&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Chemical Safety
and Pollution Prevention , '' —71
(7101) January 2012
Ecological Effects
Test Guidelines
OCSPP 850.3000:
Background and
Special
Considerations-
Tests with Terrestrial
Beneficial Insects,
Invertebrates and
Microorganisms
-------
NOTICE
This guideline is one of a series of test guidelines established by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
(OCSPP) for use in testing pesticides and chemical substances to develop data for
submission to the Agency under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601,
et seq.), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136, et
seq.), and section 408 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346a).
Prior to April 22, 2010, OCSPP was known as the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances (OPPTS). To distinguish these guidelines from guidelines issued by other
organizations, the numbering convention adopted in 1994 specifically included OPPTS as
part of the guideline's number. Any test guidelines developed after April 22, 2010 will use
the new acronym (OCSPP) in their title.
The OCSPP harmonized test guidelines serve as a compendium of accepted scientific
methodologies and protocols that are intended to provide data to inform regulatory decisions
under TSCA, FIFRA, and/or FFDCA. This document provides guidance for conducting the
test, and is also used by EPA, the public, and the companies that are subject to data
submission requirements under TSCA, FIFRA, and/or the FFDCA. As a guidance
document, these guidelines are not binding on either EPA or any outside parties, and the
EPA may depart from the guidelines where circumstances warrant and without prior notice.
At places in this guidance, the Agency uses the word "should." In this guidance, the use of
"should" with regard to an action means that the action is recommended rather than
mandatory. The procedures contained in this guideline are strongly recommended for
generating the data that are the subject of the guideline, but EPA recognizes that departures
may be appropriate in specific situations. You may propose alternatives to the
recommendations described in these guidelines, and the Agency will assess them for
appropriateness on a case-by-case basis.
For additional information about these test guidelines and to access these guidelines
electronically, please go to http://www.epa.gov/ocspp and select "Test Methods &
Guidelines" on the left side navigation menu. You may also access the guidelines in
http://www.requlations.qov grouped by Series under Docket ID #s: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-
0150 through EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0159, and EPA-HQ-OPPT-2009-0576.
-------
OCSPP 850.3000: Background and special considerations: tests with terrestrial
beneficial insects, invertebrates and microorganisms.
(a) Scope—
(1) Applicability. This guideline is intended to be used to help develop data to submit to
EPA under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 U.S.C. 2601, et seq.), the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (7 U.S.C. 136, et seq.), and
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) (21 U.S.C. 346a).
(2) Background. This guideline provides general information applicable to conducting
OCSPP Series 850, Group C toxicity tests with terrestrial beneficial insects, invertebrates
and soil micoorganisms. The source materials used in developing this harmonized
OCSPP guideline are: OPP 140-1 General Information, OPP 140-2 Definitions, OPP 140-
3 Basic standards for testing, OPP 140-4 Reporting and evaluation of results, OPP 140-5
Special test requirements (Pesticide Assessment Guidelines Subdivision L); Pesticide
Reregi strati on Rejection Rate Analysis: Ecological Effects; and background materials
included in the specific OCSPP Series 850, Group C guidelines.
(3) General.
(i) The OCSPP Series 850, Group C provides guidelines applicable to conducting
laboratory toxicity tests with terrestrial beneficial insects, invertebrates and soil
microorganisms. Field tests are designed on a case-by-case basis. The guidelines
in OCSPP Series 850, Group C are applicable to evaluating the hazards of
industrial chemicals and pesticides to terrestrial beneficial insects, invertebrates
and soil microorganisms exposed directly or indirectly. Data concerning the
effects of pesticides on terrestrial beneficial insects, invertebrates, and
microorganisms are used in ecological risk assessment of pesticides (see 40 CFR
part 158, paragraph (k)(29) of this guideline). These data are also of use in
assessments of potential injury to endangered and threatened species listed by the
Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of Interior, and when toxicity concerns
arise from incidents or during Special Review. These data are used for both
deterministic and probabilistic risk assessments.
(ii) Information is provided on the design and conduct of tests with terrestrial
beneficial insects, invertebrates and soil microorganisms, emphasizing the
importance of adequately characterizing the test substance, use of suitable
experimental design, as well as establishing the physical and chemical conditions
of the test system for providing a scientifically sound understanding of how the
test substance behaves under test conditions. Also considered are the factors that
can affect the test outcome and interpretation of test results. This general
information is primarily applicable to the guidelines for laboratory toxicity tests,
since field tests are designed on a case-by-case basis. However, the OCSPP
850.3000 guideline lists critical quality assurance and reporting standards
common to all the guidelines in the OCSPP Series 850, Group C guidelines.
(iii) The OCSPP Series 850, Group C guidelines have generally been validated in
formal round-robin tests or informally through repeated use.
Page 1 of23
-------
(iv) Each submitted study should meet the data quality objectives for which the
test is designed. Test validity elements critical to determining the scientific
soundness and acceptability of the study have been listed for each guideline in the
OCSPP Series 850, Group C.
(v) The guidelines contained in OCSPP Series 850, Group C recommend specific
procedures to be used in almost all circumstances to result in a satisfactory study
result, while they provide general guidance that allows for some latitude, based
upon study-specific circumstances. It is recognized that certain problems, some
of which are unavoidable, may arise both before and during testing and provisions
have thus been made in the guidelines for dealing with those that are commonly
encountered. These guidelines provide for exceptions, while at the same time
maintaining a high level of scientifically sound, state-of-the-art guidance so that
following this guidance will provide ecological effect information that is
scientifically defensible for its intended use, while also taking into consideration
the chemistry and experimental fate of the test substance. For a satisfactory test,
the experimental design, execution of the experiments, classification of the
organism, sampling, measurement, and data analysis should be accomplished by
use of sound scientific techniques recognized by the scientific community. The
uniformity of procedures, materials, and reporting should be maintained
throughout the toxicity evaluation process. Refinements of the procedures to
increase their accuracy and effectiveness are encouraged. When such refinements
include major modifications of any test procedure, the Agency should be
consulted before implementation. Also when in doubt, users of these guidelines
should consult with the appropriate regulatory authorities for clarification or
additional information before proceeding. All references supplied with respect to
protocols or other test standards are provided as recommendations.
