonlinear tradeoffs in 21st-century RoS flood hazards with warming and provides water management and infrastructure investment adaptation considerations.

Selective microbial attachment to LDPE plastic beads during passage through the wastewater network - Constance L. Tulloch; Benjamin M. Cotterell; Igor Pântea; Davey L. Jones; Peter N. Golyshin (Chemosphere, 2024)

Adapting to climate change in a spiny lobster (Jasus edwardsii) fishery: A harvest strategy response - Adrian Linnane; Richard McGarvey; Janet M. Matthews; John E. Feenstra; Annabel Jones; Nathan Kimber (Fisheries Research, 2024)

Lead exposure and source attribution for a mammalian scavenger before and after a culling program - Evie M. Jones; Amelia J. Koch; James M. Pay; Menna E. Jones; Rodrigo K. Hamede; Jordan O. Hampton (Science of The Total Environment, 2024)

Scale-dependent topographic complexity underpins abundance and spatial distribution of ecosystem engineers on natural and artificial structures - Franz Bauer; Antony M. Knights; John N. Griffin; Mick E. Hanley; Andy Foggo; Austin Brown; Emma Jones; Louise B. Firth (Science of The Total Environment, 2024)

Exposure to PFAS contaminated urban wetland water causes similar metabolic alterations to laboratory-based exposures in the freshwater amphipod Austrochiltonia subtenuis - Georgia M. Sinclair; Oliver A.H. Jones; Navneet Singh; Sara M. Long (Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 2024)

Induced plant resistance and its influence on natural enemy use of plant-derived foods - Islam S Sobhy; Geoff M Gurr; T Hefin Jones (Current Opinion in Insect Science, 2024)

Carbon and nitrogen isotopes of lizardfish provide insight into regional patterns of ocean biogeochemistry across the eastern continental United States - Oliver N. Shipley; Seth D. Newsome; Tonya M. Long; Susan Murasko; Ryan Jones; Jakub Kircun; R. Pearse Webster; Simona A. Ceriani (Marine Biology, 2024)

Perspectives on Conservation Impacts of the Global Primate Trade - Gal Badihi; Daniel R. K. Nielsen; Paul A. Garber; Mike Gill; Lisa Jones-Engel; Angela M. Maldonado; Kerry M. Dore; Jennifer D. Cramer; Susan Lappan; Francine Dolins; Emerson Y. Sy; Agustin Fuentes; et al. (International Journal of Primatology, 2024)
The global trade in nonhuman primates represents a substantial threat to ecosystem health, human health, and primate conservation worldwide. Most of the primate trade involves trade for pet-keeping, consumption, or biomedical experimentation. We present an overview of international primate trade through five case studies; each describes a different facet of this trade. We draw on published scientific literature, media outlets, and open access datasets, including the CITES Trade Database to build these case studies. Case study 1 describes the role of introduced island populations of Macaca and Chlorocebus in trade for biomedical experimentation; case study 2 covers the global health threats posed by the primate trade, including zoonotic disease transmission once animals enter the trade pipeline; case study 3 addresses the ways that changing patterns of primate trade, from local markets to online, have increased the demand for primates as pets; case study 4 recognizes the role that local environmental activism can play in mitigating trade; and case study 5 shows variation between global regions in their contribution to the primate trade. We recommend greater oversight of primate trade, especially domestic trade within primate range countries, and real-time reporting to CITES to accurately track primate trade. Effective conservation-focused regulations that can minimise the negative effects of primate trade must be tailored to specific regions and species and require transparency, careful regulation, field research, and an understanding of the magnitude of this trade.

