PEER REVIEW DRAFT - DO NOT CITE OR QUOTE

United States	Office of Chemical Safety and

Environmental Protection Agency	Pollution Prevention

Draft Risk Evaluation for
Carbon Tetrachloride

Systematic Review Supplemental File:
Data Quality Evaluation of Ecological Hazard

Studies

CASRN: 56-23-5

ci

i

ci-"crci

CI

January 2020


-------
1

1

3

6

9

11

14

17

19

21

23

25

27

Table of Contents

Data Type

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
Amphibians

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
Photobacteriae

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Other; Aquatic; other Bacteria

Reference

Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daph-
nia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 24:684-

691

Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcen-
tration and elimination of selected water pollutants by bluegill sunfish (Lepomis
macrochirus).

Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority
pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of Environmental Con-
tamination and Toxicology 26:446-452

Dawson, G. W.,Jennings, A. L.,Drozdowski, D.,Rider, E.. 1977. The acute
toxicity of 47 industrial chemicals to fresh and saltwater fishes. Journal of
Hazardous Materials 1:303-318

Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B.
A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic compounds to embryo-
larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133

Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B.
A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic compounds to embryo-
larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133

Lee, S. M.,Lee, S. B.,Park, C. H.,Choi, J.. 2006. Expression of heat shock
protein and hemoglobin genes in Chironomus tentans (Diptera, chironomidae)
larvae exposed to various environmental pollutants: A potential biomarker of
freshwater monitoring. Chemosphere 65:1074-1081

Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural
configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes. Chemosphere 28:253-259

Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural
configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes. Chemosphere 28:253-259

Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural
configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes. Chemosphere 28:253-259

Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural
configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes. Chemosphere 28:253-259

Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural
configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes. Chemosphere 28:253-259


-------
29

33

35

37

40

42

44

46

48

50

52

54

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Other; Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Other; Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Brack, W.,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with
green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Martins, J.,Soares, M. L.,Saker, M. L.,01ivateles, L.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007.
Phototactic behavior in Daphnia magna Straus as an indicator of toxicants in
the aquatic environment. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 67:417-422

Martins, J. C.,Saker, M. L.,Teles, L. F.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007. Oxygen
consumption by Daphnia magna Straus as a marker of chemical stress in the
aquatic environment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1987-1991

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with
Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environment 43:149-157

Bauder, M. B.,Palace, V. P.,Hodson, P. V.. 2005. Is oxidative stress the mech-
anism of blue sac disease in retene-exposed trout larvae?. Environmental Toxi-
cology and Chemistry 24:694-702

Jia, R.,Cao, L. P.,Du, J. L.,Wang, J. H.,Liu, Y. J.,Jeney, G.,Xu, P.,Yin, G.
J.. 2014. Effects of carbon tetrachloride on oxidative stress, inflammatory
response and hepatocyte apoptosis in common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Aquatic
Toxicology 152

de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium
carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the African tilapia Ore-
ochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202

de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium
carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the African tilapia Ore-
ochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202

Khangarot, B. S.,Das, S.. 2009. Acute toxicity of metals and reference toxicants
to a freshwater ostracod, Cypris subglobosa Sowerby, 1840 and correlation to
EC(50) values of other test models. Journal of Hazardous Materials 172:641-649

Jia, R.,Cao, L.,Du, J.,Xu, P.,Jeney, G.,Yin, G.. 2013. The protective effect of
silymarin on the carbon tetrachloride (CC14)-induced liver injury in common
carp (Cyprinus carpio). In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology 49:155-
161

Y. Liu, L. Cao, J. Du, R. Jia, J. Wang, P. Xu, G. Yin. 2015. Protective ef-
fects of Lycium barbarum polysaccharides against carbon tetrachloride-induced
hepatotoxicity in precision-cut liver slices in vitro and in vivo in common carp
(Cyprinus carpio L.). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology - Part C: Tox-
icology and Pharmacology 169:65-72

Chen, C. Y.,Wooster, G. A.,Bowser, P. R.. 2004. Comparative blood chemistry
and histopathology of tilapia infected with Vibrio vulnificus or Streptococcus
iniae or exposed to carbon tetrachloride, gentamicin, or copper sulfate. Aqua-
culture 239:421-443


-------
56

58

62

65

68

71

73

75

77

79

81

83

85

87

89

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other
Amphibians

Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Other; Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish
Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Inver-
tebrates

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Birge, W. J.,Black, J. A.,Kuehne, R. A.. 1980. Effects of Organic Compounds
on Amphibian Reproduction.

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to
Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to
Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to
Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical Properties. 12:15-21

Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxi-
cants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental Toxicology and
Chemistry 26:1931-1939

Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in
the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Com-
parisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an Amphipod and a
Cladoceran.

Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Com-
parisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an Amphipod and a
Cladoceran.

Geiger, D. L.,Brooke, L. T.,Call, D. J.. 1990. Acute toxicities of organic chem-
icals to fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): Volume V.

Weber, L. J.,Gingerich, W. H.,Pfeifer, K. F.. 1979. Alterations in Rainbow
Trout Liver Function and Body Fluids Following Treatment with Carbon Tetra-
chloride or Monochlorobenzene. 99:401-413

Richie, J. P., Jr.,Mills, B. J.,Lang, C. A.. 1984. The Verification of a Mam-
malian Toxicant Classification Using a Mosquito Screening Method. 4:1029-
1035

Koskinen, H.,Pehkonen, P.,Vehniainen, E.,Krasnov, A.,Rexroad, C.,Afanasyev,
S.,Molsa, H.,Oikari, A.. 2004. Response of Rainbow Trout Transcriptome to
Model Chemical Contaminants. 320:745-753

Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to
Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia magna.

Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to
Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia magna.

Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to
Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia magna.


-------
3684293
4338225

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; In-
vertebrates

Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to
Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia magna.

Kotsanis, N.,Metcalfe, C. D.. 1988. Accelerating an in vivo trout carcinogenesis
assay with carbon tetrachloride and partial hepatectomy. 15th Annual Aquatic
Toxicity Workshop

91

93

<


-------
Study Citation: Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daphnia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination

and Toxicology 24:684-691
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	7508

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1: Test Substance Identity	High x 2 2

Metric 2: Test Substance Source	Medium X 1	2 Obtained from commercial supplier, but details were

omitted.

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity	Medium X 1	2 Study reports a minimum purity of 80 percent

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



^ Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2



Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Medium

X

1

2

While CC14 is volatile and the not measured, the
researchers did attempt to have a closed system.

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Medium

X

1

2

5-8 test concentrations were reported to be used for
each chemical, but the actual values were not avail-
able.

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	High x 2 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low	x 1	3 Study didn't report whether test organisms were ac-

climatized.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:

Leblanc, G. A.. 1980. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to water flea (Daphnia magna). Bulletin of Environmental Contamination



and Toxicology 24:684-691

Data Type:

Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:

7508

Domain

Metric Rating^ MWF* Score Comments"^

It appears there were 15 daphnia in each test con-
centration for CC14 and no replicates to avoid losing
CC14 to volatilization. OECD TG 202recommends
at least 20 total daphnids and separated into 4 dif-
ferent test vessels.

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	High x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
Medium

High

x 1
x 2

x 1

Data for most but not all outcomes by study group
were reported but these minor uncertainties or limi-
tations are unlikely to have a substantial impact on
results.

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18050

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1: Test Substance Identity	High x 2 2

Metric 2: Test Substance Source	High x 1	1

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity	Low	X 1	3 No purity of test chemical was reported, but liquid

gas chromatography was performed during the ex-
periment and purity of the chemical could be de-
termined then, although it wasn't reported in the
paper.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



co Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Method for allocation was not reported.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2



Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

High

X

1

1



Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

High

X

1

1



Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	Medium x 2	4 Minor reservations about the source of fish.

Three populations of bluegill sunfish (Lepomis
macrochirus) were obtained from a commercial fish
farmer in Connecticut, one population obtained
from a commercial fish farmer in Nebraska. Age not
reported, but length and weight was documented,
and age may not be a big factor in determining BCF.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R. ,Macek,
bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18050

K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High x 1
Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Low

x 1

Study started with 100 organisms per exposure
group, and took out 5 fish on each sampling day.
OECD recommends having enough to remove at
least 4. Number of replicates not reported.
Recommended water temperature for bluegill is 20-
25 degrees C and this study was conducted at 16
degrees C which could have lowered metabolism in
fish.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Low

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

x 2

Medium x 1

BCFs and half-lives were reported, but assessment
was not as sensitive as it should be for calculating
a BCF. OECD recommends noting if both sexes are
used, and ensuring that differences in growth and
lipid content between sexes is not significant before
the start of the exposure, in particular if it is antic-
ipated that pooling of male and female fish will be
necessary to ensure detectable substance concentra-
tions and/or lipid content. This was not noted.

Incomplete reporting of minor details of outcome as-
sessment protocol execution

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low	x 2

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium x 1

OECD recommends noting if both sexes are used,
and ensuring that differences in growth and lipid
content between sexes is not significant before the
start of the exposure, in particular if it is anticipated
that pooling of male and female fish will be neces-
sary to ensure detectable substance concentrations
and/or lipid content. This was not noted.

Data on attrition and health outcomes unrelated to
exposure were not reported for each study group.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Not all regressions, lipid content, and weights were
reported, but BCFs and half-lives were reported for
all chemicals.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Barrows, M. E.,Petrocelli, S. R.,Macek, K. J.,Carroll, J. J.. 1980. Bioconcentration and elimination of selected water pollutants by

bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus).

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18050

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.7

Extracted

Yes





*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

( 4	if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

I V. (Metric Score,- x MWF,-) I V ..

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High x 2
Medium x 1

Medium x 1

Study says all chemicals tested were purchased from
commercial chemical suppliers, but does not specify
where CC14 came from. Study does state "were pro-
cured from those commercial sources able to provide
the purest grade available. All chemicals tested were
greater than or equal to 80 percent pure..."

Study reports a minimum purity of 80 percent for
all chemicals tested, but does not specify what the
purity is for CC14.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:	Negative Controls

Metric 5:	Negative Control Response

Metric 6:	Randomized Allocation

High
Low

High

x 2
x 1

x 1

Many chemicals tested and no details provided
about negative control response, although it says
control mortality was recorded.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 1
x 1

x 2

Volatile chemicals were capped, but paper does not
specify headspace in the capped jars. The jars
capped could have had low DO content, but DO was
measured at 0 and at 96 hours..

Nominal concentrations were used and were not
measured. CC14 is volatile, but test jars were
capped immediately following addition of test chem-
ical. Precipitate was observed in test jars indicating
test concentrations may have been above water sol-
ubility

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

x 1

x 1

Study says that the test was conducted according to
EPA's "Methods for acute toxicity tests with fish,
macroinvertebrates, and amphibians" which says for
static tests you must have 10 organisms in each
treatment divided into at least two test chambers;
not sure how they got the exposure concentrations
used of what the exposure concentrations were.