(vi) For pesticides, a tiered testing approach given in 40 CFR 158.630 for
nontarget insect data requirements provides for greater efficiency of testing
resources while assuring data development as warranted to meet the objectives of
a hazard or risk assessment. To reduce or eliminate unnecessary toxicity testing
for regulatory decision making the specific test requirements for pesticides in 40
CFR part 158 depend upon the use pattern of the pesticide and the potential for
exposure of terrestrial beneficial insects and invertebrates. In addition, there is a
hierarchal or tier system which progresses from basic laboratory tests to applied
field tests, where the results of each tier of tests should be evaluated to determine
the potential of the pesticide to cause adverse effects, and to determine whether
further testing is warranted to meet the objectives of the hazard or risk assessment
(40 CFR part 202). Generally, the decision as whether to proceed to the second
tier, or longer term higher tiered tests, is based on the potential toxicity
demonstrated in the first level tests, in conjunction with other pertinent
information such as use pattern and environmental fate profile. For nontarget
insects the lower tier test is designed to screen test substances to determine the
potential to cause adverse affects on pollinators on direct contact with the test
substance (the OCSPP 850.3020 guideline). For pesticides, a Tier I test, referred
to as a limit test in the OCSPP 850.3020 guideline, tests a single concentration
and compares effects observed with appropriate controls. Tier II testing for
Page 2 of23
-------
pesticides includes the multiple-concentration definitive test in the OCSPP
850.3020 guideline. The multiple-concentration definitive test provides for
generation of the dose-response curve for test substances which are known insect
toxicants or in which Tier I testing demonstrated the test substance was an insect
toxicant. The higher tier foliar residue test with pollinators (the OCSPP 850.3030
guideline).determines the length of time post-application that foliar residues are
toxic to pollinators and is conducted for test substances which are known
toxicants and use patterns resulting in exposure of honey bees. Higher tier
nontarget insect testing includes the Field Testing for Pollinators (the OCSPP
850.3040 guideline) and are designed on a case-by-case basis to address specific
objectives concerning detrimental effects on nontarget insects, and are performed
under simulated or actual field conditions. Progression to higher tier tests would
occur on a case-by-case basis to further refine and characterize the estimate of
nontarget insect risk.
(vii) Data on toxicity to terrestrial beneficial insects, invertebrates and
microorganisms may also be used to evaluate the potential hazard and risk of
industrial chemicals. When the pattern of production, use, or disposal indicates
exposure to these terrestrial organisms, these tests are strongly recommended.
This testing is part of the Tier I (base set) suite of tests in the OPPT testing
scheme developed for determining environmental effects (see the references in
paragraphs (k)(12), (k)(13), (k)(18), (k)(19), (k)(31) and (k)(32) of this guideline
for further details). The testing scheme is deterministic for the most part, flexible,
sequential, consistent, iterative, transparent, discriminatory of the extent of
toxicity, and applicable to all types of chemicals.
(viii) While performing field tests, all necessary measures should be taken to
ensure that nontarget plants and animals, especially endangered or threatened
species, will not be adversely affected either by direct hazard or by impact on
food supply or food chain.
(b) Definitions. Terms used in the OCSPP Series 850, Group C guidelines have the meanings
set forth in Section 3 FIFRA regulations at 40 CFR 152.3 (Pesticide Registration and
Classification Procedures); 40 CFR 158.300 (Product Chemistry Definitions); 40 CFR part 160
(Good Laboratory Practice Standards); and in TSCA Section 3 regulations 40 CFR part 792
(Good Laboratory Practice Standards); and the Agency's "Terms of Environment, Glossary,
Abbreviations and Acronyms" (see paragraph (k)(23) of this guideline). The definitions in this
section apply to the OCSPP Series 850, Group C test guidelines and where applicable, the
individual test guidelines contain additional or test-specific definitions.
Acclimation is the physiological or behavioral adaptation of test organisms to new
environmental conditions associated with the test procedure.
Active Ingredient (a.i.) is any substance (or group of structurally similar substances if
specified by the Agency) that will prevent, destroy, repel or mitigate any pest, or that
functions as a plant regulator, desiccant, or defoliant within the meaning of FIFRA (40
CFR 152.3).
Page 3 of23
-------
Acute toxicity is the discernible adverse effects (lethal or sublethal) induced in an
organism within a short exposure period (usually not constituting a substantial portion of
the total life cycle or life span, e.g. single dose, hours, or days).
Acute toxicity test is a comparative study in which organisms are subjected to a severe,
short-term stimulus (test substance). The organisms, exposed to different concentrations
of the test substance (except in a limit test), are observed for a short period usually not
constituting a substantial portion of the total life cycle or life span. Acute exposure
typically includes a lethal biological response of relatively quick progression.
Adjuvant is a subsidiary ingredient or additive in a mixture which modifies, enhances or
prolongs by physical action the activity of the active ingredient(s). Examples of
agricultural chemical adjuvants include but are not limited to surfactants, crop oils, anti-
foaming agents, buffering compounds, drift control agents, compatibility agents, stickers
and spreaders.
Axenic is a culture of one organism free from other organisms.
Chronic toxicity test is a comparative study in which organisms are exposed to different
concentrations of the test substance generally for a relatively long period that constitutes
a substantial, nearly complete, or complete portion of the total life cycle or life span.
Chronic exposure typically induces a sublethal biological response of relatively slow
progression, or which is cumulative in nature. For some chemicals with certain modes-
of-action, shorter-term exposure may result in chronic or latent effects, and continued or
cumulative exposure is therefore not necessary.
Concentration-response curve is the graphical and mathematical relationship between the
concentration of a substance and a specific biological response produced from toxicity
tests when percent response (e.g., mortality) values are plotted against concentration of
test substance for a given exposure duration. This is also referred to as the dose-response
curve or concentration-effect curve.
Control refers to test organisms exposed to test conditions and test matrix in the absence
of any introduced test substance as part of the test design for the purpose of establishing a
basis of comparison with a test substance for known chemical or biological
measurements.
Culture (noun) refers to the organisms which are raised on-site or maintained under
controlled conditions to produce test organisms through reproduction.
Culture (verb) is to grow, raise, or maintain organisms under controlled conditions to
produce test organisms through reproduction.
Effect concentration (ECx) is the experimentally derived concentration of a test substance
in a test matrix (e.g., soil, feed) that would be expected to cause a specified effect in x
percent (x%) of a group of test organisms under specified exposure conditions.
Page 4 of23
-------
Effect concentration, median (EC 50) is the experimentally derived concentration of a test
substance in a test matrix (e.g., soil, feed) that would be expected to cause a defined
effect in 50% of a group of test organisms under specified exposure conditions.
Formulation, as used within these guidelines, is a packaged end use product (e.g., dust,
wettable powder, emulsifiable concentrate, ultra low volume, etc) of the test substance
and may contain one or more active ingredients and one or more inert ingredients.
Holding is the period from the time test organisms are received in the laboratory until
they are used in testing or begin acclimation to test conditions. Holding conditions may
include quarantine, lower temperatures to minimize disease, or other conditions that are
different from test conditions. Where holding conditions are different from test
conditions, the test organisms should be acclimated to test conditions prior to testing to
not stress the organisms.
Inert ingredient is any substance (or group of structurally similar substances if designated
by the Agency), other than an active ingredient, which is intentionally included in a
pesticide product (40 CFR 152.3).
Inhibition concentration (/Cx) is the experimentally derived concentration of a test
substance in a test matrix (e.g., soil, feed) that would be expected to cause a given
percent, x, inhibition or reduction in a non-quantal response from the smoothed mean
control response. For example, the IC25 for growth is the concentration of test substance
that would cause a 25% reduction in growth in a test population from the control
response and the ICso is the concentration of test substance that would cause a 50%
reduction in growth from the control response.
