Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 241

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

Improved empirical models describing hormesis

Cedergreen, Nina, Ritz, Christian, Streibig, Jens Carl·2005·Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry

Abstract

During the past two decades, the phenomenon of hormesis has gained increased recognition. To promote research in hormesis, a soudund statistical quantification of important parameters, such as the level and significance of the increase in response and the range of concentration where it occurs, is strongly needed. Here, we present an improved statistical model to describe hormetic dose—response curves and test for the presence of hormesis. Using the delta method and freely available software, any percentage effect dose or concentration can be derived with its associated standard errors. Likewise, the maximal response can be extracted and the growth stimulation calculated. The new model was tested on macrophyte data from multiple-species experiments and on laboratory data of Lemna minor. For the 51 curves tested, significant hormesis was detected in 18 curves, and for another 17 curves, the hormesis model described that data better than the logistic model did. The increase in response ranged from 5 to 109%. The growth stimulation occurred at an average dose somewhere between zero and concentrations corresponding to approximately 20 to 25% of the median effective concentration (EC50). Testing the same data with the hormesis model proposed by Brain and Cousens in 1989, we found no significant hormesis. Consequently, the new model is shown to be far more robust than previous models, both in terms of variation in data and in terms of describing hormetic effects ranging from small effects of a 10% increase in response up to effects of an almost 100% increase in response.

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 · 10.1897/05-014r.1

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 241

Metadata

Authors
Cedergreen, N., Ritz, C., & Streibig, J. C.
Venue
Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry
Published
2005-12-01
Volume
24
Issue
12
Pages
3166-3172
ISSN
  • 0730-7268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8618
OpenAlex
W2078782423
Cited by
241
References
1
FWCI
4.95
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: Improved empirical models describing hormesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1897/05-014r.1
The paper
Cedergreen, N., Ritz, C., & Streibig, J. C. (2005). Improved empirical models describing hormesis. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1897/05-014r.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.