Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 393

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

Accurate Prediction of the Response of Freshwater Fish to a Mixture of Estrogenic Chemicals

Open access
Brian, Jayne V., Harris, Catherine A., Scholze, Martin, Backhaus, Thomas, Booy, Petra, Lamoree, Marja, Pojana, Giulio, Jonkers, Niels, Runnalls, Tamsin, Bonfà, Angela, Marcomini, Antonio, Sumpter, John P.·2005·Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract

Existing environmental risk assessment procedures are limited in their ability to evaluate the combined effects of chemical mixtures. We investigated the implications of this by analyzing the combined effects of a multicomponent mixture of five estrogenic chemicals using vitellogenin induction in male fathead minnows as an end point. The mixture consisted of estradiol, ethynylestradiol, nonylphenol, octylphenol, and bisphenol A. We determined concentration-response curves for each of the chemicals individually. The chemicals were then combined at equipotent concentrations and the mixture tested using fixed-ratio design. The effects of the mixture were compared with those predicted by the model of concentration addition using biomathematical methods, which revealed that there was no deviation between the observed and predicted effects of the mixture. These findings demonstrate that estrogenic chemicals have the capacity to act together in an additive manner and that their combined effects can be accurately predicted by concentration addition. We also explored the potential for mixture effects at low concentrations by exposing the fish to each chemical at one-fifth of its median effective concentration (EC50). Individually, the chemicals did not induce a significant response, although their combined effects were consistent with the predictions of concentration addition. This demonstrates the potential for estrogenic chemicals to act additively at environmentally relevant concentrations. These findings highlight the potential for existing environmental risk assessment procedures to underestimate the hazard posed by mixtures of chemicals that act via a similar mode of action, thereby leading to erroneous conclusions of absence of risk.

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 · 10.1289/ehp.7598

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 393

Metadata

Authors
Brian, J. V., Harris, C. A., Scholze, M., Backhaus, T., Booy, P., Lamoree, M., Pojana, G., Jonkers, N., Runnalls, T., Bonfà, A., Marcomini, A., & Sumpter, J. P.
Venue
Environmental Health Perspectives
Published
2005-06
Volume
113
Issue
6
Pages
721-728
ISSN
  • 0091-6765 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-9924
OpenAlex
W2133053119
Cited by
393
References
1
FWCI
20.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Accurate Prediction of the Response of Freshwater Fish to a Mixture of Estrogenic Chemicals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1289/ehp.7598
The paper
Brian, J. V., Harris, C. A., Scholze, M., Backhaus, T., Booy, P., Lamoree, M., Pojana, G., Jonkers, N., Runnalls, T., Bonfà, A., Marcomini, A., & Sumpter, J. P. (2005). Accurate Prediction of the Response of Freshwater Fish to a Mixture of Estrogenic Chemicals. Environmental Health Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.7598

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.