Lethal concentration (ZCX) is the experimentally derived concentration of a test substance
in a test matrix (e.g., soil, feed) that would be expected to result in mortality ofx% of a
group of test organisms under specified exposure conditions. For example, the LC25 is
the concentration of test substance that would result in mortality of 25% of the exposed
test population.
Lethal concentration, median (LCso) is the experimentally derived concentration of test
substance in test matrix (e.g., soil, feed) that would be expected to result in mortality of
50% of a group of test organisms under specified exposure conditions.
Lethal dose, median (LD^) is the experimentally derived dose of the test substance that
would be expected to result in mortality of 50% of a population of test animals which is
treated with a single dose under specified exposure conditions.
Limit of detection (LOD) is the analytic level below which the qualitative presence of the
material is uncertain. This is typically defined by the lowest concentration producing a
signal two standard deviations above the background noise from a matrix blank sample.
Limit of quantification (LOQ) is the analytic level below which the quantitative amount
of the material is uncertain. This is typically defined by the lowest concentration of
fortified matrix successfully analyzed.
Page 5 of23
-------
Limit test is a toxicity test performed with a single test substance concentration or dose
and a control to establish that the value for the measurement endpoint of concern (e.g.,
LCso, LD50) is greater than the test substance concentration or dose (limit concentration
or dose, respectively).
Lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC) is the lowest concentration of a test
substance to which organisms are exposed under specified exposure conditions that
causes an statistically significant adverse effect as compared to the control(s).
Throughout these guidelines, the terms LOEC and lowest observed adverse effect
concentration (LOAEC) have the same meaning.
Lowest observed effect level (LOEL) is the lowest dose level of a test substance to which
organisms are exposed under specified exposure conditions that causes a statistically
significant adverse effect as compared to the control(s). Throughout these guidelines, the
terms LOEL and lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) have the same meaning.
Maximum acceptable toxicant concentration (MATC) is the maximum concentration at
which a test substance can be present and not be toxic to the test organism. The MATC
lies within the range between the LOEC and NOEC. Operationally, for industrial
chemicals, the MATC is defined as the geometric mean of these values. The MATC is
also referred to (in the Pre-Manufacture Notification (PMN) program of OPPT) as the
chronic value or chronic no-effect-concentration (NEC).
Measured concentration is an analytically derived quantitative measure above the method
detection limit.
Measurement endpoint is a quantitative measurable response to a stressor that is used to
infer a measure of protection or evaluate risk to valued environmental entities. Examples
of measurement endpoints include, but are not limited to, mortality (e.g., LDso, LCso),
growth (IC25, ICso), etc. Each test-specific guideline identifies the measurement
endpoint(s) to be determined by the proscribed study. The term "measurement endpoint"
is used synonymously with the term "measures of effect".
Medium is the chemically-defined culture solution used in culturing and testing certain
organisms.
Method detection limit (MDL) is operationally defined as the concentration of constituent
that, when processed through the complete method, produces a signal with 99%
probability that it is different from the blank. It is computed as the standard deviation
multiplied by the Student's t constant corresponding to the appropriate degrees of
freedom (n-1). Thus, for seven spiked samples prepared at the hypothetical LOQ, the
MDL is 3.143 times the standard deviation of the mean of the seven replicate
measurements.
Microorganism is any of those organisms classified as fungi (Myxomycota and
Eumycota), and bacteria (Schizomycota).
No observed effect concentration (NOEC) is the highest concentration of a test substance
to which organisms are exposed under specified exposure conditions that does not cause
Page 6 of23
-------
a statistically significant adverse effect as compared to the control(s). The NOEC is the
test concentration immediately below the LOEC and can only be defined in the presence
of the LOEC. Throughout these guidelines, the terms NOEC and no observed adverse
effect concentration (NOAEC) have the same meaning.
No observed effect level (NOEL) is the highest dose level of a test substance to which
organisms are exposed under specified exposure conditions that does not cause a
statistically significant adverse effect as compared to the control(s). The NOEL is the
test dosage immediately below the LOEL and can only be defined in the presence of the
LOEL. Throughout these guidelines, the terms NOEL and no observed adverse effect
level (NOAEL) have the same meaning.
Reagent water is water that has been prepared by deionization, glass distillation, or
reverse osmosis.
Replicate is the experimental unit within a toxicity test. It is the smallest physical entity
to which treatments can be independently assigned.
Test substance is the specific form of a chemical substance or mixture being evaluated
(e.g., pesticide active ingredient or formulation, or industrial chemical).
Treatment group is the set of replicate test chambers that receive the same amount (if
any) of the test substance; controls are treatment groups that receive none of the test
substance.
Typical end-use product (TEP) is a term used to convey direction to a data producer to
use a commonly used end-use product, a pesticide formulation for field or other end use
(excludes products with labeling that allows use of the product to formulate other
pesticide products), as the test substance. The term includes any physical apparatus used
to deliver or apply the pesticide if distributed or sold with the pesticide.
Vehicle is any agent (e.g., solvent) which facilitates the mixture, dispersion, or
solubilization of a test substance with a carrier (e.g., dust, spray solution) used to expose
the test organisms (40 CFR 160.3, 40 CFR 792.3).
(c) Apparatus, facilities and equipment—
(1) Laboratory facilities and equipment. The type of facilities and equipment for
conducting the toxicity tests with the organisms in this group of guidelines varies
depending upon the nature of the test and the organism. In general, these toxicity tests
use normal laboratory glassware, supplies and equipment, as well as equipment for
maintaining the organisms under the test conditions and controlling the test conditions
(e.g., temperature, humidity, lighting). Construction materials and equipment that are
toxic, may affect toxicity, or that may adsorb test substances should not be used. See
test-specific OCSPP Series 850, Group C guidelines for identification of any atypical
facility, equipment, or supplies used in the test. Construction materials and equipment
that are toxic, may affect toxicity, or that may sorb test substances should not be used.
Page 7 of23
-------
(2) Maintenance and reliability. All equipment used in conducting the test, including
equipment used to prepare and administer the test substance, and equipment to maintain
and record environmental conditions, should be of such design and capacity that tests
involving this equipment can be conducted in a reliable and scientific manner.
Equipment should be inspected, cleaned, and maintained regularly, and be properly
calibrated. All materials that will come in contact with the test organisms and test
substance should be cleaned before use. Cleaning procedures should be appropriate to
remove known or suspected contaminants.
(d) Experimental design and data analysis—
(1) Design elements. Elements of experimental design such as the number of test
treatments, progression factor between treatment levels , number of replicates, and
number of organisms per replicate and per treatment are based upon the purpose of the
test, variability expected in response measurements, and the type of statistical procedures
that will be used to evaluate the results. See the test-specific guidelines for specific
information relating to these aspects of test design. General principles of test design are
set forth in this guideline. General guidance on the statistical analysis of ecotoxicity tests
can be found in the references in paragraphs (k)(l), (k)(2), (k)(15), (k)(16), (k)(17),
(k)(26), (k)(27) and (k)(28) of this guideline.
(2) Calculation of endpoints—
(i) Background.