Test substance concentration was not reported. Pa-
per states " The acute toxicity of most of the chem-
icals tested was at concentrations above their water
solubility and therefore, the test material or one or
more of its constituents precipitated ..." Precipitate
was observed for CC14

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1	2

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	Low	x 1	3

Test animals utilized were young of the year bluegill
(L. macrochirus) obtained from commercial fish sup-
pliers within the continental United States. Ag e and
weight reported, sex not reported

Acclimation period not stated, but does state tests
followed "Methods for acute toxicity tests with fish,
macroinvertebrates and amphibians" which specifies
a 14 day acclimation period for fish. Study does
report a 48 hour time prior to test where fish were
not fed and observed; fish were not used if had >3
percent mortality,

Number of fish per test jar reported, but number of
replicates not reported

Minor uncertainties around housing conditions
(headspace in jar) DO cones for all chemicals ranged
from 9.7 mg/L at start of test to 0.3 mg/L at 96
hours. Low DO can impact survival; DO at end of
test for CCL4 not reported.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Buccafusco, R. J.,Ells, S. J.,Leblanc, G. A.. 1981. Acute toxicity of priority pollutants to bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus). Bulletin of

Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 26:446-452
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18064

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

Low

X

2

6

Study did not provide enough information to allow

Procedures









a comparison of environmental conditions

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

X

1

3

Do not provide information about health outcomes











of each study group

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Medium

X

1

2

Not clear what method was used to calculate LC50











for CC14: "The LC50s and 95 percent confidence in-











tervals were calculated, where possible, by the mov-











ing average angle method (HARRIS 1959). The











nominal test concentrations were transformed to log-











arithms and corresponding percentage mortalities to











angles. Each group of these successive angles was











then averaged and the LCSO was estimated by lin-











ear interpolation, between the successive concentra-











tions whole average angles bracketed 45" . When the











test data did not meet Harris' method requirements,











the LC50s were calculated by the log probit method,











a modification of the LITCHFIELD + WILCOXON











(1949) method."

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Low

X

2

6

The data for the static test were not presented in











full, and no information was reported for controls.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

Medium





2.0



Extracted

Yes











*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Dawson, G. W.,Jennings, A. L.,Drozdowski, D.,Rider, E.. 1977. The acute toxicity of 47 industrial chemicals to fresh and saltwater

fishes. Journal of Hazardous Materials 1:303-318
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18670

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

Low	X 2	6 Analytical confirmation of CC14 was not reported.

Low	X 1	3 CC14 was either research or chemically pure grade

quality from commercial sources.

Low	X 1	3 Purity was not reported.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2



Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Low

X

1

3

Did not report whether or not CC14 was measured.

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

High

X

1

1



Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Metric 16:

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

2

2



High

X

1

1



Low

X

1

3

The number of organisms/replicates was not re-
ported.

Medium

X

1

2

Minor uncertainties and will not have substantial
impact on the results.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Dawson, G. W.,Jennings, A. L.,Drozdowski, D.,Rider, E.. 1977. The acute toxicity of 47 industrial chemicals to fresh and saltwater

fishes. Journal of Hazardous Materials 1:303-318
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	18670

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2	2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2	2

Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Low	x 2	6

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	Low	x 1	3

Data for exposure-related findings were not shown
for each study group.

The study did not report any measures of variability
and/or insufficient information was provided.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High 	¥ Medium 1.6 Downgrade from high to medium: The purity of

CC14 and number of replicates is absent from the
paper. It is also unclear if the researchers analyti-
cally quantified CC14.

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Black, J.

A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B.

A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians.

133









Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Amphibians











Hero ID: 93660













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

The test substance was identified as carbon tetra-













chloride.

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

The toxicant source was not identified in the publi-













cation.

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

All test substances used in the toxicity tests were













reagent grade quality.

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Amphibian controls were used in the study.

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

The control survival ranged from 84-99 percent.

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

There was no mention of randomized allocation of













test organisms.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2

Flow-through testing with a closed vessel was devoid



tion









of air space to minimize volatilization.

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

The researchers administrated the test solutions (ex-













posure scenario) consistently across the toxicity test.

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1

Gas-liquid chromatography was used to measure test



tion









concentrations daily.

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Amphibian embryo-larvae were exposed up to 4 days













post-hatch, sufficient to determine effects in embryos













and larvae.

Metric 11

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1

There were 6 exposure concentrations with appro-

posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

priate spacing used fore each amphibian tested.

All exposure concentrations were below the water
solubility of carbon tetrachloride.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	High	x 2	2 Amphibians used were appropriate for this study,

with the exception of the African Clawed frog, which
is not endemic to the U.S.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B. A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Amphibians

Hero ID:	93660

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	Medium x 1

2	Controls and exposed organisms were appeared to

be treated identical with the exception of CC14 in
the controls. After re-reading, I did not see any ac-
climatization and pretreatment conditions reported,
but if there were adverse effects from this, it would
have shown up in the controls and it did not.

1	Single replicates of 50 to 125 eggs were used per test
concentration.

2	A loading rate of up to 125 eggs per test concen-
tration was used, which did not appear to impact
test results. Environmental conditions were within
acceptable ranges, and control mortality was accept-
able.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High	X 2	2 Test vessels observed daily to assess development

and remove dead test organisms.

High	X 1	1 LC50, LC10, LCls were assessed adjusted for control

mortality, but detailed control mortality data were
not provided.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium x 1

Environmental conditions appeared consistent
across test concentrations and control mortality
ranged from 1-16 percent.

Teratogenesis was reportedly infrequently in the
controls ( percent teratogenicity not reported) and
control mortality ranged from 1 to 16 percent, which
is acceptable.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium x 1

Medium x 2

Survival data was reported as percent of total organ-
isms at each exposure concentration after corrected
for control mortality, but detailed control data were
not reported. LC50s, LClOs, and LCls were calcu-
lated using log-probit analysis.

