Literature DB >> 22991182

The drive to ban the NOEC/LOEC in favor of ECx is misguided and misinformed.

John W Green1, Timothy A Springer, Jane P Staveley.   

Abstract

Challenges to the use of the no observed effect concentration (NOEC) in ecotoxicology have appeared over the years, with a recent call for banning its use in favor of the x% effects concentration (ECx). This article presents an opposing view, providing reasons for the continued use of the NOEC, and for hypothesis testing in general. Although the use of ECx values is appropriate in many situations, there are numerous real-world examples where it is not suitable and offers no advantage over the use of hypothesis testing. These examples are presented with recommended data analysis techniques, illustrating the variety of statistical approaches that are meaningful in analyzing ecotoxicity data. Thoughtful consideration of study design and proper analysis and interpretation of the results will go further to advance the science of ecotoxicology than attempting to implement a blanket prohibition or endorsement of any single statistical approach.
Copyright © 2012 SETAC.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 22991182     DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1367

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag        ISSN: 1551-3777            Impact factor:   2.992


  7 in total

1.  Reconsidering sufficient and optimal test design in acute toxicity testing.

Authors:  Tjalling Jager
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 2.823

2.  The advantages of linear concentration-response curves for in vitro bioassays with environmental samples.

Authors:  Beate I Escher; Peta A Neale; Daniel L Villeneuve
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 3.742

3.  Ecosystem services in risk assessment and management.

Authors:  Wayne R Munns; Veronique Poulsen; William R Gala; Stuart J Marshall; Anne W Rea; Mary T Sorensen; Katherine von Stackelberg
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 2.992

4.  MOSAIC: a web-interface for statistical analyses in ecotoxicology.

Authors:  Sandrine Charles; Philippe Veber; Marie Laure Delignette-Muller
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-08-26       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 5.  Historical control data for the interpretation of ecotoxicity data: are we missing a trick?

Authors:  Amy C Brooks; Manousos Foudoulakis; Hanna S Schuster; James R Wheeler
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 2.823

6.  Risk Assessment of Gypsum Amendment on Agricultural Fields: Effects of Sulfate on Riverine Biota.

Authors:  Krista Rantamo; Hanna Arola; Jukka Aroviita; Heikki Hämälainen; Maija Hannula; Rami Laaksonen; Tiina Laamanen; Matti T Leppänen; Johanna Salmelin; Jukka T Syrjänen; Antti Taskinen; Jarno Turunen; Petri Ekholm
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2022-01       Impact factor: 4.218

7.  Relative robustness of NOEC and ECx against large uncertainties in data.

Authors:  Yoshinari Tanaka; Kensei Nakamura; Hiroyuki Yokomizo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.