Chemical Mixtures and Multiple Stressors: Same but Different?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecosystems are strongly influenced by multiple anthropogenic stressors, including a wide range of chemicals and their mixtures. Studies on the effects of multiple stressors have largely focussed on nonchemical stressors, whereas studies on chemical mixtures have largely ignored other stressors. However, both research areas face similar challenges and require similar tools and methods to predict the joint effects of chemicals or nonchemical stressors, and frameworks to integrate multiple chemical and nonchemical stressors are missing. We provide an overview of the research paradigms, tools, and methods commonly used in multiple stressor and chemical mixture research and discuss potential domains of cross-fertilization and joint challenges. First, we compare the general paradigms of ecotoxicology and (applied) ecology to explain the historical divide. Subsequently, we compare methods and approaches for the identification of interactions, stressor characterization, and designing experiments. We suggest that both multiple stressor and chemical mixture research are too focused on interactions and would benefit from integration regarding null model selection. Stressor characterization is typically more costly for chemical mixtures. While for chemical mixtures comprehensive classification systems at suborganismal level have been developed, recent classification systems for multiple stressors account for environmental context. Both research areas suffer from rather simplified experimental designs that focus on only a limited number of stressors, chemicals, and treatments. We discuss concepts that can guide more realistic designs capturing spatiotemporal stressor dynamics. We suggest that process-based and data-driven models are particularly promising to tackle the challenge of prediction of effects of chemical mixtures and nonchemical stressors on (meta-)communities and (meta-)food webs. We propose a framework to integrate the assessment of effects for multiple stressors and chemical mixtures. Environ Toxicol Chem 2023;42:1915-1936. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".