118 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21932292)
1. A new perspective on the Dunnett procedure: filling the gap between NOEC/LOEC and ECx concepts.
Delignette-Muller ML; Forfait C; Billoir E; Charles S
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2011 Dec; 30(12):2888-91. PubMed ID: 21932292
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Time to get off the fence: the need for definitive international guidance on statistical analysis of ecotoxicity data.
van Dam RA; Harford AJ; Warne MS
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2012 Apr; 8(2):242-5. PubMed ID: 22308052
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Bad habits die hard: the NOEC's persistence reflects poorly on ecotoxicology.
Jager T
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2012 Feb; 31(2):228-9. PubMed ID: 22095471
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
4. Relative robustness of NOEC and ECx against large uncertainties in data.
Tanaka Y; Nakamura K; Yokomizo H
PLoS One; 2018; 13(11):e0206901. PubMed ID: 30485303
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Application of chemical toxicity distributions to ecotoxicology data requirements under REACH.
Williams ES; Berninger JP; Brooks BW
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2011 Aug; 30(8):1943-54. PubMed ID: 21590796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation and comparison of the relationship between NOEC and EC10 or EC20 values in chronic Daphnia toxicity testing.
Beasley A; Belanger SE; Brill JL; Otter RR
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2015 Oct; 34(10):2378-84. PubMed ID: 26033640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Reluctant comment on Fox et al. (2012): On being dragged into the NOEC squabble.
Newman MC
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2012 Oct; 8(4):767. PubMed ID: 22987525
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. NOEC: notable oversight of enlightened Canadians: a response to van Dam et al. (2012).
Van der Vliet L; Taylor LN; Scroggins R
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2012 Jul; 8(3):397-8; author reply 399-400. PubMed ID: 22707418
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Statistical analysis of regulatory ecotoxicity tests.
Isnard P; Flammarion P; Roman G; Babut M; Bastien P; Bintein S; Esserméant L; Férard JF; Gallotti-Schmitt S; Saouter E; Saroli M; Thiébaud H; Tomassone R; Vindimian E
Chemosphere; 2001 Nov; 45(4-5):659-69. PubMed ID: 11680762
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. The drive to ban the NOEC/LOEC in favor of ECx is misguided and misinformed.
Green JW; Springer TA; Staveley JP
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2013 Jan; 9(1):12-6. PubMed ID: 22991182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. NOEC and LOEC as merely concessive expedients: two unambiguous alternatives and some criteria to maximize the efficiency of dose-response experimental designs.
Murado MA; Prieto MA
Sci Total Environ; 2013 Sep; 461-462():576-86. PubMed ID: 23756217
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Comparing ecotoxicological effect concentrations of chemicals established in multi-species vs. single-species toxicity test systems.
De Laender F; De Schamphelaere KA; Vanrolleghem PA; Janssen CR
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2009 Feb; 72(2):310-5. PubMed ID: 18774172
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Results from a round robin test for the ecotoxicological evaluation of construction products using two leaching tests and an aquatic test battery.
Gartiser S; Heisterkamp I; Schoknecht U; Burkhardt M; Ratte M; Ilvonen O; Brauer F; Brückmann J; Dabrunz A; Egeler P; Eisl AM; Feiler U; Fritz I; König S; Lebertz H; Pandard P; Pötschke G; Scheerbaum D; Schreiber F; Soldán P; Weiß R; Weltens R
Chemosphere; 2017 May; 175():138-146. PubMed ID: 28211327
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Clustering pesticides according to their molecular properties, fate, and effects by considering additional ecotoxicological parameters in the TyPol method.
Traoré H; Crouzet O; Mamy L; Sireyjol C; Rossard V; Servien R; Latrille E; Martin-Laurent F; Patureau D; Benoit P
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int; 2018 Feb; 25(5):4728-4738. PubMed ID: 29197062
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Is the ECx a legitimate surrogate for a NOEC?
Fox DR
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2009 Apr; 5(2):351-3. PubMed ID: 19645096
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Survival data analyses in ecotoxicology: critical effect concentrations, methods and models. What should we use?
Forfait-Dubuc C; Charles S; Billoir E; Delignette-Muller ML
Ecotoxicology; 2012 May; 21(4):1072-83. PubMed ID: 22302371
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Is the integration of hormesis and essentiality into ecotoxicology now opening Pandora's Box?
Kefford BJ; Zalizniak L; Warne MS; Nugegoda D
Environ Pollut; 2008 Feb; 151(3):516-23. PubMed ID: 17559995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Proposing a vigorous hybrid of the LOEC and ECx.
deBruyn AM; Elphick JR
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2013 Apr; 9(2):345-7. PubMed ID: 23529808
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Reducing uncertainty in environmental risk assessment (ERA): clearly defining acute and chronic toxicity tests.
Hahn T; Stauber J; Dobson S; Howe P; Kielhorn J; Koennecker G; Diamond J; Lee-Steere C; Schneider U; Sugaya Y; Taylor K; Van Dam R; Mangelsdorf I
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2009 Jan; 5(1):175-7. PubMed ID: 19132815
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Effects of the artificial sweetener sucralose on Daphnia magna and Americamysis bahia survival, growth and reproduction.
Huggett DB; Stoddard KI
Food Chem Toxicol; 2011 Oct; 49(10):2575-9. PubMed ID: 21742009
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
