117 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22991182)
1. 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]
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. 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]
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. What does the ECx tell us about the curve? Thoughts into ecological thresholds.
Krull M
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2013 Jan; 9(1):170-1. PubMed ID: 23281238
[No 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. 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]
8. A Bayesian approach for determining the no effect concentration and hazardous concentration in ecotoxicology.
Fox DR
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2010 Feb; 73(2):123-31. PubMed ID: 19836077
[TBL] [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. 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]
11. Statistics and ecotoxicology: shotgun marriage or enduring partnership?
Fox DR
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2010 Jul; 6(3):501-2. PubMed ID: 20821712
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. The use of carrier solvents in regulatory aquatic toxicology testing: practical, statistical and regulatory considerations.
Green J; Wheeler JR
Aquat Toxicol; 2013 Nov; 144-145():242-9. PubMed ID: 24185102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Don't be fooled-A no-observed-effect concentration is no substitute for a poor concentration-response experiment.
Fox DR; Landis WG
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2016 Sep; 35(9):2141-8. PubMed ID: 27089534
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Some good reasons to ban ECx and related concepts in ecotoxicology.
Jager T
Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Oct; 45(19):8180-1. PubMed ID: 21919475
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Statistical reporting deficiencies in environmental toxicology.
Bosker T; Mudge JF; Munkittrick KR
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2013 Aug; 32(8):1737-9. PubMed ID: 23553995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Redressing the power and effect of significance. A new approach to an old problem: teaching statistics to nursing students.
Taylor S; Muncer S
Nurse Educ Today; 2000 Jul; 20(5):358-64. PubMed ID: 10895117
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. DEBtox theory and matrix population models as helpful tools in understanding the interaction between toxic cyanobacteria and zooplankton.
Billoir E; da Silva Ferrão-Filho A; Laure Delignette-Muller M; Charles S
J Theor Biol; 2009 Jun; 258(3):380-8. PubMed ID: 18706427
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Introduction of jumping fragments in combination with QSARs for the assessment of classification in ecotoxicology.
Lozano S; Poezevara G; Halm-Lemeille MP; Lescot-Fontaine E; Lepailleur A; Bissell-Siders R; Crémilleux B; Rault S; Cuissart B; Bureau R
J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Aug; 50(8):1330-9. PubMed ID: 20726596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. The CPCAT as a novel tool to overcome the shortcomings of NOEC/LOEC statistics in ecotoxicology: a simulation study to evaluate the statistical power.
Lehmann R; Bachmann J; Karaoglan B; Lacker J; Lurman G; Polleichtner C; Ratte HT; Ratte M
Environ Sci Eur; 2018; 30(1):50. PubMed ID: 30596000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Application of the Closure Principle Computational Approach Test to Assess Ecotoxicological Field Studies: Comparative Analysis Using Earthworm Field Test Abundance Data.
Daniels B; Roß-Nickoll M; Jänsch S; Pieper S; Römbke J; Scholz-Starke B; Ottermanns R
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2021 Jun; 40(6):1750-1760. PubMed ID: 33590918
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