Human serum albumin-based drug-free macromolecular therapeutics induce apoptosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patient cells by crosslinking of CD20 and/or CD38 receptors - Jiahui Li; M. Tommy Gambles; Brandt Jones; Justin A. Williams; Nicola J. Camp; Paul J. Shami; Jiyuan Yang; Jindřich Kopeček (Drug Delivery and Translational Research, 2024)

Climate change impacts on a sedimentary coast—a regional synthesis from genes to ecosystems - Christian Buschbaum; L. N. S. Shama; F. L. L. Amorim; S. Brand; C. M. A. Broquard; N. Camillini; A. Cornelius; T. Dolch; A. Dummermuth; J. Feldner; M. S. Guignard; J. Habedank; et al. (Marine Biodiversity, 2024)
Climate change effects on coastal ecosystems vary on large spatial scales, but can also be highly site dependent at the regional level. The Wadden Sea in the south-eastern North Sea is warming faster than many other temperate coastal areas, with surface seawater temperature increasing by almost 2 °C over the last 60 years, nearly double the global ocean mean increase. Climate warming is accompanied by rising sea levels, which have increased by approximately 2 mm yr −1 over the last 120 years. For this sedimentary coast, the predicted acceleration of sea-level rise will have profound effects on tidal dynamics and bathymetry in the area. This paper synthesises studies of the effects of ocean warming and sea level rise in the northern Wadden Sea, largely based on research conducted at the Wadden Sea Station Sylt of the Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research. An increasing rate of sea level rise above a critical threshold will lead to coastal erosion and changes in sediment composition, and may cause the transition from a tidal to lagoon-like environment as tidal flats submerge. This involves changes to coastal morphology, and the decline of important habitats such as muddy tidal flats, salt marshes and seagrass meadows, as well as their ecological services (e.g. carbon sequestration). Ocean warming affects plankton dynamics and phenology, as well as benthic community structure by hampering cold-adapted but facilitating warm-adapted species. The latter consist mostly of introduced non-native species originating from warmer coasts, with some epibenthic species acting as ecosystem engineers that create novel habitats on the tidal flats. Warming also changes interactions between species by decoupling existing predator–prey dynamics, as well as forming new interactions in which mass mortalities caused by parasites and pathogens can play an understudied but essential role. However, Wadden Sea organisms can adapt to changing abiotic and biotic parameters via genetic adaptation and phenotypic plasticity, which can also be inherited across generations (transgenerational plasticity), enabling faster plastic responses to future conditions. Important research advances have been made using next-generation molecular tools (-omics), mesocosm experiments simulating future climate scenarios, modelling approaches (ecological network analysis), and internet-based technologies for data collection and archiving. By synthesising these climate change impacts on multiple levels of physical and biological organisation in the northern Wadden Sea, we reveal knowledge gaps that need to be addressed by future investigations and comparative studies in other regions in order to implement management, mitigation and restoration strategies to preserve the uniqueness of this ecosystem of global importance.

Time for CHANGE: system-level interventions for bringing forward the date of effective use of NAMs in regulatory toxicology - Gro H. Mathisen; Angela Bearth; Lowenna B. Jones; Sebastian Hoffmann; Gunn E. Vist; Heather M. Ames; Trine Husøy; Camilla Svendsen; Katya Tsaioun; Takao Ashikaga; Denise Bloch; Aleksandra Cavoski; et al. (Archives of Toxicology, 2024)

Promoting Farmer Appreciation in Kentucky through a Farmer Cultural Awareness Project - M. Susan Jones; Ann K. Ferrell; Catherine Malin; Dawn Garett-Wright; Ginny Willoughby (Journal of Agromedicine, 2024)

Soluble metal porphyrins - Zero-valent zinc system for effective reductive defluorination of branched per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) - Jun Sun; Tsz Tin Yu; Maryam Mirabediny; Matthew Lee; Adele Jones; Denis M. O'Carroll; Michael J. Manefield; Priyank V. Kumar; Russell Pickford; Zeno Rizqi Ramadhan; Saroj Kumar Bhattacharyya; Björn Åkermark; et al. (Water Research, 2024)