Most, but not all, data endpoints were reported.
You could not re-create the statistics in the paper.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B. A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Amphibians

Hero ID:	93660

Domain Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score Comments"^

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X 1 1 Unexpected outcomes were not reported in the
study.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B. A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	93660

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

The test substance was identified as carbon tetra-
chloride.

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

The toxicant source was not identified in the publi-
cation.

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

All test substances used in the toxicity tests were
reagent grade quality.

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Fish control eggs were used in the study.

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

The control survival ranged from 84-99 percent.

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

There was no mention of randomized allocation of
test organisms.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2

Flow-through testing with closed vessel devoid of air
space was used to minimize volatilization.

Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

The researchers administrated the test solutions (ex-
posure scenario) consistently across the toxicity test.

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

High

X

1

1

Gas-liquid chromatography was used to measure test
concentrations daily.

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Fish embryo-larvae were exposed up to 4 days post-
hatch , sufficient to determine effects in embryos and
larvae.

Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

High

X

1

1

There were 6 exposure concentrations with appro-
priate spacing used for each fish tested.

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

All exposure concentrations were below the water

solubility of carbon tetrachloride.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Continued on next page


-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation: Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B. A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	93660

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per High x 1
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	Medium x 1

Rainbow trout and fathead minnow are well known
species. The trout were obtained from a hatchery
and freshly fertilized fathead minnow eggs were ob-
tained from the EPA Newtown Fish Toxicology Lab-
oratory.

Controls and exposed organisms were appeared to
be treated identical with the exception of CC14 in
the controls. I did not see any acclimatization and
pretreatment conditions reported, but if there were
adverse effects from this, it would have shown up in
the controls and it did not.

Single replicates of 50 to 125 eggs were used per test
concentration.

A loading rate of up to 125 eggs per test concen-
tration was used, which did not appear to impact
test results. Environmental conditions were within
acceptable ranges, and control mortality was accept-
able.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High	x 2	2 Test vessels observed daily to assess development

and remove dead test organisms.

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High	x 1	1 LC50, LC10, LCls were assessed adjusted for control

mortality, but detailed control mortality data were
not provided.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Medium x 1

Environmental conditions appeared consistent
across test concentrations and control mortality
ranged from 1-16 percent.

Teratogenesis was reportedly infrequent in controls
( percent teratogenicity not reported) and control
mortality ranged from 1 to 16 percent, which is ac-
ceptable.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Black, J. A.,Birge, W. J.,McDonnell, W. E.,Westerman, A. G.,Ramey, B. A.,Bruser, D. M.. 1982. The aquatic toxicity of organic

compounds to embryo-larval stages of fish and amphibians. 133
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	93660

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High x 1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1

Survival data was reported as percent of total organ-
isms at each exposure concentration after corrected
for control mortality, but detailed control data were
not reported. LC50s, LClOs, and LCls were calcu-
lated using log-probit analysis.

Most, but not all, data endpoints were reported.
You could not re-create the statistics in the paper.

Unexpected outcomes were not reported in the
study.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Lee, S. M.,Lee, S. B.,Park, C. H.,Choi, J.. 2006. Expression of heat shock protein and hemoglobin genes in Chironomus tentans (Diptera,
chironomidae) larvae exposed to various environmental pollutants: A potential biomarker of freshwater monitoring. Chemosphere
65:1074-1081

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	492760

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-	High	x	2	2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High	x	1	1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	Low	x	1	3
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x	2	2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	High	x	1	1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x	1	1

NOMINAL 24 HR EXP

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Lee, S. M.,Lee, S. B.,Park, C. H.,Choi, J.. 2006. Expression of heat shock protein and hemoglobin genes in Chironomus tentans (Diptera,
chironomidae) larvae exposed to various environmental pollutants: A potential biomarker of freshwater monitoring. Chemosphere
65:1074-1081

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	492760

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
Medium

High
Medium

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

Medium x 1

Concentrations were measured using gas chromatog-
raphy, but concentrations were not reported in the
paper

Number of exposure groups and spacing of exposure
levels not reported, though followed OECD guideline
203

Solvent concentrations were not discussed;
closed containers to minimize volatility

used

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium

High

High

High

x 2
x 1
x 1

x 1

Source of fish not reported

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium x 1

Medium x 2
High x 1

No details on statistical methods were reported.
Just reported 48-hr LC50 as mortality ( percent) vs
concentration

Reported 48 hr LC50, but no additional details in-
cluded

Overall Quality Determination^

High

1.5

Extracted

Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Photobacteriae

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Low

Low
Low

X 2	6	Used Microtox test, which includes negative con-

trols, but controls were not described
X 1	3	Negative control response not described

X 1	3 Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	Medium x 1

High
Medium

High
Medium

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

Experimental system and test media were described,
but not in great detail. Cite "Microtox test" and
German standard DIN 38412 L 34.

