There is a need for fast, efficient, and cost-effective hazard identification and characterization of chemical hazards. This need is generating increased interest in the use of zebrafish embryos as both a screening tool and an alternative to mammalian test methods. A Collaborative Workshop on Aquatic Models and 21st Century Toxicology identified the lack of appropriate and consistent testing protocols as a challenge to the broader application of the zebrafish embryo model. The National Toxicology Program established the Systematic Evaluation of the Application of Zebrafish in Toxicology (SEAZIT) initiative to address the lack of consistent testing guidelines and identify sources of variability for zebrafish-based assays. This report summarizes initial SEAZIT information-gathering efforts. Investigators in academic, government, and industry laboratories that routinely use zebrafish embryos for chemical toxicity testing were asked about their husbandry practices and standard protocols. Information was collected about protocol components including zebrafish strains, feed, system water, disease surveillance, embryo exposure conditions, and endpoints. Literature was reviewed to assess issues raised by the investigators. Interviews revealed substantial variability across design parameters, data collected, and analysis procedures. The presence of the chorion and renewal of exposure media (static versus static-renewal) were identified as design parameters that could potentially influence study outcomes and should be investigated further with studies to determine chemical uptake from treatment solution into embryos. The information gathered in this effort provides a basis for future SEAZIT activities to promote more consistent practices among researchers using zebrafish embryos for toxicity evaluation.

Toxicological evaluation of chemicals using early-life stage zebrafish (Danio rerio) involves the observation and recording of altered phenotypes. Substantial variability has been observed among researchers in phenotypes reported from similar studies, as well as a lack of consistent data annotation, indicating a need for both terminological and data harmonization. When examined from a data science perspective, many of these apparent differences can be parsed into the same or similar endpoints whose measurements differ only in time, methodology, or nomenclature. Ontological knowledge structures can be leveraged to integrate diverse data sets across terminologies, scales, and modalities. Building on this premise, the National Toxicology Program's Systematic Evaluation of the Application of Zebrafish in Toxicology undertook a collaborative exercise to evaluate how the application of standardized phenotype terminology improved data consistency. To accomplish this, zebrafish researchers were asked to assess images of zebrafish larvae for morphological malformations in two surveys. In the first survey, researchers were asked to annotate observed malformations using their own terminology. In the second survey, researchers were asked to annotate the images from a list of terms and definitions from the Zebrafish Phenotype Ontology. Analysis of the results suggested that the use of ontology terms increased consistency and decreased ambiguity, but a larger study is needed to confirm. We conclude that utilizing a common data standard will not only reduce the heterogeneity of reported terms but increases agreement and repeatability between different laboratories. Thus, we advocate for the development of a zebrafish phenotype atlas to help laboratories create interoperable, computable data.