MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799852233 · doi:10.1002/ieam.4055

Variability in Nontarget Terrestrial Plant Studies Should Inform Endpoint Selection

2018· article· en· W2799852233 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jane Staveley, John W. Green, Josie B. Nusz, Dan Edwards, Kevin Henry, Matt Kern, Andrew M. Deines, Richard A. Brain, Brad Glenn, Nathan Ehresman, Tiffany H. Kung, Kimberly Ralston‐Hooper, Faith Kee, Steve McMaster

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBayer CropScienceMcMaster University
KeywordsRisk assessmentEnvironmental risk assessmentEnvironmental scienceRelevance (law)Selection (genetic algorithm)GuidelinePesticideStatisticsToxicologyComputer scienceEcologyBiologyMathematicsMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Inherent variability in nontarget terrestrial plant (NTTP) testing of pesticides creates challenges for using and interpreting these data for risk assessment. Standardized NTTP testing protocols were initially designed to calculate the application rate causing a 25% effect (ER25, used in the United States) or a 50% effect (ER50, used in Europe) for various measures based on the observed dose–response. More recently, the requirement to generate a no-observed-effect rate (NOER), or, in the absence of an NOER, the rate causing a 5% effect (ER05), has raised questions about the inherent variability in, and statistical detectability of, these tests. Statistically significant differences observed between test and control groups may be a product of this inherent variability and may not represent biological relevance. Attempting to derive an ER05 and the associated risk-assessment conclusions drawn from these values can overestimate risk. To address these concerns, we evaluated historical data from approximately 100 seedling emergence and vegetative vigor guideline studies on pesticides to assess the variability of control results across studies for each plant species, examined potential causes for the variation in control results, and defined the minimum percent effect that can be reliably detected. The results indicate that with current test design and implementation, the ER05 cannot be reliably estimated. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:639–648. © 2018 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (SETAC) Key Points Inherent variability in nontarget terrestrial plant (NTTP) testing of pesticides creates challenges for risk assessment. An evaluation of approximately 100 seedling emergence and vegetative vigor guideline studies was performed to assess the variability in control results and define the minimum percent effect that can be reliably detected. With current NTTP test design and implementation, it will often be impossible to reliably estimate an ER05, and it will rarely be possible to reliably estimate an ER10.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and ManagementSame topicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207