The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Synergistic impacts of malathion and predatory stress on six species of North American tadpoles
Abstract
The decline of many amphibian populations is associated with pesticides, but for most pesticides we know little about their toxicity to amphibians. Malathion is a classic example; it is sprayed over aquatic habitats to control mosquitoes that carry malaria and the West Nile virus, yet we know little about its effect on amphibians. I examined the survival of six species of tadpoles (wood frogs, Rana sylvatica; leopard frogs, R. pipiens; green frogs, R. clamitans; bullfrogs, R. catesbeiana; American toads, Bufo americanus; and gray tree frogs, Hyla versicolor) for 16 d in the presence or absence of predatory stress and six concentrations of malathion. Malathion was moderately toxic to all species of tadpoles (median lethal concentration [LC50] values, the concentration estimated to kill 50% of a test population, ranged from 1.25–5.9 mg/L). These values are within the range of values reported for the few amphibians that have been tested (0.2–42 mg/L). In one of the six species, malathion became twice as lethal when combined with predatory stress. Similar synergistic interactions have been found with the insecticide carbaryl, suggesting that the synergy may occur in many carbamate and organophosphate insecticides. While malathion has the potential to kill amphibians and its presence is correlated with habitats containing declining populations, its actual role in amphibian declines is uncertain given the relatively low concentration in aquatic habitats.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cost-comparison of DDT and alternative insecticides for malaria control
Walker, K. (2000) · Medical and Veterinary Entomology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2915.2000.00262.x · Cited by 104
Cited by
Assessing the ecology in ecotoxicology: a review and synthesis in freshwater systems
Relyea, R., & Hoverman, J. (2006) · Ecology Letters · doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00966.x · Cited by 473
Self-citationThe cause of global amphibian declines: a developmental endocrinologist's perspective
Hayes, T. B., Falso, P., Gallipeau, S., & Stice, M. (2010) · Journal of Experimental Biology · doi:10.1242/jeb.040865 · Cited by 451
A review of the species, community, and ecosystem impacts of road salt salinisation in fresh waters
Hintz, W. D., & Relyea, R. A. (2019) · Freshwater Biology · doi:10.1111/fwb.13286 · Cited by 324
Self-citationUNDERSTANDING THE NET EFFECTS OF PESTICIDES ON AMPHIBIAN TREMATODE INFECTIONS
Rohr, J. R., Raffel, T. R., Sessions, S. K., & Hudson, P. J. (2008) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/07-1429.1 · Cited by 209
Toxicity of Coal-Tar Pavement Sealants and Ultraviolet Radiation to Ambystoma Maculatum
Bommarito, T., Sparling, D. W., & Halbrook, R. S. (2010) · Ecotoxicology · doi:10.1007/s10646-010-0498-8 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Relyea, R. A.
- Venue
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-04-01
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1080-1084
- ISSN
- 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-8618
- OpenAlex
- W2111937163
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.03
- 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: Synergistic impacts of malathion and predatory stress on six species of North American tadpoles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1897/03-259
- The paper
- Relyea, R. A. (2004). Synergistic impacts of malathion and predatory stress on six species of North American tadpoles. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1897/03-259
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.