The deglacial history of 79N glacier and the Northeast Greenland Ice Stream - David H. Roberts; Timothy P. Lane; Richard S. Jones; Michael J. Bentley; Christopher M. Darvill; Angel Rodes; James A. Smith; Stewart S.R. Jamieson; Brice R. Rea; Derek Fabel; Delia Gheorghiu; Allan Davidson; et al. (Quaternary Science Reviews, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-hexen-1-ol, 5-methyl-2-(1-methylethenyl)-, CAS registry number 58461-27-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, dihydro-α-terpineol, CAS Registry Number 498-81-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-hexylcyclopentanone, CAS registry number 13074-65-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methyl-4-phenyl-2-butyl isobutyrate, CAS registry number 10031-71-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, d,l-menthone 1,2-glycerol ketal, CAS Registry Number 63187-91-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-cyclohexyl-2-methyl-2-butanol, CAS registry number 83926-73-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4′-hydroxy-3′-methoxyacetophenone, CAS Registry Number 498-02-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2,2,4-trimethyl-4-phenyl-butane-nitrile, CAS Registry Number 75490-39-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, thymol, CAS Registry Number 89-83-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl cinnamate, CAS Registry Number 103-36-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-methyl-2-butenyl benzoate, CAS Registry Number 5205-11-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, methylcyclooctyl carbonate, CAS Registry Number 61699-38-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-p-tolylethanol, CAS registry number 699-02-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene, CAS Registry Number 13877-91-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,1-dimethyl-2-phenylethyl isobutyrate, CAS Registry Number 59354-71-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, amyl cinnamate, CAS Registry Number 3487-99-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methyl-4-phenyl-2-butanol, CAS Registry Number 103-05-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, benzenepropanenitrile, 4-ethyl-α,α.-dimethyl-, CAS Registry Number 134123-93-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, methyl 2,4-dihydroxy-m-toluate, CAS Registry Number 33662-58-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2H-1,5-benzodioxepin-3(4H)-one, 7-(1-methylethyl)-, CAS Registry Number 950919-28-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl 2-ethylhexanoate, CAS Registry Number 2983-37-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexyl salicylate, CAS registry number 25485-88-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment,α-methylbenzyl alcohol, CAS registry number 98-85-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-isopropylcyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 4621-04-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, acetaldehyde, diphenethyl acetal, CAS Registry Number 122-71-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, α,α-dimethylphenethyl alcohol, CAS Registry Number 100-86-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, citronellyl ethyl oxalate, CAS Registry Number 60788-25-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl 2-tert-butylcyclohexyl carbonate, CAS Registry Number 67801-64-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl 2,3,6-trimethylcyclohexyl carbonate, CAS Registry Number 93981-50-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3-octyl acetate, CAS registry number 4864-61-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, exo-2-[(1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-yl)oxy]ethanol, CAS Registry Number 7070-15-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-propanol, reaction products with boron trifluoride and 5-ethylidenebicyclo[2.2.1]hept-2-ene, CAS registry number 90530-04-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1-propanol, 2-methyl-3-[(1,7,7-trimethylbicyclo-[2.2.1]hept-2-yl)oxy]-, CAS Registry Number 128119-70-0 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,3-nonanediol acetate (mixed esters), CAS Registry Number 1322-17-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,12-tridecadienenitrile, CAS Registry Number 134769-33-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, hexanoic acid, 4-methyl-, CAS registry number 1561-11-1 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-ethyloctanoic acid, CAS registry number 16493-80-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methylhexanoic acid, CAS registry number 4536-23-6 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 2-methylheptanoic acid, CAS registry number 1188-02-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, butyl 2-methylvalerate, CAS Registry Number 6297-41-2 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, N,N-diethyloctamide, CAS registry number 996-97-4 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, phenethyl salicylate, CAS Registry Number 87-22-9 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, benzonitrile, 3,4-dimethyl-, CAS Registry Number 22884-95-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 4-allyl-2-methoxyphenyl benzyl ether, CAS Registry Number 57371-42-3 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 3,6-nonadien-1-ol, CAS Registry Number 76649-25-7 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, ethyl 2-methylpentanoate, CAS Registry Number 39255-32-8 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)

Update to RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, linalyl cinnamate, CAS registry number 78-37-5 - A.M. Api; A. Bartlett; D. Belsito; D. Botelho; M. Bruze; A. Bryant-Freidrich; G.A. Burton; M.A. Cancellieri; H. Chon; M.L. Dagli; W. Dekant; C. Deodhar; et al. (Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2024)