(A) Data generated in ecotoxicity tests with terrestrial beneficial insects,
invertebrates and microorganisms may be of three types:
(1) Quantal (dichotomous), where the variable has only two
mutually exclusive outcomes (e.g., dead or alive)—note that
quantal data are a special case of discrete data;
(2) Discrete, where there is a finite number of values possible or
there is a space on the number line between two possible values; or
(3) Continuous, where the variable can assume a continuum of
possible outcomes (e.g., respiration rate).
(B) These data may be analyzed using regression-based techniques or
hypothesis-testing procedures depending on the objectives and endpoints
of a specific test guideline. Traditionally, the results of acute toxicity tests
have been expressed as point estimates (e.g., LCso or LDso for lethality, or
ECso or ICso for other effects), while the results of chronic tests have been
expressed as the results of hypothesis-testing procedures to determine the
NOEC and LOEC (or NOEL and LOEL). Regarding terminology, the
term ICX is more appropriately used for continuous endpoints, rather than
ECX. For information on the advantages and disadvantages of these
approaches, see the references in paragraphs (k)(5), (k)(8), (k)(16), (k)(17)
and (k)(20) of this guideline. Specific test guideline objectives, either
Page 8 of23
-------
point estimate or hypothesis-based endpoints or both, are identified in
each specific test guideline.
(ii) Point estimates and concentration-response or dose-response tests. This
type of toxicity test is designed to allow calculation of a concentration- or dose-
response curve (mathematical model) and to estimate one or more specific points
(point estimates) on the curve, such as an LDio and LDso. Because of the normal
variation in sensitivity of individuals within a group of test organisms, a measure
of the degree of certainty in the model parameters and the point estimate value(s)
should be determined.
(A) No single statistical technique is appropriate for all data sets, and the
assumptions and requirements of each method should be known before
using (see paragraphs (k)(l), (k)(4), (k)(6), (k)(7), (k)(9), (k)(10), (k)(ll),
(k)(14), (k)(20), and (k)(30) of this guideline). Not all methods suitable
for continuous data are appropriate for quantal data (see paragraphs (k)(4)
and (k)(14) of this guideline). For point estimate tests, regression-based
methods (e.g., probit) that model the full concentration- or dose-response
relationship and provide error estimates of the model parameters and point
estimate(s) are desired. The regression model used to fit data should be
recorded, and the error estimates of the model parameters (e.g., standard
error of slope and intercept), and goodness-of-fit should be calculated and
recorded. For a point estimate (e.g., LDso) the 95% confidence interval
and standard error are calculated and recorded. If data do not fit a
regression-based model, other point estimator methods (e.g., binomial,
moving average, trimmed Spearman-Karber, linear interpolation (e.g.,
Boostrap ICp)) are available (see paragraphs (k)(24), (k)(27) and (k)(28)
of this guideline). Which of these other methods is selected is dependent
upon the shape of the concentration-response curve, the number of
treatments with partial mortalities (i.e., where mortality is greater than 0%
but less than 100%), the magnitude of these mortalities, and the number of
replicates. The method used to estimate the endpoint and, if applicable,
the 95% confidence interval for the point estimate should be recorded.
(B) Concentration-response models are good estimating tools only for the
range of concentrations used to fit them; therefore, endpoints that are
extrapolated beyond the range of the concentrations tested would be
considered to be of lower confidence or potentially, of such low
confidence that they would not be appropriate to estimate.
(iii) Hypothesis-based methods—
(A) Multiple-concentration or dose definitive tests. In this type of test,
the purpose is to determine if the biological response to a treatment level
differs from the response of the control. Hypothesis testing-based
endpoints, expressed as the NOEC and LOEC (or NOEL and LOEL), are
calculated by determining statistically significant differences from the
control. The null hypothesis is that no difference exists among the mean
Page 9 of23
-------
(or median if nonparametric) control and treatment responses. The
alternative hypothesis is that the treatment(s) result in an adverse
biological effect relative to the control sample. Parametric and
nonparametric analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests and multiple-
comparison tests are often appropriate for continuous data and for count
data and may be appropriate for some categorical data (rank, order, score).
Contingency table tests are usually appropriate for categorical data.
Parametric tests are based on normal distribution theory and assume that
the data within treatments are a random sample from an approximately
normal distribution and that the error variance is constant among
treatments. These assumptions should be examined using appropriate
tests, and data transformations (see paragraph (d)(2)(iv)(A) of this
guideline) or non-parametric techniques should be used where the
assumptions are not met. Where possible multiple comparison tests that
restrict the number of comparisons made should be used. Generally, the
more powerful multiple-comparison tests are those which assume a
concentration- or dose-response relationship in the data. When the
assumption of a monotonic dose-response holds, Williams' and
Jonckheere's test, respectively, are examples of parametric and
nonparametric tests that can be used. When the assumption of a
monotonic dose-response fails, Dunnett's t-test and either Steel's many-
one rank test or the Wilcoxon rank sum test with Bonferroni adjustment,
respectively, are examples of parametric and nonparametric multiple
comparison tests requiring no assumption about the dose-response but
which restrict comparisons of the treatments to a control. A measure of
the sensitivity of the test, such as the minimum significant difference
(parametric tests), should be calculated. Alternatively, a calculation of the
number of replicates necessary to achieve data quality objectives given the
actual measured test responses and variability should be made. At a
minimum, the percent change from the control for each treatment should
be calculated.
(B) Types of decisions and errors.
(1) Table 1 presents the two possible outcomes and decisions that
can be reached in the statistical hypothesis tests discussed in
paragraph ((d)(3)(ii)(A) of this guideline:
(a) There is no difference among the mean control and
treatment responses; or
(b) There is a difference among the mean control and
treatment responses (concerned with direction, where
response is adverse relative to the control).
(2) Statistical tests of hypothesis can be designed to control for the
chances of making incorrect decisions. The types of incorrect and
correct decisions that can be made in a hypothesis-based test and
Page 10 of 23
-------
the probability of making these decisions are represented in Table
1. For multiple comparison tests the Type I error rate is controlled
to account for multiple test comparisons.
Table 1.—Types of Errors and the Probabilities of Making Correct and Incorrect
Decisions Based on the Results of Testing
Test Decision Outcome:
Treatment Response > Control Response
Treatment Response < Control Response
Actual (or True) Condition:
Treatment Response >
Control Response
Correct Decision
probability = 1- alpha (a)
Type I error (False positive)
probability = a
Treatment Response < Control
Response
Type II error (False negative)
probability = beta (p)
Correct Decision
probability (Power of test) = 1-p
(C) Power of the test. Power of the test versus percent reduction in
treatment response relative to the control mean at various coefficients of
variation is provided in the reference in paragraph (k)(24) of this
guideline. Examples are specifically given for 5 and 8 replicates for a
one-tailed test alpha (a) of 0.05 and 0.10. Effects on the number of
replicates at various coefficients of variation are also provided in the
reference in paragraph (k)(24) of this guideline for various low a and beta
(P) values (i.e.., a + P = 0.25). See also the references in paragraph
(k)(9)and (k)(25) of this guideline.
