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 accessAbstract
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.
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
Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology
(2001) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420032314 · Cited by 1,161
Ecological risk assessment of atrazine in North American surface waters
Solomon, K. R., Baker, D. B., Richards, R. P., Dixon, K. R., Klaine, S. J., La Point, T. W., Kendall, R. J., Weisskopf, C. P., Giddings, J. M., Giesy, J. P., et al. (1996) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.5620150105 · Cited by 847
Aldenberg, T., & Jaworska, J. S. (2000) · Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety · doi:10.1006/eesa.1999.1869 · Cited by 447
A safety factor for LC50 values allowing for differences in sensitivity among species
Kooijman, S. A. L. M. (1987) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/0043-1354(87)90205-3 · Cited by 356
Species Sensitivity Distributions Revisited: A Critical Appraisal
Forbes, V. E., & Calow, P. (2002) · Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal · doi:10.1080/10807030290879781 · Cited by 281
Chlorpyrifos: Ecological Risk Assessment in North American Aquatic Environments
Giesy, J. P., Solomon, K. R., Coats, J. R., Dixon, K. R., Giddings, J. M., & Kenaga, E. E. (1999) · Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1498-4_1 · Cited by 231
Threshold Levels for Effects of Insecticides in Freshwater Ecosystems: A Review
Wijngaarden, R. P. A. V., Brock, T. C. M., & Brink, P. J. V. D. (2005) · Ecotoxicology · doi:10.1007/s10646-004-6371-x · Cited by 196
Self-citationSolomon, K. R., Giddings, J. M., & Maund, S. J. (2001) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.5620200326 · Cited by 182
Hose, G. C., & Van den Brink, P. J. (2004) · Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00244-003-3212-5 · Cited by 181
Self-citationSchroer, A. F. W., Belgers, J. D. M., Brock, C. M., Matser, A. M., Maund, S., & den Brink, P. J. V. (2004) · Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00244-003-2315-3 · Cited by 105
Cited by
Diepens, N. J., Koelmans, A. A., Baveco, H., van den Brink, P. J., van den Heuvel-Greve, M. J., & Brock, T. C. M. (2016) · Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/398_2015_5004 · Cited by 44
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Maltby, L., Blake, N., Brock, T. C. M., & Van den Brink, P. J.
- Venue
- Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- 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.