A comparative study of an accelerated life-test model and a toxicokinetics-based model for the analysis of Porcellio scaber survival data

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 232-237

  Ren, Shijin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Accelerated life test model; Dose time response data; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD ESTIMATION; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; RELIABILITY; RISK MANAGEMENT; STATISTICAL METHODS; TOXIC MATERIALS;

LIFE-TEST MODELS; LOG-NORMAL DISTRIBUTION;

ECOLOGY;

DIMPYLATE;

COMPARATIVE STUDY; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL; TOXICITY TEST;

ACCELERATED LIFE TEST MODEL; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DOSE TIME EFFECT RELATION; ISOPODA; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; NONHUMAN; PORCELLIO SCABER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL; STATISTICAL MODEL; SURVIVAL RATE; TOXICITY TESTING; TOXICOKINETICS;

ANIMALS; DIAZINON; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FORECASTING; INSECTICIDES; ISOPODA; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SOIL POLLUTANTS; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS;

ANIMALIA; ISOPODA; PORCELLIO; PORCELLIO SCABER;

EID: 0346098282     PISSN: 07307268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1897/03-66     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Sun K, Krause GF, Mayer FL, Ellersieck MR, Basu AP. 1995. Estimation of acute toxicity by fitting a dose-time-response surface. Risk Analysis 15:247-252.
2. Liao CM, Chen BC, Lin MC, Chiu HM, Chou YH. 2002. Coupling toxicokinetics and pharmacodynamics for predicting survival of Abalone (Haliotis diversicolor supertexta) exposed to waterborne zinc. Environ Toxicol 17:478-486.
3. Jacquez JA. 1996. Compartment Analysis in Biology and Medicine. Biomedware, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
4. Bonnomet V, Duboudin C, Magaud H, Thybaud E, Vindimian E, Beauzamy B. 2002. Modeling explicitly and mechanistically median lethal concentration as a function of time for risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:2252-2259.
5. McKay D, Puig H, McCarty LS. 1992. An equation describing the time course and variability in uptake and toxicity of narcotic chemicals to fish. Environ Toxicol Chem 11:941-951.
6. Hughes MR, Bailer AJ, Denton DL. 2001. Toxicant- and response-specific comparisons of statistical methods for estimating effective concentrations. Environ Toxicol Chem 20:1374-1380.
7. Kerr DR, Meador JP. 2001. Modeling dose response using generalized linear models. Environ Toxicol Chem 15:395-401.
8. Widianarko B, Van Straalen N. 1996. Toxicokinetics-based survival analysis in bioassays using nonpersistent chemicals. Environ Toxicol Chem 15:402-406.
9. Meeker WQ, Escobar LA. 1998. Statistical Methods for Reliability Data. John Wiley, New York, NY, USA.
10. Ren S, Frymier PD. 2003. Kinetics of the toxicity of metals to luminescent bacteria. Advances in Environmental Research 7:537-547.
11. Thursby GB, Heltshe J, Scott KJ. 1997. Revised approach to toxicity test acceptability criteria using a statistical performance assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 16:1322-1329.
12. Péry ARR, Flammarion P, Vollat B, Bedaux JJM, Kooijman SALM, Garric J. 2002. Using a biology-based model (DEBtox) to analyze bioassays in ecotoxicology: Opportunities and recommendations. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:459-465.
13. Parrish PR. 1985. Acute toxicity tests. In Rand GM, Petrocelli SR, eds, Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology. Hemisphere, New York, NY, USA, pp 31-56.