(D) Limit test. In a limit test it is only necessary to ascertain that: a fixed
standard (such as the LD50 for an acute contact) is greater than a given
threshold; and/or the response at the limit dose or concentration does not
differ from the control response. Only one treatment, the limit dose or
concentration, and the appropriate control(s) are tested. This is referred to
as a limit test or maximum challenge concentration test.
(1) Fixed standard. For a fixed standard limit test, the null
hypothesis is that the estimated limit treatment parameter (e.g.,
percent survival) is greater than or equal to the fixed threshold
value (e.g., 50% survival). The alternative hypothesis is that the
estimated limit parameter is less than the fixed threshold value
(e.g., 50% survival) (Concerned with direction, where response is
inhibition relative to the control switch hypotheses around.)
Examples of statistical approaches are one sample binomial tests or
one sample t-tests.
(2) Difference between two means (or medians). For testing if
the treatment level affects the test organism, the null hypothesis is
that the treatment mean (or median) response is equal to the
control response mean (or median) level and the alternative
hypothesis is that the treatment mean response differs from the
control response. The direction of the alternative hypothesis
depends on what is considered an adverse direction for the specific
response being evaluated, such as decreased survival and weight or
Page 11 of 23
-------
increased mortality as compared to the control response. Examples
of parametric and nonparametric two-group comparison tests are
Student's t-test and Wilcoxon rank rank sum test, respectively.
(iv) Transformations, outliers, and non-detects—
(A) Transformations. Transforma-tion of data (e.g., square root, log,
arcsine-square root) may be useful for a number of statistical analysis
purposes. The two main reasons are to satisfy assumptions for statistical
testing and to derive a linear relationship between two variables, so that
linear regression analysis can be applied. Added benefits include
consolidating data that may be spread out or that have several extreme
values (see reference in paragraph (k)(25) of this guideline). Once the
data have been transformed, all statistical analyses are performed on the
transformed data.
(B) Outliers. Outliers are measurements that are extremely large or small
relative to the rest of the data and, therefore, are suspected of
misrepresenting the population from which they were collected. Unless
there is a known documented reason for the outlier(s), such as
measurement system problems or instrument breakdown, the statistical
analyses performed should at a minimum include results using the full
data set (i.e., the suspected outlier(s) are not discarded). Outliers should
not be discarded based on a statistical outlier test (see reference in
paragraph (k)(25) of this guideline). The analyst may conduct all
statistical analysis of the data with both a full and truncated (presumed
outliers are discarded) data set, however, so that the effect of the presumed
outlier(s) on the conclusion may be assessed.
(C) Nondetects. Data generated from chemical analysis that fall below
the LOD of the analytical procedure are generally described as not
detected, or nondetects, (rather than as zero or not present) and the
appropriate LOD should be reported. There are a variety of ways to
evaluate data that include both detected and non-detected values (see
reference in paragraph (k)(25) of this guideline). However, for a
satisfactory test in a number of the Group C guidelines, test substance
concentrations should not be below the LOD (see specific OCSPP Series
850, Group C guidelines), except in controls.
(3) Selection of test treatments—
(i) Point estimate and concentration-response or dose-response test. Toxicity
tests where the objective is the concentration- or dose-response curve and a
specific point response on the curve (e.g., LDso) usually consist of one or more
control treatments and at least five test treatments which should bracket the
specific point (s) of concern for the test. To obtain a reasonably precise estimate
of the LCso or LDso using probit analysis for example, one or more treatments
should be between, but not including, 0% and 50% and one or more treatments
should be between, but not including, 50% and 100%. The spacing between test
Page 12 of 23
-------
treatments depends upon the expected slope of the concentration- or dose-
response curve, information about which can be gained during a range-finding
test. The test treatment levels (doses or concentrations) are usually selected in a
geometric series in which the ratio is between 1.5 and 3.2. When the objective of
the test is to determine a regression-based estimate and sampling size constraints
apply, the use of more treatment levels is preferable to the use of more replicates.
The inclusion of additional treatment levels rather than additional replicates
results in better characterization of the overall concentration- or dose-response
relationship.
(ii) Hypothesis-based test—
(A) Multiple-concentration or multiple-dose definitive test. Each test
usually consists of one or more control treatments and at least five test
treatments which span the expected environmental concentrations and
where at least the lowest treatment level is the NOEC (or NOEL). The
test treatments are usually selected in a geometric series in which the ratio
is between 1.5 and 3.2. A key assumption is that the response data are
monotonic with increasing concentration or dose (i.e., the degree of
biological effect increases as concentration or dose increases) or that there
is a threshold response such that a NOEC (or NOEL) for a given
biological response should not occur at a treatment concentration or dose
higher than one found to be statistically different from the control for the
given biological response. Where these assumptions do not hold it is
recommended that additional concentrations or doses be included to better
characterize the relationship of the biological response with exposure
concentration or dose. If the failure is suspected to be due to high
variability in a given response measurement, the number of replicates
should be increased.
(B) Limit test. A limit test consists of a single treatment level and the
appropriate control(s). Individual OCSPP Series 850 Group C guidelines
identify the concentration or dose that satisfies the limit treatment level
test for that guideline.
(4) Randomization. For test results to be satisfactory test treatments should be randomly
assigned to individual test chambers and the test chambers randomly assigned to
locations. The locations may be randomly reassigned during the test. Randomized block
designs or completely randomized designs may be used. For test results to be
satisfactory, test organisms should ideally be randomly assigned to the test chambers;
where this is not practical impartial assignment can be used (with the exception of
assignment intentionally according to sex). (Note: random assignment as used here
implies a mathematically-based unbiased assignment method and impartial assignment
implies a non mathematically-based unbiased assignment procedure.) All test chambers
should be treated as similarly as possible to eliminate potential bias in test results. The
methods used to randomize treatments among test chambers and test chambers among
locations should be recorded, as well as methods of random or impartial organism
assignment to test chambers.
Page 13 of 23
-------
(5) Number of replicates. The number of replicate test chambers for a given treatment
is dependent upon the objective of the specific guideline test. Except for field tests which
are designed on a case-by-case basis, the minimum number of replicates for a given test
is described in each individual OCSPP Series 850 Group C guideline.
(i) Regression-based test. When the objective of the test is to determine a
regression-based estimate and sample size constraints apply, the inclusion of
additional concentrations rather than additional replicates results in better
characterization of the overall concentration-response relationship. The objective
of some OCSPP Group C guideline tests includes determination of both a
regression-based point estimate (e.g., LDso) and a hypothesis-based endpoint
(e.g., NOEC) in which case the minimum number of replicates will be determined
by the hypothesis-based method.
(ii) Hypothesis-based test. For hypothesis-based tests, the determination of the
test-specific number of replicates depends upon the objectives of the test, the
statistical method(s) that may be used, the coefficient of variation, the size of
effect to be detected, and the acceptable error rate. (Note: several of the
recommended non-parameteric multiple-comparison tests can not be performed
without at least a minimum of four replicates.) Individual testing facilities should
consider variability observed in their laboratory and adjust the number of
replicates upward where the minimum replication number identified in the test
specific guideline is not sufficient to provide the statistical power to detect
adverse effects to the test organisms or, if appropriate, identify and correct any
environmental, handling, and culturing conditions, etc. that are resulting in the
high variability.
