Allyl ethers of e.g. 2,4,6-tribromophenol and TBBPA are handled by naming the phenol entity first and then introducing one or two ether functionalities, the latter denoted “bis” (b), to give the STABs: TrBPh-AE and TBBPA-bAE, respectively. Other ethers are treated similarly, with the aryl group first and with the alkyl ether group linked to the word “ether”. In order to minimize confusion, we propose the use of a set of standardized short forms for major parts of a molecule (or their name). The criteria for constructing the abbreviations are given below and in Table 1. The STABs of all BFRs, CFRs and PFRs are listed in plain letters under the PRABs of the same compound, presented in bold letters (Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4).

No inorganic FRs have been included in the present article since we feel that Epacadostat manufacturer the chemical formula can be used for most of those chemicals. 1. Abbreviations should, as far as possible, be based on a “readable” common name EPZ5676 research buy of the chemical. This may lead to the use of an abbreviation, such as TBBPA originating from the common name tetrabromobisphenol A. The goal is to minimize use of non-interpretable names as a base of the abbreviation if it is possible to do so. However, some names and structures of the FRs are very complex and it is unavoidable that the STABs also become complex. Di; Tr; Te; Pe; Hx; Hp; O; N; D; UD; DD; TrD; TeD; for the series of 2–14 substituents. 6. The aliphatic chains or rings and aromatic entities are presented in Table 1. Since the STABs tend to be quite complicated, Demeclocycline in numerous cases, we are proposing combinations of, in general, three to eight capital letters for PRABs. The PRABs take into account previously used abbreviations and shortening of the STABs. In a few cases the suggested PRABs exceed eight letters, but this is in cases where no other possibility was obvious to us. The goal has been to present PRABs that are derived in a logical manner (based on the STABs) and are expected to be adopted by the scientific community. Among the FRs discussed in this article, we propose

a hierarchy for clarification of the status of these chemicals in an environment and health perspective. First, it may be worth to stress that there is a difference in the definition of e.g. an “emerging chemical pollutant” and an “emerging issue”. Further, an “established pollutant” could of course be an “emerging issue”. Hence the following definitions are put forward for any FRs: Established FRs (BFRs/CFRs/PFRs) are chemicals which are extensively documented regarding production and use as FRs, chemistry, fate, exposures, environment and health issues (i.e. (eco-)toxicity and/or human health effects). The numbers of established, emerging, novel and/or potential BFRs, CFRs and PFRs identified and reported in this paper are 55, 18 and 23, respectively (Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4). These numbers do not include either congeners or enantiomers of a given FR.