Concentrations were measured using gas chromatog-
raphy, but concentrations were not reported in the
paper

Number of exposure groups and spacing of exposure
levels not reported, though EC50 was reported

Solvent concentrations were not discussed

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

X

2

4

Source of organisms not reported

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Replicates were not discussed



Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Photobacteriae

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1



Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control











Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2



Procedures











Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1



Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Medium

X

1

2

No details on statistical methods were reported

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium

X

2

4

Reported EC50, but no additional details included

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination^	Medium	1.8

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
Medium

High
Medium

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

Medium x 1

Concentrations were measured using gas chromatog-
raphy, but concentrations were not reported in the
paper

Number of exposure groups and spacing of exposure
levels not reported, though followed modified OECD
guideline 201

Solvent concentrations were not discussed; used
modified test containers to minimize volatility with-
out causing growth inhabitation or death merely due
to closed containers

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Medium x 2
High x 1
High x 1

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

Source of algae not reported

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Ereitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Medium x 1

Medium x 2
High x 1

No details on statistical methods were reported.
Just reported EC50/72 hours as percentage of
growth inhibition versus concentration
Reported EC50/72hrs, but no additional details in-
cluded

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.5

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance















Metric 1



Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2



Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3



Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design















Metric 4



Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5



Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6



Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7



Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Medium

X

2

4

Specific methodology not reported in paper, cites





tion









OECD guidelines

Metric 8



Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9



Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Medium

X

1

2

Concentrations were measured using gas chromatog-





tion









raphy, but concentrations were not reported in the















paper

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

Number of exposure groups and exposure levels not





posure Levels









reported, though EC50 was reported

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism















Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

X

2

4

Source of organisms not reported

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1







Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.5

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Freitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other Bacteria

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance















Metric 1



Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

chemical name and structure

Metric 2



Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3



Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design















Metric 4



Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5



Negative Control Response

Low

X

1

3

Negative control response not described

Metric 6



Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7



Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2

Used an automatic test apparatus (Sapromat)





tion











Metric 8



Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9



Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Medium

X

1

2

Concentrations were measured using gas chromatog-





tion









raphy, but concentrations were not reported in the















paper

Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Medium

X

1

2

Number of exposure groups and exposure levels not





posure Levels









reported, though EC50 was reported

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Medium

X

1

2

Solvent concentrations were not discussed

Domain 4: Test Organism















Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

X

2

4

Source of organisms not reported

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Replicates were not discussed





Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Ereitag, D.,Ballhorn, L.,Behechti, A.,Fischer, K.,Thumm, W.. 1994. Structural configuration and toxicity of chlorinated alkanes.

Chemosphere 28:253-259
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; other Bacteria

Hero ID:	660810

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Medium x 1
Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

2	No details on statistical methods were reported

4 Reported EC50/5 days, but no additional details in-
cluded

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.6

Extracted

Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

I High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation:	Brack, W. ,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Test substance was identified by name.

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Authors identified Merck as the source of the test
substance.

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

"p.a." is reported for CC14, which is analytical grade

quality.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4: Negative Controls

Metric 5: Negative Control Response
Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

High

Low
Low

x 2

x 1
x 1

"Each test series contained three controls without
toxicant and two controls with 0.8 mg/L Cu2+
(CuS04). This concentration reduces algal growth
to50 percent and is used to check normal sensitivity
of the organisms."

The biological responses of the negative control
groups were not reported

It was not reported whether there was random place-
ment of flasks.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brack, W. ,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Domain

Metric

Ratingt MWF* Score

Commentstt

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- High
tion

x 2

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

x 1

The purpose of the test was to determine a way
of doing algae tests with volatile chemicals, as the
OECD guidelines recommends using a permeable
stopper in the flask to allow C02 to pass through
so as not to impede algae growth. However with
volatile chemicals this is not possible because of loss
of test substance through vitalization. Therefore in
test, they used a closed system that still provided
a source of C02 for the algae. Authors reported,
"Deviations between the duplicates, extracted from
the same test culture were less than 5 percent . To
estimate recovery of this analytical method, 20 mL
headspace vials were filled completely with water
or alga suspension. The vials were sealed gas" tight
with septa. Gravimetrically defined amounts of the
volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons were injected via
syringe through the Septa into the liquids and dis-
solved. From these solutions samples were taken
and extracted as explained above. Recovery of the
method amounted to 90 " S percent and was inde-
pendent from cell density."

Exposures were administered consistently across
study groups.

Analytical measurments by gas chromatography/
electron capture detector (GC/ECD) following
liquid-liquid microextraction were taken at test ini-
tiation and end.

The test was 72 hours in duration, which is recom-
mended by OECD Guideline 201.

Test concentrations are reported in figure 3 and show
a dose response for growth inhibition. The figure
shows at least 5 concentrations tested which is rec-
ommended by OECD Guideline 201.

The test cone for CC14 shown in figure 3 (highest
cone is <10 mg/1) are well below CC14's solubility
level of 793 mg/1.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

This is not a commonly used algal species. Not a
TG species.

Continued on next page


-------
. . . continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Brack, W. ,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High

x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1	2

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	High x 1	1

Pretreatment conditions included, "Precultures and
test cultures were grown in the medium for unicel-
lular algae according to KUflL (1962) (Table 2). In-
cubation of all cultures was done in a Orbital In-
cubator (Gallenkamp). The cultures were shaken
permanently with a frequency of 120 rpm. They
wereilluminated from above with 130 "E/m2s with-
out light dark cycle. The photosynthetically effec-
tive light was determined with a Quantum Sensor
from Licor Inc. The temperature was maintained at
20 " 1 deg C."

Two replicates per test concentration (8 concentra-
tions). Three replicates are preferred.

Glass flasks which are recommended in OECD 201.
Temp and pH were within recommended ranges.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High x 2
High x 1

Biomass assessed using fluorometric measurement of
total chlorophyll for controls and treatment groups
to determined EClOs and EC50s.

No inconsistencies were reported, and both positive
and negative controls performed as expected.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

x 1

There were no reported differences among study
groups in environmental conditions or other factors
that would influence the outcome assessment.

Positive and negative controls performed as ex-
pected and no outcomes unrelated to exposures were
reported.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

1	Probit analysis was used to assess significant differ-

ences in biomass.

