Improved empirical models describing hormesis

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Volumn 24, Issue 12, 2005, Pages 3166-3172

  Cedergreen, Nina ^a   Ritz, Christian ^a   Streibig, Jens Carl ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Delta method; Dose response model; Hormesis; Hormoligosis; Statistical model

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; DELTA MODULATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; STATISTICAL METHODS;

DELTA METHOD; DOSE-RESPONSE MODEL; HORMESIS; HORMOLIGOSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL;

TOXICITY;

HERBICIDE; METSULFURON METHYL; TERBUTYLAZINE;

DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; MODELING; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TOXICOLOGY;

ARTICLE; BARLEY; CRUSTACEA; DOSE RESPONSE; EGG PRODUCTION; HORMESIS; INSECT; LEAF GROWTH; LONGEVITY; MACROPHYTE; NONHUMAN; PLANT GROWTH; POPULATION GROWTH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY;

ANIMALS; ARYLSULFONATES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HERBICIDES; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; NITROBENZOATES; PLANTS, MEDICINAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOXICITY TESTS; TOXICOLOGY; TRIAZINES;

CRUSTACEA; HORDEUM VULGARE SUBSP. VULGARE; INSECTA; LEMNA MINOR;

EID: 28444475884     PISSN: 07307268     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1897/05-014R.1     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Calabrese EJ. 2001. Overcompensation stimulation: A mechanism for hormetic effects. Crit Rev Toxicol 31:425-470.
2. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. 2003. Toxicology rethinks its central belief. Nature 421:691-692.
3. Stebbing ARD. 2003. A mechanism for hormesis-A problem in the wrong direction. Crit Rev Toxicol 33:463-467.
4. Fujiwara Y, Takahashi T, Yoshioka T, Nakasuji F. 2002. Changes in egg size of the diamondback moth Phutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutidae) treated with fenvalerate at sublethal doses and viability of the eggs. Appl Entomol Zool 37:103-109.
5. Forbes VE. 2000. Is hormesis an evolutionary expectation? Funct Ecol 14:12-24.
6. Zanuncio TV, Serrão JE, Zanuncio JC, Guedes RNC. 2003. Permethrin-induced hormesis on the predator Supputius cincticeps (Stål, 1860) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Crop Prot 22:941-947.
7. Kovalchuk I, Filkowski J, Smith K, Kovalchuk O. 2003. Reactive oxygen species stimulate homologous recombination in plants. Plant Cell Environ 26:1531-1539.
8. Liu SZ. 2003. On radiation hormesis expressed in the immune system. Crit Rev Toxicol 33:431-442.
9. Morré DJ. 2000. Chemical hormesis in cell growth: A molecular target at the cell surface. J Appl Toxicol 20:157-163.
10. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. 2001. U-shaped dose-responses in biology, toxicology, and public health. Annu Rev Public Health 22:15-33.
11. Bailer J, Oris JT. 2000. Defining the baseline for inhibition concentration calculations for hormetic hazards. J Appl Toxicol 20:121-125.
12. Chapman PM. 2001. Reflections on the future of hormesis. Crit Rev Toxicol 31:649-651.
13. Crump K. 2001. Evaluating the evidence for hormesis: A statistical perspective. Crit Rev Toxicol 31:669-679.
14. Brain P, Cousens R. 1989. An equation to describe dose-responses where there is stimulation of growth at low doses. Weed Res 29:93-96.
15. Streibig JC, Rudemo M, Jensen JE. 1993. Dose-response curves and statistical models. In Streibig JC, Kudsk R eds, Herbicide Bioassay. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, USA, pp 29-55.
16. Van Ewijk PH, Hoekstra JA. 1993. Calculation of the EC50 and its confidence interval when subtoxic stimulus is present. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 25:25-32.
17. Hoekstra JA, Van Ewijk PH. 1993. Alternatives for the no-observed-effect level. Environ Toxicol Chem 12:187-194.
18. Faust M, Scholze M. 2004. Competing concepts for the prediction of mixture toxicity: Do the differences matter for regulatory purposes? EVKI-CT1999-00012. EU Project BEAM. Final Report. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium.
19. Van der Vart AW. 1998. Asymptotic Statistics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
20. Ritz C, Streibig JC. 2004. Bioassay analysis using R. Journal of Statistical Software 12:1-22.
21. R Development Core Team. 2004. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
22. Van Ewijk PH, Hoekstra JA. 1994. Curvature measures and confidence intervals for the linear logistic model. Applied Statistics 43:477-487.
23. Schabenberger O, Tharp BE, Kells JJ, Penner D. 1999. Statistics- Statistical test for hormesis and effective dosages in herbicide dose-response. Agron J 91:713-721.
24. Bailer J, Oris JT. 1997. Incorporating hormesis in the routine testing of hazards. Hum Exp Toxicol 17:247-250.
25. Cedergreen N, Streibig JC, Spliid NH. 2004. Species specific sensitivity of aquatic macrophytes towards herbicides. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 58:314-323.
26. Press WH, Flannery BP, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT. 1986. Numerical Recipes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
27. Cedergreen N, Streibig JC, Spliid NH. 2004. Sensitivity of aquatic plants to the herbicide metsulfuron-methyl. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 57:153-161.
28. Cedergreen N, Streibig JC. 2005. Can the choice of endpoint lead to contradicting results of mixture toxicity experiments? Environ Toxicol Chem 24:1676-1683.
29. Bates DM, Watts DG. 1988. Nonlinear Regression Analysis and Its Applications. John Wiley, New York, NY, USA, pp 103-104.
30. Stebbing ARD. 2000. Hormesis: Interpreting the β-curve using control theory. J Appl Toxicol 20:93-101.
31. Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. 2003. Inorganics and hormesis. Crit Rev Toxicol 33:215-295.
32. Chapman PM, Caldwell RS. 1996. A warning: NOECs are inappropriate for regulatory use. Environ Toxicol Chem 5:77-79.
33. Kooijman SALM. 1996. An alternative to NOEC exists, but the standard model has to be abandoned first. Oikos 75:310-316.
34. Morse JG. 2001. Agricultural implications of pesticide-induced hormesis of insects and mites. Hum Exp Toxicol 17:266-269.
35. Allender WJ, Cresswell GC, Kaldor J, Kennedy IR. 1997. Effect of lithium and lanthium on herbicide induced hormesis in hydroponically grown cotton and corn. J Plant Nutr 20:81-95.