Abstract

The relative ability of the NOEC (no-observed-effect concentration) and ECx (the effect concentration corresponding to x-percent response) to determine benchmark toxicant concentrations, which are expected to ensure environmental safety, when there are large uncertainties in data was investigated with Monte Carlo simulations. We assumed a hypothetical true concentration-response function, and examined how random fluctuations of responses around the true responses affected the NOEC and ECx values. For assessment of the relative performances of these endpoints, we adopted two criteria: how large uncertainties were allowed for the minimum requirement for safety to be met, and the probability with which the estimated endpoints exceeded the minimum requirement for safety. The results of simulations indicated that, when there were small uncertainties in the data, performance of the NOEC was comparable with or slightly better than the ECx (EC5 and EC10) in providing benchmark concentrations that satisfied the minimum requirement for safety. With larger random variation of data (the coefficient of variation in responses between replicates within treatments or in the control was noticeably larger than 10 percent), the NOEC performed considerably worse than the ECx in terms of the frequency of simulated runs in which the endpoints exceeded the minimum requirement of safety. We conclude that the NOEC is as relevant as the ECx for risk assessment of chemicals under limited situations.

Highlights

  • In the last two decades, the no-observed effect concentration (NOEC) has been severely criticized as a summary statistic in ecotoxicology [1,2,3]

  • (2) NOECs depend on the power of statistical hypothesis testing, which is based on pairwise comparisons

  • When TSL20 was regarded as the benchmark concentration, the EC5 always had better performance than the NOEC in all cases (Figs 2 and 3), which implied that the ECx specified by an effect rate that is much smaller than the effect rate inducing unacceptable hazards can be an efficient endpoint that is generally more robust than the NOEC in avoiding such hazards

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In the last two decades, the no-observed effect concentration (NOEC) has been severely criticized as a summary statistic in ecotoxicology [1,2,3]. The concentration that is predicted to induce a particular rate of response (x-percent effect concentration, ECx) or the model-based no-effect concentration (NEC) has been advocated [2,3]. The criticisms for the NOEC and related concepts are mainly directed towards the following two properties, which would be inappropriate for endpoints in toxicology. (1) A NOEC value is equated to one of the test concentrations and is largely dependent on the test design. (2) NOECs depend on the power of statistical hypothesis testing, which is based on pairwise comparisons. Robustness of NOEC and ECx design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript The criticisms for the NOEC and related concepts are mainly directed towards the following two properties, which would be inappropriate for endpoints in toxicology. (1) A NOEC value is equated to one of the test concentrations and is largely dependent on the test design. (2) NOECs depend on the power of statistical hypothesis testing, which is based on pairwise comparisons

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call