(6) Controls. Control groups are used to ensure that effects observed are associated with
or attributed only to the test substance exposure. A control group should be similar in
every respect to the test substance treatment groups except for exposure to the test
substance. As described in paragraph (f)(l) of this guideline, in addition to blank (or
negative) controls normally run, a vehicle control (solvent control) is also tested if a
vehicle was used to prepare the test substance. To demonstrate satisfactorily that the
vehicle has no unacceptable effect, the highest concentration of the vehicle that was
added to any of the test chambers is used in the vehicle control. It is recommended that
the vehicle concentration be the same at each treatment level. If either the control or
vehicle control results are not satisfactory for the test, indicating problems with test
organisms or test procedures, the test results should be considered unacceptable. If both
the control and the vehicle control results verify test organism health and status, the
control and vehicle control results are compared using an appropriate statistical method to
determine if there is an effect of the vehicle on the test organisms. If there is a
statistically significant difference between the control and the vehicle control, indicating
either a positive or negative vehicle effect, for any of the measured response variables
using an a-level of 0.05, the study may be considered unacceptable.
Page 14 of 23
-------
(e) Test substance characterization—
(1) Background information on the test substance. The information in paragraphs
(e)(l)(i) through (e)(l)(vi) of this guideline should be known about the test substance
prior to testing:
(i) Chemical name; CAS number; molecular structure; source; lot or batch
number; purity and/or percent a.i.; identities and concentrations of major
ingredients and major impurities; radiolabeling if any, location of label(s), and
radiopurity; date of most recent assay and expiration date for sample.
(ii) Appropriate storage and handling conditions for the test substance to protect
the integrity of the test substance. (Note: health and safety precautions should
also be known. These considerations are beyond the scope of these guidelines
and depend upon the characteristics of the test substance).
(iii) Physical and chemical properties of the test substance, including solubility in
water and various solvents; vapor pressure; hydrolysis at various pH; pKa; etc.
Of particular relevance are rates for processes such as hydrolysis, photolysis, and
volatilization.
(iv) Stability and solubility as relevant, under the test conditions (see paragraph
(e)(2) of this guideline).
(v) Physical and chemical properties and stability information for the analytical
standard (if applicable).
(vi) Analytical method for quantification of the test substance in the feed or
dosing solutions. Analyses are conducted with the specific media for which it
will be used during the test, i.e. under test conditions.
(2) Preliminary analyses.
(i) The Agency recommends preliminary testing of the test substance. The
information about stability and solubility of the test substance should be
developed under actual test conditions. This information can be gained while
doing the range-finding studies.
(ii) Information on the behavior of a test substance should be based on
experiments which are conducted under the same conditions as those occurring
during the test. These include but are not limited to:
(A) Test matrix characteristics (e.g., growth medium, soil, dust, spray,
etc)
(B) Temperature, humidity, lighting, etc.
(C) With test organisms in place (when practical).
(D) Use of the same test containers.
Page 15 of 23
-------
(iii) A list of recommended tests is as in paragraphs (e)(2)(iii)(A) through
(e)(2)(iii)(D) of this guideline:
(A) Stability trials should be conducted under actual test conditions.
(B) If relevant, solubility trials should be conducted under test conditions.
(C) Chemical analysis methods as detailed in paragraph (g) of this
guideline.
(D) Storage stability of the test substance in the samples to be collected for
chemical analyses should be determined. This includes determining
whether and how samples can be stored for future analysis.
(3) Sample storage. If samples of the exposure matrix (soil, growth medium, dust,
spray, etc.) collected for chemical analysis cannot be analyzed immediately, they should
be handled and stored appropriately to minimize loss of the test substance. Loss could be
caused by such processes as microbial degradation, hydrolysis, oxidation, photolysis,
reduction, sorption, or volatilization. Stability determination under storage conditions,
whether it refers to storing the test substance before testing or storing samples awaiting
analysis, is required by GLP regulation. Test substance stability under storage conditions
should be documented.
(4) Analytical test substance determinations.
(i) Media to be tested and sampling frequency to document the concentration and
stability of the test substance throughout exposure is defined in the test-specific
guidelines in the OCSPP Series 850 Group C guidelines.
(ii) For field tests, media and frequency of testing depends on the objective of the
study, the stability and fate of the test substance, and is determined on a case-by-
case basis.
(f) Preparation of test substances.
(1) The preferred choice for preparation of the test substance is to use reagent water
(deionized, distilled or reverse osmosis water), providing the test substance can be
dissolved in water and does not readily hydrolyze. If the test substance cannot be
dissolved in reagent water, vehicles are often used. If a vehicle, i.e. a solvent, is
absolutely necessary to dissolve the test substance, the amount used should not exceed
the minimum volume necessary to dissolve or suspend the test substance. If the test
substance is a mixture, formulation or commercial product, none of the ingredients is
considered a vehicle unless an extra amount is used in its preparation for testing.
(i) Preferred vehicles are specific to the test and test organisms and are listed in
each individual guideline in the OCSPP Series 850 Group C guidelines.
(ii) If a vehicle is used to prepare the test substance, a vehicle control is also
included in the test, in addition to the no-treatment control. The same batch of
Page 16 of 23
-------
vehicle used to prepare the test treatment doses or concentrations is used in the
vehicle control. For a valid test, the selected vehicle should not affect the test
organisms at the concentration used. A vehicle should not interfere with the
metabolism (degradation) of the test substance, alter the chemical properties of
the test substance, or produce physiological or toxic effects to test organisms.
(iii) Ideally, vehicle concentration should be kept constant in the vehicle control
and all test treatments. If the concentration of vehicle is not kept constant, the
highest concentration of vehicle used in any test treatment level should be used in
the vehicle control. Limits on the amount of vehicle that can be used are given in
each guideline in OCSPP Series 850 Group C.
(2) All techniques used in stock solution preparation (shaking, stirring, sonication,
heating, solvent, etc) should be recorded. The appearance of the stock solution should be
observed and recorded.
(3) If the test substance is a formulated preparation, the test concentrations should be
expressed in terms of the concentration of a.i.
(g) Analytical methods and sampling for verification of exposure—
(1) Method validation.
(i) The analytical method used to measure the amount of test substance in the
exposure matrix (e.g., soil, growth medium, dust, spray, etc) or stock solution
should be validated by appropriate laboratory practices before beginning the
definitive test. An analytical method is not acceptable if likely degradation
products of the test substance give positive or negative interferences which cannot
be systematically identified and mathematically corrected, unless it is shown that
such degradation products are not present in the test system during the test.
(ii) Method validation is conducted for the purpose of determining the linear
range, detection limit, accuracy and precision (repeatability and reproducibility)
of the method for analysis of the test substance under the conditions of the test.