4	Figure 3 shows the results of the tests at each cone

for each chemical but it's difficult to determine the
exact concentrations from the figure, so some minor
uncertainties remain.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Brack, W. ,Rottler, H.. 1994. Toxicity testing of highly volatile chemicals with green algae: A new assay. 1:223-228

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	661061

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	Medium x 1	2 SDs were provided, but it was unclear whether or

not there were any unexpected outcomes.

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.4

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Martins, J.,Soares, M. L.,Saker, M. L.,01ivateles, L.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007. Phototactic behavior in Daphnia magna Straus as an

indicator of toxicants in the aquatic environment. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 67:417-422
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	661491

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance











Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

x 2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

x 1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

x 1

1



Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

x 2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

x 1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

x 1

3

Did not report randomization.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

x 2

2





tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

x 1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Medium

x 1

2

It is not clear, but it appears that nominal concen-



tion







trations were used in the study.

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

x 2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

x 1

1





posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

x 1

1





Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Martins, J.,Soares, M. L.,Saker, M. L.,01ivateles, L.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007. Phototactic behavior in Daphnia magna Straus as an

indicator of toxicants in the aquatic environment. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 67:417-422
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	661491

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.1

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Martins, J. C.,Saker, M. L.,Teles, L. F.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007. Oxygen consumption by Daphnia magna Straus as a marker of

chemical stress in the aquatic environment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1987-1991
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	661492

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Randomization was not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-	High
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	Medium
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	N/A
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2

x 1

It is unclear if the test concentration was measured.

N/A Only one concentration was reported and is accept-
able for this type of test.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Medium

X

1

2

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1

It was not clear, but was described in another paper
on CC14 from the same laboratory/test group.

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	High x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Martins, J. C.,Saker, M. L.,Teles, L. F.,Vasconcelos, V. M.. 2007. Oxygen consumption by Daphnia magna Straus as a marker of

chemical stress in the aquatic environment. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1987-1991
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	661492

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	High	x 2	2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High	x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.2

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source of test chemicals not reported

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Medium

X

1

2

Purity not reported; study states "all other reagents

were of analytical grade"

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4: Negative Controls	Low	x 2 6

Metric 5: Negative Control Response	N/A	N/A

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation	Low	x 1	3

The study states "The relative growth rate was cal-
culated as the ratio of the number of cells cultured
with a chemical against the number cultivated in a
blank", which implies the blank is a control but this
is not stated. Very little information is presented
about what is in the blank.

This is an acute study with lots of chemicals re-
ported, and they did not report on the control re-
sponse for each chemical.

No mention of random allocation

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium	x 2	4 The methods section does not state test chambers

¦j-Jq-q	were closed for CC14, but page 155 states "The au-

thors adopted 24 h for the test time and the con-
ditions of No. 4 for culturing. The EC50 values
of 57 chemicals were determined by themethod and
are shown in Table 1." Test condition 4 on Figure 2
indicates "cultured in vertical vessel with a silicone
rubber stopper"The study also states "the air space
of 20 ml in the test tube is sufficient to determine
the EC50 value of a chemical for a short cultivation
period; volatile chemicals can therefore be tested in
the sealed vessel."

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1
posure Levels

x 1

There were differences in how exposure was adminis-
tered but because the point of the study was to figure
out what housing conditions were best for this type
of protozoa. These differences could have effected
the EC50 reported. Authors report that some of
the temperatures, and amount of food changed the
growth rate of the protozoa.

Study does not state whether exposure concentra-
tions are nominal or measured

No information was provided on number of expo-
sure groups or spacing of exposures for CC14. Figure
2 shows five exposure concentrations used to deter-
mine the EC50 value for aniline.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High
Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 1

Tetrahymena pyriformis was preserved in a sterile
medium of 2 percent proteasepeptone at 20" C which
was renewed at 2-4 week intervals. Unsure but it
sounds like they cultured their own animals in the
lab from descriptions of previous studies in this pa-
per. Acknowledgements say "Pr. Nozawa of Gifu
University for providing T. pyriformis in germ-free
condition"

Number of test organisms and replicates were not
reported for the test groups. Each test solution was
inoculated with 0.2 ml of pre-cultures T. pyriformis,
but pre-exposure numbers in that 0.2 ml were not
counted. Number of replicates not stated.It was re-
ported that 20 cells per slide were counted using one
method of counting, but that was the only number
provided.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1985. Testing for the toxicity of chemicals with Tetrahymena pyriformis. Science of the Total Environ-
ment 43:149-157
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	676758

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	Medium	x 2	4 They describe two different methods for counting the

cells. Some uncertainty regarding the method se-
lected to calculate the EC50 values, but the correla-
tion coeffieicnt between the two methods was 0.998.

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	Medium	X 1	2 Assessment protocol was reported with minor uncer-

tainties.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High

x 2
x 1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High
Low

High

x 1
x 2

x 1

Data for exposure related findings were not shown
for each study group.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score : 2.0.

Extracted

No

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

I V. (Metric Score,- x MWF,-) I V ..

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Bauder, M. B.,Palace, V. P.,Hodson, P. V.. 2005. Is oxidative stress the mechanism of blue sac disease in retene-exposed trout larvae?.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 24:694-702
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	1617737

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance















Metric 1



Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2



Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/information not reported

Metric 3



Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design















Metric 4



Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5



Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6



Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7



Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2







tion











Metric 8



Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9



Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured





tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

1 concentration





posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism















Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimation not reported

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1







Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Bauder, M. B.,Palace, V. P.,Hodson, P. V.. 2005. Is oxidative stress the mechanism of blue sac disease in retene-exposed trout larvae?.

