An individual-based modeling approach for evaluation of endpoint sensitivity in harpacticoid copepod life-cycle tests and optimization of test design

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Volumn 30, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 2353-2362

  Preuss, Thomas G ^a   Brinkmann, Markus ^a   Lundström, Elin ^b   Bengtsson, Bengt Erik ^b   Breitholtz, Magnus ^b  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b STOCKHOLM UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Biotests; Sublethal effects; Test design; Virtual ecology

Indexed keywords

BIOTESTS; CURRENT TEST; END POINT DETECTION; HARPACTICOID COPEPODS; INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODELING; INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODELS; INSPECTION INTERVALS; MEASURED DATA; ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT; STANDARD TESTS; STATISTICAL POWER; SUBLETHAL EFFECTS; TEST DESIGNS; VIRTUAL ECOLOGY; VIRTUAL EXPERIMENTS;

DESIGN; ECOLOGY; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; OPTIMIZATION; SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS; STANDARDIZATION; STATISTICS; STOCHASTIC MODELS; VIRTUAL REALITY;

TESTING;

BROOD SIZE; CRUSTACEAN; DATA SET; DETECTION METHOD; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; GUIDELINE; INDIVIDUAL-BASED MODEL; LIFE CYCLE; MORTALITY; NUMERICAL MODEL; OECD; OPTIMIZATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SUBLETHAL EFFECT; TOXICITY TEST;

ARTICLE; COPEPOD; LIFE CYCLE; MORTALITY; NITOCRA SPINIPES; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SIMULATION; STOCHASTIC MODEL;

ANIMALS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COPEPODA; ENDPOINT DETERMINATION; FEMALE; LIFE CYCLE STAGES; MALE; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; REPRODUCTION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOXICITY TESTS;

COPEPODA; HARPACTICOIDA; NITOCRA SPINIPES;

