Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 449

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How well can we predict the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to aquatic life?

Belden, Jason B, Gilliom, Robert J, Lydy, Michael J·2007·Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management

Abstract

Results of published pesticide mixture toxicity experiments conducted with aquatic organisms were compiled and evaluated to assess the accuracy of predictive mixture models. Three types of models were evaluated: Concentration addition (CA), independent action (IA), and simple interaction (SI). The CA model was the most often tested (207 experiments), followed by SI (59) and IA (37). The reviewed experiments are listed in the Supplemental material to provide a resource for future investigators. The predictive accuracy of each model was quantified for each experiment by the model deviation ratio (MDR), which was calculated by dividing the predicted toxicity by the observed toxicity. Eighty-eight percent of all experiments that evaluated the CA model had observed effective concentrations within a factor of 2 of predicted values (MDR values from 0.5–2.0). The median MDR was 1, about 5% of MDRs were less than 0.5, and about 5% were greater than 2, indicating unbiased estimates overall. The predictive accuracy of CA and IA models was influenced, however, by the different modes of action (MOA) of the pesticides. For experiments with pesticides with the same MOA, CA more accurately predicted effective concentrations for more experiments compared to IA, which tended to underpredict toxicity. The IA model was somewhat more accurate than the CA model for most mixtures with different MOAs, but in most cases there were relatively small differences between the models. Additionally, 80% of SI experiments had an MDR value below 2.0 despite a bias towards experiments that are likely to have an interaction. Thus, results indicate that the CA model may be used as a slightly conservative, but broadly applicable model with a relatively small likelihood of underestimating effects due to interactions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ieam.5630030307

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 449

Metadata

Authors
Belden, J. B., Gilliom, R. J., & Lydy, M. J.
Venue
Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management
Published
2007-07-01
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
364-372
ISSN
  • 1551-3777 (ISSN-L)
  • 1551-3793
OpenAlex
W2111906798
Cited by
449
References
1
FWCI
4.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How well can we predict the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to aquatic life? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ieam.5630030307
The paper
Belden, J. B., Gilliom, R. J., & Lydy, M. J. (2007). How well can we predict the toxicity of pesticide mixtures to aquatic life? Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.5630030307

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.