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 24:694-702
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	1617737

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.5

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Jia, R.,Cao, L. P.,Du, J. L.,Wang, J. H.,Liu, Y. J.,Jeney, G.,Xu, P.,Yin, G. J.

2014.

Effects of carbon tetrachloride on oxidative stress,

inflammatory response and hepatocyte apoptosis in common carp (Cyprinus

carpio)

. Aquatic Toxicology 152

Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish











Hero ID: 2366621













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured; nominal



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

1 Concentration



posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimation not reported

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Low

X

1

3

Number of organisms and replicates not reported



Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Jia, R.,Cao, L. P.,Du, J. L.,Wang, J. H.,Liu, Y. J.,Jeney, G.,Xu, P.,Yin, G. J.. 2014. Effects of carbon tetrachloride on oxidative stress,

inflammatory response and hepatocyte apoptosis in common carp (Cyprinus carpio). Aquatic Toxicology 152
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2366621

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.5

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the

African tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2468140

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance















Metric 1



Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2



Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3



Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design















Metric 4



Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5



Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6



Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7



Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2







tion











Metric 8



Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9



Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured





tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

1 concentration





posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism















Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1







Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the

African tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2468140

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the

African tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2468140

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance















Metric 1



Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2



Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3



Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design















Metric 4



Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5



Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6



Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7



Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2







tion











Metric 8



Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9



Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured





tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

1 concentration





posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism















Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1







Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: de Vera, M. P.,Pocsidio, G. N.. 1998. Potential protective effect of calcium carbonate as liming agent against copper toxicity in the

African tilapia Oreochromis mossambicus. Science of the Total Environment 214:193-202
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	2468140

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Khangarot, B. S.,Das, S.. 2009. Acute toxicity of metals and reference toxicants to a freshwater ostracod, Cypris subglobosa Sowerby,

1840 and correlation to EC(50) values of other test models. Journal of Hazardous Materials 172:641-649
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	2592033

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Medium

X

1

2

Purchased from SRL (India) and E. Merck (India)

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Researchers did not report how organisms were al-
located to study groups.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

High

X

2

2



Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Only nominal concentrations were reported in the



tion









paper. EC50 values were based on nominal concen-











trations.

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Medium

X

1

2

Solvent was discussed for some chemicals, but not













for CC14.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Khangarot, B. S.,Das, S.. 2009. Acute toxicity of metals and reference toxicants to a freshwater ostracod, Cypris subglobosa Sowerby,

1840 and correlation to EC(50) values of other test models. Journal of Hazardous Materials 172:641-649
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	2592033

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21
Metric 22
Metric 23

Statistical Methods	High x 1	1

Reporting of Data	High x 2 2

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

4	if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Jia, R.,Cao, L.,Du, J.,Xu, P.,Jeney, G.,Yin, G.. 2013. The protective effect of sifymarin on the carbon tetrachforide (CCf4)-induced

fiver injury in common carp (Cyprinus carpio). fn Vitro Ceffufar and Devefopmentaf Biofogy 49:155-161
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3481018

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Commercial source not specified

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controis

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Controi Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Afiocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimentaf System/Test Media Prepara-	High	x 2	2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High	x 1	1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	Low	x 1	3
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2	2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	Low	x 1	3
posure Leveis

Metric 12: Testing at or Beiow Soiubiiity Limit	High	x 1	1

nominal injection

Only one concentration

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acciimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Repiicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodoiogy	High x 2 2

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Jia, R.,Cao, L.,Du, J.,Xu, P.,Jeney, G.,Yin, G.. 2013. The protective effect of silymarin on the carbon tetrachloride (CC14)-induced

liver injury in common carp (Cyprinus carpio). In Vitro Cellular and Developmental Biology 49:155-161
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3481018

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Y. Liu, L. Cao, J. Du, R. Jia, J. Wang, P. Xu, G. Yin. 2015. Protective effects of Lycium barbarum poiysaccharides against carbon
tetrachforide-induced hepatotoxicity in precision-cut fiver sfices in vitro and in vivo in common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Comparative
Biochemistry and Physiofogy - Part C: Toxicofogy and Pharmacofogy 169:65-72
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3481539

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Grade/Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-	High	x 2	2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High	x 1	1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	Low	x 1	3
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2	2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	Low	x 1	3
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1	1

Not measured

1 concentration

Domain 4: Test Organism
Metric 13
Metric 14
Metric 15

Test Organism Characteristics
Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions
Number of Organisms and Replicates per
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

2

2



Low

X

1

3

Acclimation not reported

Low

X

1

3

Number of organisms and replicates not reported

High

x 1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Y. Liu, L. Cao, J. Du, R. Jia, J. Wang, P. Xu, G. Yin. 2015. Protective effects of Lycium barbarum poiysaccharides against carbon
tetrachforide-induced hepatotoxicity in precision-cut fiver sfices in vitro and in vivo in common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Comparative
Biochemistry and Physiofogy - Part C: Toxicofogy and Pharmacofogy 169:65-72
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3481539

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overaff Quafity Determination"'"	High	1.5

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

It Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Chen, C. Y.,Wooster, G. A.,Bowser, P. R.. 2004. Comparative blood chemistry and histopathology of tilapia infected with Vibrio

vulnificus or Streptococcus iniae or exposed to carbon tetrachloride, gentamicin, or copper sulfate. Aquaculture 239:421-443
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3568343

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Medium

X

1

2

Manufacturer identified, but not certified by manu-













facturer

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Purity/grade not identified

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

Medium

X

1

2

Did not specify if the controls were also injected

Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured



tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

Only 1 concentration



posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Number of organisms reported, but not replicates



Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Chen, C. Y.,Wooster, G. A.,Bowser, P. R.. 2004. Comparative blood chemistry and histopathology of tilapia infected with Vibrio

vulnificus or Streptococcus iniae or exposed to carbon tetrachloride, gentamicin, or copper sulfate. Aquaculture 239:421-443
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3568343

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	High	x 2	2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High	x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.4

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Birge, W. J.,Black, J. A.,Kuehne, R. A.. 1980. Effects of Organic Compounds on Amphibian Reproduction.
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Amphibians

Hero ID:	3616521

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

Medium

X

1

2

Data were not shown beyond stating that the control













survival ranged from 82 to 98 percent.

