Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 444

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: Importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems

Open access
Maltby, Lorraine, Blake, Naomi, Brock, Theo C. M., Van den Brink, Paul J.·2005·Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Abstract

Single-species acute toxicity data and (micro)mesocosm data were collated for 16 insecticides. These data were used to investigate the importance of test-species selection in constructing species sensitivity distributions (SSDs) and the ability of estimated hazardous concentrations (HCs) to protect freshwater aquatic ecosystems. A log-normal model was fitted to a minimum of six data points, and the resulting distribution was used to estimate lower (95% confidence), median (50% confidence), and upper (5% confidence) 5% HC (HC5) values. Species sensitivity distributions for specific taxonomic groups (vertebrates, arthropods, nonarthropod invertebrates), habitats (saltwater, freshwater, lentic, lotic), and geographical regions (Palaearctic, Nearctic, temperate, tropical) were compared. The taxonomic composition of the species assemblage used to construct the SSD does have a significant influence on the assessment of hazard, but the habitat and geographical distribution of the species do not. Moreover, SSDs constructed using species recommended in test guidelines did not differ significantly from those constructed using nonrecommended species. Hazardous concentrations estimated using laboratory-derived acute toxicity data for freshwater arthropods (i.e., the most sensitive taxonomic group) were compared to the response of freshwater ecosystems exposed to insecticides. The sensitivity distributions of freshwater arthropods were similar for both field and laboratory exposure, and the lower HC5 (95% protection with 95% confidence) estimate was protective of adverse ecological effects in freshwater ecosystems. The corresponding median HC5 (95% protection level with 50% confidence) was generally protective of single applications of insecticide but not of continuous or multiple applications. In the latter cases, a safety factor of at least five should be applied to the median HC5.

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 · 10.1897/04-025r.1

Cites

12 of 12 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 12 references

Cited by

See all 444

Metadata

Authors
Maltby, L., Blake, N., Brock, T. C. M., & Van den Brink, P. J.
Venue
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Published
2005-02-01
Volume
24
Issue
2
Pages
379-388
ISSN
  • 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8618
OpenAlex
W2013504426
Cited by
444
References
12
FWCI
12.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: Importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1897/04-025r.1
The paper
Maltby, L., Blake, N., Brock, T. C. M., & Van den Brink, P. J. (2005). Insecticide species sensitivity distributions: Importance of test species selection and relevance to aquatic ecosystems. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1897/04-025r.1

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.