Thus, quality control (fortification) samples should be prepared at concentrations
spanning the range of concentrations to be used in the definitive test, using the
same procedures (vehicles, etc) and in the same matrix (soil, etc) representative
of what will be used in the test.
(iii) The method validation should include a determination of linearity between
detector response and test substance concentration, the LOQ, the MDL, method
accuracy (average percent recovery) and precision (relative standard deviation).
The method validation should establish the acceptance criteria for the quality
control (QC) samples that will be prepared and analyzed during the test.
(2) Collection of samples. Samples should be collected in such a manner as to provide
an accurate representation of the matrix being sampled. Samples should be processed
and analyzed immediately, or handled and stored in a manner which minimizes loss of
Page 17 of 23
-------
test substance through microbial degradation, photodegradation, chemical reaction,
volatilization, sorption or other processes.
(3) Analysis of test samples. Concurrent with each analysis of test samples, quality
control (fortified) samples should be analyzed. QC samples are prepared by adding
known amounts of the test substance to the test matrix. Minimally, one QC sample
should be at the low end of the test concentration range and one QC sample at the high
end. A control (zero-level fortification) sample should also be included. Test sample
recoveries may be corrected for inherent method bias as determined from the concurrent
analysis of freshly fortified quality control samples.
(h) Reference toxicants. Historically, reference toxicity testing has been thought to provide
three types of information relevant to the interpretation of toxicity test data: An indication of the
relative health of the organisms used in the test; A demonstration that the laboratory can perform
the test procedure in a reproducible manner over a period of time; and Information to indicate
whether the sensitivity of a particular strain or population in use at a laboratory is comparable to
those used in other facilities and how sensitivity varies over time. However, performance of
control organisms over time may be a better indicator of success in handling and testing of at
least some organisms. Nonetheless, periodic reference toxicant testing can provide an indication
of the overall comparability of results within and among laboratories. Although a positive
control is not standard for each test, a quarterly or semiannual positive control (on a guideline-
specific basis) can serve as a means of detecting possible interlaboratory or temporal variation.
A reference toxicant might also be desirable when there is any significant change in source or
maintenance of test organisms or in other test conditions.
(i) Monitoring of test conditions. Test conditions are specified in each test-specific guideline in
the OCSPP Series 850 Group C. These conditions include environmental factors such as
temperature, humidity, and lighting. Methods used for monitoring test conditions should be in
accordance with established methods (e.g., those published by U.S. EPA, ASTM, APHA et al,
etc.).
(1) Temperature. Preferably, temperature should be monitored continuously (recorded
at least hourly). Alternatively, the maximum and minimum should be measured daily
(which is a minimum of at least two measurements during each 24 hour period during the
study). Temperature measurements should be made in at least one representative
location.
(2) Humidity. Where applicable, humidity should be monitored continuously in at least
one representative location.
(3) Lighting. Guidance for lighting in laboratory toxicity tests can be found in the
reference in paragraph (k)(3) of this guideline.
(j) Reporting—
(1) Background information. In addition to the reporting requirements prescribed in the
Good Laboratory Practices Standards (40 CFR part 792 and 40 CFR part 160), the report
should include the information in paragraphs G)0)(i) through (j)(l)(vi) of this guideline:
Page 18 of 23
-------
(i) Test facility (name and location), test dates, and personnel.
(ii) The name of the sponsor, study director, principal investigator, names of other
scientists or professionals, and the names of all supervisory personnel involved in
the study.
(iii) Raw data sufficient to allow independent confirmation the study authors'
conclusions should be presented with the study report. Raw data includes all
measurements recorded during the study including, but not limited to, effects
(mortality, growth, etc), environmental conditions (temperature, etc) and test
substance concentration or dose measured as specified and are used for the
reconstruction and evaluation of the report of that study. The absence of raw data
may make the study incomplete and impossible to review for scientific soundness
and thus can lead to rejection of the study as scientifically sound.
(iv) The signed and dated reports of each of the individual scientists or other
professionals involved in the study, including each person who, at the request or
direction of the testing facility or sponsor, conducted an analysis or evaluation of
data or specimens from the study after data generation was completed.
(v) The locations where all raw data and the final report are stored.
(vi) The statement prepared and signed by the quality assurance unit identifying
whether or not the study was conducted in compliance with Good Laboratory
Practices Standards (40 CFR part 792 or 40 CFR part 160). Alternatively the
statement can indicate it was conducted under OECD Principles of Good
Laboratory Practice, in accordance with the multilateral agreement with OECD
member countries.
(2) Data elements. The test report should include all information for providing a
complete and accurate description of test procedures and evaluation of test results.
(i) Objectives and procedures stated in the guideline, including any changes or
deviations or occurrences which may have influenced the results of the test.
(ii) Identification of the test substance (including source, lot or batch number, and
purity) and known physical and chemical properties that are pertinent to the test.
As relevant, solubility and stability of the test substance under the test conditions,
and stability of the test substance under storage conditions if stored prior to
analysis. It should be reported if a formulation is being tested. Where appropriate
a cross-reference to OCSPP Series 830 (Product Properties Test Guidelines)
guideline study results can be used to report this data.
(iii) Methods of preparation of the test substance and the concentrations or doses
used in definitive testing. If vehicles are used, the name and source of the vehicle,
the nominal concentration of the test substance in the vehicle, and the vehicle
concentration(s) used in the test.
(iv) Information about the test organisms.
Page 19 of 23
-------
(v) A description of the test system used in definitive and any preliminary testing.
This includes a description of the test chambers, method of test substance
introduction, number of organisms per chamber, number of replicates per
treatment, all environmental parameters, description of any feeding during the test
(if applicable), including type of food, source, amount given and frequency.
(vi) Document and submit to the Agency the preliminary test results for review
with the study to which they apply.
(vii) Results of measurements of test substance. All analytical procedures and
results should be described. Report all chemistry methods used in preliminary
trials, in range-finding tests, in establishing percent purity of batches of test
substance, or in measuring concentrations in feed, dosing solutions, or animals.
Include in the documentation a complete description of the method so that a
bench chemist can independently determine what equipment to use and perform
the analysis. Also include the raw data, standards, quality control samples, and
chromatograms from samples taken during either definitive or range-finding tests,
not of standard or samples from recovery tests. For a satisfactory test, the
accuracy of the method, LOD, MDL, and LOQ should be given.
(viii) Any difficulties in maintaining constant test substance concentrations should
be reported. If it is observed that the stability or homogeneity of the test
substance cannot be maintained, care should be taken in the interpretation of the
results, and note made that the results may not be reproducible.
(ix) Methods, frequency, and results of environmental monitoring performed
during the study (temperature, lighting, etc} and other records of test conditions.
(x) Biological observations should be reported in sufficient detail to allow
complete independent evaluation of the results (see specific test guidelines in this
group for a description of what should be reported).
(xi) All data developed during the study that are suggestive or predictive of toxic
effects and all concomitant gross toxicological manifestations.
