A Bayesian approach for determining the no effect concentration and hazardous concentration in ecotoxicology

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety

Volumn 73, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 123-131

  Fox, David R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Ecosystem protection; Hypothesis testing; NOECs; Species sensitivity distribution

Indexed keywords

MERCURIC CHLORIDE; METHYLMERCURIC CHLORIDE; PHENYLMERCURIC ACETATE;

BAYESIAN ANALYSIS; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; ESTIMATION METHOD; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; NUMERICAL MODEL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; BAYES THEOREM; COELENTERATE; CONCENTRATION (PARAMETERS); CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; DAPHNIA; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; NO EFFECT CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; PLANT LEMMA; POND; PROCESS DEVELOPMENT; SPECIES COMPARISON; SPECIES SENSITIVITY DISTRIBUTION; STATISTICAL MODEL; TOXICITY TESTING; URANIUM MINE;

BAYES THEOREM; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; ECOTOXICOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MODELS, STATISTICAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 70649105470     PISSN: 01476513     EISSN: 10902414     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoenv.2009.09.012     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Aldenberg T., and Jaworska J.S. Estimation of the hazardous concentration and fraction affected for normally distributed species sensitivity distributions. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 46 (2000) 1-18
2. Aldenberg T., and Slob W. Confidence limits for hazardous concentrations based on logistically distributed NOEC toxicity data. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 25 (1993) 48-63
3. ANZECC/ARMCANZ, 2000. Australian and New Zealand guidelines for fresh and marine water quality. National Water Quality Management Strategy Paper No. 4, Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council/Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand, Canberra, Australia.
4. Biesinger K.E., Anderson L.E., and Eaton J.G. Chronic effects of inorganic and organic mercury on Daphnia magna: toxicity, accumulation and loss. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 11 (1982) 769-774
5. Billoir E., Delignette-Muller M.L., Péry A.R.R., and Charles S. A Bayesian approach to analyzing ecotoxicological data. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42 (2008) 8978-8984
6. Crane M., and Newman M.C.N. What level of effect is a no observed effect?. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 19 (2000) 516-519
7. Fox, D.R., 1999. Setting water quality guidelines - a statistician's perspective. SETAC News, 17-18 May.
8. Fox D.R. Environmental power analysis - a new perspective. Environmetrics 12 (2001) 437-449
9. Fox D.R. Statistical issues in ecological risk assessment. Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 12 (2006) 120-129
10. Fox D.R. Natural resource management. In: Melnick E., and Everitt B. (Eds). Encyclopedia of Quantitative Risk Assessment and Analysis (2008), John Wiley and Sons Ltd., Chichester, UK 1600-1603
11. x a legitimate surrogate for the NOEC?. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage. 5 (2009) 351-353
12. Grist E.P.M., O'Hagan A., Crane M., Sorokin N., Sims I., and Whitehouse P. Bayesian and time-independent species sensitivity distributions for risk assessment of chemicals. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 (2006) 395-401
13. Hickey G.L., Kerford B., Dunlop J.E., and Craig P.S. Making species sensitivity distributions reflective of naturally occurring communities: using rapid testing and Bayesian statistics. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 27 (2008) 2403-2411
14. Hogan, A., van Dam, R., Houston, M., Lee, N., 2008. Toxicity of Ranger mine RP2 and pit 3 waters to native freshwater species: 2007 wet season. Supervising Scientist Report 197, Supervising Scientist, Darwin NT, Australia.
15. Isnard P., Flammarion P., Roman G., Babut M., Bastien Ph., Bintein S., Esserméant L., Férard J.F., Gallotti-Schmitt S., Saouter E., Saroli M., Thiébaud H., Thomassone R., and Vindimian E. Statistical analysis of regulatory ecotoxicity tests. Chemosphere 45 (2001) 659-669
16. Jager T., Heugens E.H.W., and Kooijman S.A.L.M. Making sense of ecotoxicological test results: towards application of process-based models. Ecotoxicology 15 (2006) 305-314
17. Kooijman S.A.L., Hanstveit A.O., and Nyholm N. No-effect concentrations in algal growth inhibition tests. Water Res. 30 (1996) 1625-1632
18. Kooijman S.A.L.M. An alternative for NOEC exists, but the standard model has to be abandoned first. Oikos 75 (2006) 310-316
19. Lee P.M. Bayesian Statistics: An Introduction (2004), Oxford University Press
20. Lunn D.J., Thomas A., Best N., and Spiegelhalter D. WinBUGS - a Bayesian modelling framework: concepts, structure, and extensibility. Stat. Comput. 10 (2000) 325-337
21. McCarthy M.A. Bayesian Methods for Ecology (2007), Cambridge University Press
22. Newman M.C. What exactly are you inferring? A closer look at hypothesis testing. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 27 (2008) 1013-1019
23. Newman M.C., Ownby D.R., Mézin L.C.A., Powell D.C., Christensen T.R.L., Lerberg S.B., and Anderson B.-A. Applying species-sensitivity distributions in ecological risk assessment: assumptions of distribution type and sufficient number of species. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 19 (2000) 508-515
24. Pires A.M., Branco J.A., Picado A., and Mendonça E. Models for the estimation of a 'no effect concentration'. Environmetrics 13 (2002) 15-27
25. Posthuma L., Suter G.W., and Traas T.P. Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology (2002), CRC Press
26. Shao Q. Estimation for hazardous concentrations based on NOEC toxicity data: an alternative approach. Environmetrics 11 (2000) 583-595
27. x, and NEC estimates. Environmetrics 8 (1997) 255-261
28. Van der Hoeven N. Current issues in statistics and models for ecotoxicological risk assessment. Acta Biotheor. 52 (2004) 201-217
29. Verdonck F.A.M., Jaworska J., Thas O., and Vanrolleghem P.A. Determining environmental standards using bootstrapping, Bayesian and maximum likelihood techniques: a comparative study. Anal. Chim. Acta 446 (2001) 427-436
30. Verdonck F.A., Aldenberg T., Jaworska J., and Vanrolleghem P.A. Limitations of current risk characterization methods in problematic environmental risk assessment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 22 (2003) 2209-2213
31. Wagner C., and Løkke H. Estimation of ecotoxicological protection levels from NOEC toxicity data. Water Res. 25 (1991) 1237-1242