EID: 80052612164     PISSN: 07307268     EISSN: 15528618     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/etc.614     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. European Commission. 2003. Technical Guidance Document in Support of Commission Directive 93/67/EEC on Risk Assessment for New Notified Substances and Commission Regulation. No 1488/94 on Risk Assessment for Existing Substances, Part II. Brussels, Belgium.
2. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2005. Guidance document on the validation and international acceptance of new or updated test methods for hazard assessment. Environment Health and Safety Publications Series on Testing and Assessment, No 34. Paris, France.
3. Gourmelon A, Ahtiainen J. 2007. Developing test guidelines on invertebrate development and reproduction for the assessment of chemicals, including potential endocrine active substances. The OECD perspective. Ecotoxicology 16: 161-167.
4. Breitholtz M, Lundström E, Dahl U, Forbes V. 2010. Improving the value of standard toxicity test data in REACH. In Eriksson J, Gilek M, Rudén C, eds Regulating Chemical Risks European and Global Challenges, 1st ed. Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 85-99.
5. Kusk KO, Wollenberger L. 2007. Towards an internationally harmonized test method for reproductive and developmental effects of endocrine disrupters in marine copepods. Ecotoxicology 16: 183-195.
6. Breitholtz M, Bengtsson BE. 2001. Oestrogens have no hormonal effect on the development and reproduction of the harpacticoid copepod Nitocra spinipes. Mar Pollut Bull 42: 879-886.
7. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2004. Standard guide for conducting renewal microplate-based life-cycle toxicity tests with a marine meiobenthic copepod. ASTM E2317 - 04. West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
8. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2006. Validation report of the full life cycle test with the harpacticoid copepods Nitocra spinipes and Amphiascus tenuiremis and the calanoid copepod Acartia tonsa - Phase I. Series on Testing and Assessment, No 79. Paris, France.
9. Lundstrom E, Bjorlenius B, Brinkmann M, Hollert H, Persson JO, Breitholtz M. 2010. Comparison of six sewage effluents treated with different treatment technologies-Population level responses in the harpacticoid copepod Nitocra spinipes Aquat Toxicol 96: 298-307.
10. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2011. Report of progress on the interlaboratory validation of the OECD 'harpacticoid copepod development and reproduction test' guideline - Phase II. Paris, France.
11. Grimm V, Ashauer R, Forbes V, Hommen U, Preuss T, Schmidt A, van den Brink P, Wogram J, Thorbek P. 2009. CREAM: A European project on mechanistic effect models for ecological risk assessment of chemicals. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16: 614-617.
12. Forbes VE, Hommen U, Thorbek P, Heimbach F, Van den Brink PJ, Wogram J, Thulke H-H, Grimm V. 2009. Ecological models in support of regulatory risk assessments of pesticides: Developing a strategy for the future. Integr Environ Assess Manag 5: 167-172.
13. Thorbek P, Forbes VE, Heimbach F, Hommen U, Thulke HH, van den Brink PJ, Wogram J, Grimm V. 2009. Ecological Models for Regulatory Risk Assessments of Pesticides: Developing a Strategy for the Future. SETAC, Pensacola, FL, USA.
14. Preuss TG, Hommen U, Alix A, Ashauer R, van den Brink P, Chapman P, Ducrot V, Forbes V, Grimm V, Schafer D, Streissl F, Thorbek P. 2009. Mechanistic effect models for ecological risk assessment of chemicals (MEMoRisk)-A new SETAC-Europe Advisory Group. Environ Sci Pollut Res 16: 250-252.
15. Preuss TG, Hammers-Wirtz M, Ratte HT. 2010. The potential of individual based population models to extrapolate effects measured at standardized test conditions to relevant environmental conditions-an example for 3, 4-dichloroaniline on Daphnia magna. J Environ Monit 12: 2070-2079.
16. Meyer KM, Mooij WM, Vos M, Hol WHG, van der Putten WH. 2009. The power of simulating experiments. Ecol Model 220: 2594-2597.
17. Schulz-Trieglaff O, Pfeifer N, Gropl C, Kohlbacher O, Reinert K. 2008. LC-MSsim - A simulation software for liquid chromatography mass spectrometry data. BMC Bioinformatics 9: 18.
18. Brookes ST, Whitley E, Peters TJ, Mulheran PA, Egger M, Davey Smith G. 2001. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: Quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess 5: 1-56.
19. Chinchilli VM, Fisher L, Craig TJ. 2005. Statistical issues in clinical trials that involve the double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge. J Allergy Clin Immunol 115: 592-597.
20. Zurell D, Berger U, Cabral JS, Jeltsch F, Meynard CN, Munkemuller T, Nehrbass N, Pagel J, Reineking B, Schroder B, Grimm V. 2010. The virtual ecologist approach: Simulating data and observers. Oikos 119: 622-635.
21. Dahl U, Breitholtz M. 2008. Integrating individual ecdysteroid content and growth-related stressor endpoints to assess toxicity in a benthic harpacticoid copepod. Aquat Toxicol 88: 191-199.
22. Grimm V, Berger U, Bastiansen F, Eliassen S, Ginot V, Giske J, Goss-Custard J, Grand T, Heinz SK, Huse G, Huth A, Jepsen JU, Jorgensen C, Mooij WM, Muller B, Pe'er G, Piou C, Railsback SF, Robbins AM, Robbins MM, Rossmanith E, Ruger N, Strand E, Souissi S, Stillman RA, Vabo R, Visser U, DeAngelis DL. 2006. A standard protocol for describing individual-based and agent-based models. Ecol Model 198: 115-126.
23. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2009. OECD Draft Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals. Proposal for a New Guideline. Harpacticoid Copepod Development and Reproduction Test. Paris, France.
24. Souissi S, Ban S. 2001. The consequences of individual variability in moulting probability and the aggregation of stages for modelling copepod population dynamics. J Plankton Res 23: 1279-1296.
25. Hu Q, Petrik CM, Davis CS. 2007. Normal versus gamma: Stochastic models of copepod molting rate. J Plankton Res 29: 985-997.
26. SIS. 1991. Determination of acute lethal toxicity of chemical substances and effluents to Nitocra spinipes Boeck - Static procedure. Swedish Standard SS-02-81-06. SIS-Standardiseringskommissionen I Sverige, Stockholm, Sweden. p 17.
27. Preuss TG, Hammers-Wirtz M, Hommen U, Rubach MN, Ratte HT. 2009. Development and validation of an individual based Daphnia magna population model: The influence of crowding on population dynamics. Ecol Model 220: 310-329.
28. Wang M, Grimm V. 2010. Population models in pesticide risk assessment: lessons for assessing population-level effects, recovery, and alternative exposure scenarios from modeling a small mammal. Environ Toxicol Chem 29: 1292-1300.
29. Topping CJ, Sibly RM, Akcakaya HR, Smith GC, Crocker DR. 2005. Risk assessment of UK skylark populations using life-history and individual-based landscape models. Ecotoxicology 14: 925-936.
30. Van den Brink PJ, Baveco JM, Verboom J, Heimbach F. 2007. An individual-based approach to model spatial population dynamics of invertebrates in aquatic ecosystems after pesticide contamination. Environ Toxicol Chem 26: 2226-2236.
31. Ratte HT. 1996. Statistical implications of end-point selection and inspection interval in the daphnia reproduction test. A simulation study. Environ Toxicol Chem 15: 1831-1843.
32. Hutchinson TH. 2007. Small is useful in endocrine disrupter assessment - Four key recommendations for aquatic invertebrate research. Ecotoxicology 16: 231-238.