Universidade Federal do Norte do Tocantins

Curso de Graduação em Licenciatura em Química

Campus Araguaína – Cimba
Disciplina: Produção Textual e Linguagem Cientifica Estrangeira
Alunas: Jeysla Albuquerque Assunção (Química)
Maria Idelvânia Ferreira Tupinambá (Biologia)

Activity 3
Article Review
The article presents a scientific approach designed to assist in the innovation of
techniques that minimize costs and the use of animal testing through the use of NAMs.
The proposal was constructed and elaborated in a simple way by researchers in the field.
It is a research of great relevance to the scientific community due to the facts already
presented. It is a study situated in the field of comparability of scientific methods of
analytical chemical tests. The proposal materialized in the analysis of the difference
between some countries (EUA, UE, Japão e China), among which some differences
were highlighted. Even though the work presents a relative significance, one notices that
the authors could have added topics such as: materials and methods and/or results and
discussions instead of dealing with no connection topics. However, the authors can
make changes in the body of the article, discuss more the importance of the reduction of
tests and animals and work more in relation to the presentation of the results of the
studies performed. After making the corrections, the submission of the work in the same
journal is at the discretion of the authors.
Abstract: The authors present a copy of the last paragraph of the first topic of the
introduction in the abstract, which makes the text repetitive, this fact contributes to the
absence of a methodology, to the continuation of the introduction and also did not
punctuate the conclusion of the work done. The argument that they expect the work to
contribute to something does not mean that this is the conclusion of the work.
Introduction: The introduction started well grounded, however, the authors could
discuss more about the subject related to the reduction of animal testing, because this
fact contributes positively to the evaluation in function of the use of the technique, due
to issues related to bioethics, replacing animals in research is a way that science needs
to work to establish a respect for life. Furthermore, the production of pesticides that do
not cause harm to health could be developed and/or improved. The authors cites the
word costs soon after talking about reducing animal testing, I believe it was not the
intention of the authors, but this fact can provide subsidies to activists who are against
animal testing, generating questions about being concerned only due to numbers /
values, even though the work is related to toxicity testing techniques of chemical
pesticides.
Conclusions and prospects: In the conclusion the authors make a point that could be
added to the objectives of the paper which is "[...] thereby reducing the cost and number
of animals used during pesticide re-registration." Since they commented on this, they
could have elaborated a bit on this and added it to the objectives and discussed a bit in
the introduction about how and why these techniques are important for reducing animal
testing. The paper does not have an assertive conclusion, i.e. it does not have the
conclusion of the tests done and what the relevant differences are.
Additional information: Figure 3 is confusing to be interpreted, because it presents a
large amount of content, the color is also very clear and when the lines are together it is
almost impossible to differentiate for which fields each one is indicating, they could be
more summarized and/or divided in two.