(xii) Calculated endpoints and a description of all statistical methods, including:
software used, handling of outlier data points, handling of non-detect or zero
values, tests to validate the assumptions of the analyses, level of significance, any
data transformations, for hypothesis tests a measure of the sensitivity of the test
(either the minimum significant difference or the percent change from the control
that this minimum difference represents. Raw data should be reported to allow
independent verification of statistical procedures.
(xiii) Methods used for test chamber and treatment randomization as well as
methods for impartial assignment of test organisms to test chambers.
Page 20 of 23
-------
(k) References. The references in this paragraph should be consulted for additional background
material on this test guideline.
(1) American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water
Environment Federation, 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Wastewater, 20* edition. Part 8010, Toxicity: Introduction.
(2) American Society for Testing and Materials, 2003. ASTM E 1847-96. Standard
practice for statistical analysis of toxicity tests conducted under ASTM guidelines. In
Annual_Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.06, West Conshohocken, PA. Current edition
approved December 10, 1996, Reapproved 2003.
(3) American Society for Testing and Materials, 2002. ASTM E 1733-95. Standard
guide for the use of lighting in laboratory testing. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards,
Vol. 11.06, ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA. Current edition approved September 10,
1995; Reapproved 2002.
(4) Bruce, R.D. and DJ. Versteeg, 1992. A statistical procedure for modeling continuous
toxicity data. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 11: 1485-1491.
(5) Chapman, G.A., B.S. Anderson, AJ. Bailer, R.B. Baird, R. Berger, D.T. Burton, D.L.
Denton, W.L. Goodfellow, M.A. Heber, L.L. McDonald, T.J. Norberg-King and P.J.
Ruffier, 1996. Methods and appropriate endpoints. In Whole Effluent Toxicity Testing,
D.R. Grothe, K.L. Dickson and O.K. Reed-Judkins, eds., SETAC Press, Pensacola, FL.
(6) Daum, R.J., 1970. Revision of two computer programs for probit analysis. Bulletin
of the Entomological Society of America 16:10-15.
(7) Daum, RJ. and W. Killcreas, 1966. Two computer programs for probit analysis.
Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America 12:365-369.
(8) deBruijn, J.H.M. and M. Hof, 1997. How to measure no effect. Part IV: How
acceptable is the ECX from an environmental policy point of view? Environmetrics
8:263-267.
(9) Fairweather, P.G., 1991. Statistical power and design requirements for environmental
monitoring. Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research 42:555-567.
(10) Finney, D.J., 1971. Probit Analysis 3rd ed., Cambridge: London and New York.
(11) Litchfield, J.T., Jr. and F. Wilcoxon, 1949. A simplified method of evaluating
dose-effect experiments. Journal of Pharmacological Experimental Therapy 96:99-133.
(12) Nabholz, J.V., 1991. Environmental hazard and risk assessment under the Toxic
Substances Control Act. Science of the Total Environment, 109/110: 649-665.
(13) Nabholz, J.V., P. Miller and M. Zeeman, 1993. Environmental risk assessment of
new chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 5, In
Environmental_Toxicology and Risk Assessment, Landis, W.G., Hughes, J.S., and Lewis,
Page 21 of 23
-------
M.A., eds., ASTM STP 1179, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia,
PA, pp. 40 -55.
(14) Nyholm, N., P.S. Sorenson, K.O. Kusk, and E.R. Christensen, 1992. Statistical
treatment of data from microbial toxicity tests. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 11:157-167.
(15) Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1998. Report of the
OECD Workshop on Statistical Analysis of Aquatic Toxicity Data. OECD Series on
Testing and Assessment, No. 10. ENV/MC/CHEM(98)18
(16) Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 2006. Current
Approaches in the Statistical Analysis of Ecotoxicity Data: A Guidance to Application.
OECD Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 54. ENV/JM/MONO(2006)18.
(17) Pack, S., 1993. A review of statistical data analysis and experimental design in
OECD aquatic toxicology test guidelines. Report to OECD. Paris.
(18) Smrchek, J.C., R. Clements, R. Morcock, and W. Rabert, 1993. Assessing
ecological hazard under TSCA: methods and evaluation of data, In Environmental
Toxicology_and Risk Assessment, Landis, W.G., Hughes, J.S., and Lewis, M.A., eds.,
ASTM STP 1179, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 22-
39
(19) Smrchek, J.C. and M.G. Zeeman, 1998. Assessing risks to ecological systems from
chemicals. In Handbook of Environmental Risk Assessment and Management, P. Calow,
ed., Blackwell Science, Ltd., Oxford, UK, pp. 24-90, Chapter 3
(20) Stephan, C.E., 1997. Methods for calculating an LCso. In Aquatic Toxicology and
Hazard Evaluation, ASTM STP 634, F.L. Mayer and J.L. Hamelink, eds., American
Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.
(21) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1982. Pesticide Assessment Guidelines
Subdivision L—Hazard Evaluation: Nontarget Insects. Office of Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, Washington, D.C. EPA-540/9-82-019
(22) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1994. Pesticides Reregi strati on Rejection
Rate Analysis: Ecological Effects, EPA 738-R-94-035, Office of Prevention, Pesticides
and Toxic Substances, December, 1994
(23) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1997. Terms of Environment, Glossary,
Abbreviations, and Acronyms, Communications, Education, and Public Affairs, EPA
175-B-97-001, December 1997.
(24) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000. Methods for Measuring the Toxicity
and Bioaccumulation of Sediment-Associated Contaminants with Freshwater
Invertebrates, Second Edition, EPA 600/R-99/064, March 2000.
Page 22 of 23
-------
(25) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000. Guidance for Data Quality
Assessment, Practical Methods for Data Analysis. EPA QA/G9. Office of
Environmental Information, Washington, DC. EPA/600/R-96/084, July.
(26) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002. Methods for measuring the acute
toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater and marine organisms, Fifth
edition, Office of Water, Washington, DC. EPA-821-R-02-012
(27) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002. Short-term methods for estimating
the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to freshwater organisms, Fourth
edition, Office of Water, Washington, DC. EPA-821-R-02-013.
(28) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2002. Short-term methods for estimating
the chronic toxicity of effluents and receiving waters to marine and estuarine organisms,
Third edition, Office of Water, DC.. EPA-821-R-02-014.
(29) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40
- Pesticide Programs Subchapter E—Pesticide Programs. Part 158—Data Requirements
for Pesticides.
(30) VanEwijk, P.H. and J.A. Hoekstra, 1993. Calculation of the ECso and its confidence
interval when a subtoxic stimulus is present. Ecotox.icology and Environmental Safety.
25:25-32.
(31) Zeeman, M. and J. Gilford, 1993. Ecological hazard evaluation and risk assessment
under EPA's Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): an introduction. In Environmental
Toxicology and Risk Assessment, Landis, W.G., Hughes, J.S., and Lewis, M.A., eds.,
ASTM STP 1179, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 7-
21.
(32) Zeeman, M.G., 1995. Ecotoxicity testing and estimation methods developed under
Section 5 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), In Fundamentals of Aquatic
Toxicology^2n Edition, G.M. Rand, ed., Taylor and Francis, Washington, DC, pp. 703-
715.
Page 23 of 23
------- |