SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Aldenberg T, Jaworska J, Traas T. 2002. Normal Species sensitivity distributions and probabilistic ecological risk assessment. In: Posthuma SaT, editor. Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. CRC Press.
  • Aldenberg T, Jaworska JS. 2000. Uncertainty of the hazardous concentration and fraction affected for normal species sensitivity distributions. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 46:118.
  • Allard P, Fairbrother A, Hope BK, Hull RN, Johnson MS, Kapustka L, Mann G, McDonald B, Sample BE. 2010. Recommendations for the development and application of wildlife toxicity reference values. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:2837.
  • Anderson PD, D'Aco VJ, Shanahan P, Chapra SC, Buzby ME, Cunningham VL, Duplessie BM, Hayes EP, Mastrocco FJ, Parke NJ, et al. 2004. Screening analysis of human pharmaceutical compounds in US surface waters. Environ Sci Technol 38:838849.
  • Capdevielle M, Van Egmond R, Whelan M, Versteeg D, Hofmann-Kamensky M, Inauen J, Cunningham V, Woltering D. 2008. Consideration of exposure and species sensitivity of Triclosan in the freshwater environment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 4:1523.
  • Chen BT, Zheng S, Ni X, Zhao J. 2010. Species sensitivity distribution and its application in ecotoxicology. Asian J Ecotoxicol 5:491497.
  • Choi KW, Lee JHW, Kwok KWH, Leung KMY. 2009. Integrated stochastic environmental risk assessment of the Harbour Area Treatment Scheme (HATS) in Hong Kong. Environ Sci Technol 43:37053711.
  • [ECHA] European Chemicals Agency. 2008. Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Guidance for the implementation of REACH. European Chemicals Agency. Helsinki, Finland. Accessible from http://guidance.echa.europa.eu/
  • [EC] European Commission. 2006. Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 concerning the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemicals (REACH), establishing a European Chemicals Agency, Brussels, Belgium. [OJ L396/1, 30.12.2006].
  • [EC] European Commission. 2011. Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance document No. 27: Technical guidance for deriving environmental quality standards. Available from: DOI: 10.2779/43816.
  • Finney DJ. 1941. On the distribution of a variate whose logarithm is normally distributed. J R Stat Soc 7:155161.
  • Forbes VE, Calow P. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions revisited: A critical appraisal. Hum Ecol Risk Assess 8:473492.
  • Fox DR. 2010. A Bayesian approach for determining the no effect concentration and hazardous concentration in ecotoxicology. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 73:123131.
  • Grist EPM, Leung KMY, Wheeler JR, Crane M. 2002. Better bootstrap estimation of hazardous concentration thresholds for aquatic assemblages. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:15151524.
  • Hayashi TI, Kashiwagi N. 2011. A Bayesian approach to probabilistic ecological risk assessment: risk comparison of nine toxic substances in Tokyo surface waters. Environ Sci Pollut Res 18:365375.
  • Hope BK. 2009. Will there ever be a role for risk assessments? Hum Ecol Risk Assess 15:16.
  • Jager T, Heugens EHW, Kooijman S. 2006. Making sense of ecotoxicological test results: Towards application of process-based models. Ecotoxicology 15:305314.
  • Jagoe RH, Newman MC. 1997. Bootstrap estimation of community NOEC values. Ecotoxicology 6:293306.
  • Kapustka L. 2008. Limitations of the current practices used to perform ecological risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 4:290298.
  • Kapustka L, Froese K, McCormick R. 2010. Revisiting the rationale for holistic, integrated risk assessments. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:774776.
  • Leeuwen CJ, Vermeire TG. 2007. Risk assessment of chemicals: An introduction. 2nd ed. Netherlands Springer, Dordrecht
  • Lyndall J, Fuchsman P, Bock M, Barber T, Lauren D, Leigh K, Perruchon E, Capdevielle M. 2010. Probabilistic risk evaluation for triclosan in surface water, sediments, and aquatic biota tissues. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:419440.
  • Newman M, Ownby D, Mezin L, Powell D, Christensen T, Lerberg S, Anderson B-A, Padma T. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions in ecological risk assessment: Distributional assumptions, alternate bootstrap techniques, and estimation of adequate number of species. In: Posthuma SaT, editor: Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. CRC Press.
  • Newman MC, Ownby DR, Mezin LCA, Powell DC, Christensen TRL, Lerberg SB, Anderson BA. 2000. Applying species-sensitivity distributions in ecological risk assessment: Assumptions of distribution type and sufficient numbers of species. Environ Toxicol Chem 19:508515.
  • Orvos DR, Versteeg DJ, Inauen J, Capdevielle M, Rothenstein A, Cunningham V. 2002. Aquatic toxicity of triclosan. Environ Toxicol Chem 21:13381349.
  • Parkhurst DF. 1998. Arithmetic versus geometric: Means for environmental concentration data. Environ Sci Technol 32:92A98A.
  • Power M, McCarty LS. 1997. Fallacies in ecological risk assessment practices. Environ Sci Technol 31:A370A375.
  • R Development Core Team. 2008. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
  • Scott-Fordsmand JJ, Damgaard C. 2006. Uncertainty analysis of single-concentration exposure data for risk assessment-introducing the species effect distribution approach. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:30783081.
  • Slooff W. 1992. RIVM guidance document. Ecotoxicological effect assessment: Deriving maximum tolerable concentrations (MTC) from single-species toxicity data. Bilthoven, Netherlands: National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM).
  • Solomon K, Giesy J, Jones P. 2000. Probabilistic risk assessment of agrochemicals in the environment. Crop Prot 19:649655.
  • TenBrook PL, Palumbo AJ, Fojut TL, Hann P, Karkoski J, Tjeerdema RS. 2010. The University of California-Davis methodology for deriving aquatic life pesticide water quality criteria. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol 209:1155.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. Understanding and accounting for method variability in whole effluent toxicity applications under the national pollutant discharge elimination system program. Washington, DC USEPA.
  • van der Hoeven N. 2001. Estimating the 5-percentile of the species sensitivity distributions without any assumptions about the distribution. Ecotoxicology 10:2534.
  • van der Hoeven N. 2004. Current issues in statistics and models for ecotoxicological risk assessment. Acta Biotheor 52:201217.
  • van Straalen N, van Leeuwen C. 2002. European history of species sensitivity distributions. In: Posthuma SaT, editor: Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. CRC Press.
  • Verdonck FAM, Aldenberg T, Jaworska J, Vanrolleghem PA. 2003. Limitations of current risk characterization methods in probabilistic environmental risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 22:22092213.
  • Verdonck FAM, Jaworska J, Thas O, Vanrolleghem PA. 2001. Determining environmental standards using bootstrapping, bayesian and maximum likelihood techniques: A comparative study. Anal Chim Acta 446:429438.
  • Versteeg DJ, Belanger SE, Carr GJ. 1999. Understanding single-species and model ecosystem sensitivity: Data-based comparison. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:13291346.
  • Wang B, Yu G, Huang J, Hu HY. 2008. Development of species sensitivity distributions and estimation of HC5 of organochlorine pesticides with 5 statistical approaches. Ecotoxicology 17:716724.
  • Wheeler JR, Grist EPM, Leung KMY, Morritt D, Crane M. 2002. Species sensitivity distributions: Data and model choice. Mar Pollut Bull 45:192202.
  • Zolezzi M, Cattaneo C, Tarazona JV. 2005. Probabilistic ecological risk assessment of 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene at a former industrial contaminated site. Environ Sci Technol 39:29202926.