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Randomized allocation was not reported, which is a













deficiency.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

Low

X

1

3

Acclimatization and pretreatment conditions were













not reported.

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Medium

X

1

2

Number of replicates were reported, but not number



Group









of organisms per replicate.

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium

X

1

2

All organisms were purchased from suppliers and













control mortality was acceptable. As a result, this













is not a major flaw.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Birge, W. J.,Black, J. A.,Kuehne, R. A.. 1980. Effects of Organic Compounds on Amphibian Reproduction.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; other Amphibians

Hero ID:	3616521

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

P/chem and statistics such as LC50 were reported,
but not all the unmodified data necessary to re-
create the statistics.

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.3

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

4	if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

Source of CC14 was not reported, but it was noted
that analytical grade CC14 was used.

Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Low

Metric 5: Negative Control Response

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

x 2

Low	x 1

Low	x 1

The study refers to a blank but doesn't say what's
in the blank for CC14. Figure 1 notes that the blank
concentration for nitrobenzene is 0 mg/L. Notes re-
generation rate determined on Day 7 as most D.
japonica in the blank test could normally regener-
ate.

Study reports that "In the blank tests, the average
abnormal regeneration rate was 10 percent and no
dead D. japonica were observed through the tests",
but does not discuss CC14 specifically

It's not reported whether animals were randomly al-
located.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low	x 2

tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	Low	x 1	3

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1	3

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Medium x 2

It's unclear whether the experiement was conducted
in a closed or open system using static or flow
through methods. The study reports, "The breed-
ing liquid for Dugesia japonica was prepared by dis-
solving 3.74 g of NaCl, 0.49 g of KC1, and 8.5 5 g of
CaC12 into distilled water to make 500 ml. This was
diluted 100 times and neutralized by NaHC03 before
use. Dugesiajaponica were collected from a stream
around which there was no source of pollution and
left without food for over 7 days in the breeding
liquid to excrete alimentary canal contents. Those
of about _2 cm long were used. Dugesia japonica
was cut into two parts (head and body part) at the
nearest section to the eyes of the trisected part be-
tween pharynx and eyes. The body part was used
for the head regeneration test. Ten body parts were
put in 100 ml ofa test solution, and this was left
at 20 " 1" C for 7 days. Observation for head re-
generation was carried out with a stereomicroscope
on Days 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 after head cutting, and the
test solution was replaced at every observatiort. The
degree of regeneration was classified as normal, eye
spot, tetratophthalmic, anophthalmic, aciphthalmic,
and death. The total number of eye spot, tetratoph-
thalmic, anophthalmic, aciphthalmic, and death was
regarded as the abnormal regeneration number. The
ratio of the number to 10 on Day 7 was defined as
the abnormal regeneration rate. The concentration
of the chemical, at which the abnormal regenera-
tion rate reached 50 percent, was defined as EC50"
LC50 of D. japonica was determined at the same
time. LC50 and EC50 values of the test mentioned
above were determined on semilogarithmic paper."

Exposure methods were not reported for each study
group

it was not reported whether nominal or measured
cone were used. CC14 is volatile, and study does not
report whether test container was closed or open

Exposure occurred over 7 days, and observation was
carried out on days 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 after head cut-
ting, and the test solution was replaced at every ob-
servation.

Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low	x 1	3

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High x 1	1

Not reported for CC14, but for nitrobenzene reports
4 exposure groups used plus control.

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Low	x 1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Low	x 1

Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium x 1

Minor uncertainties about the quality of the test or-
ganisms given they were collected from the field and
no acclimation is mentioned. Study reports, "Du-
gesia japonica were collected from a stream around
which there was no source of pollution and left with-
out food for over 7 days in the breeding liquid to
excrete alimentary canal contents. Those of about 2
cm long were used."

Did not report whether they were acclimatized and
they were collected from the field. Organisms were
left without food for 7 days in the breeding liquid to
excrete alimentary canal contents before exposure.

The study says "Dugesia japonica was cut into two
parts (headand body part) at the nearest section to
the eyes of the trisected part between pharynx and
eyes. The body part was used for the head regenera-
tion test.Ten body parts were put in 100 ml of a test
solution, and this was left at 20 " 1"C for 7 days."
n = 10 body parts per test concentration. Number
of replicates not reported.

Body parts were put in 100 ml of a test solution and
this was left 20 " 1"C for 7 days.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High x 2
Medium x 1

Observation for head regeneration was carried out
with a stereomicroscope on Days 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 af-
ter head cutting, and the test solution was replaced
at every observation. Outcomes for CC14 not specif-
ically reported.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Medium x 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

x 1

Confounding variables are discussed for planarian in
terms of comparability of results with results from
other species, the study says that confounding may
occur due to the cutting of the head (stress of cutting
of the head).

Data on health and attrition were not reported for
each study group.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	Medium X 1	2 Methods for calculating LC50 not described clearly

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Low	X 2	6 Data for exposure related findings not reported for

each study group for CC14

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	Medium x 1	2 They did report unexpected outcomes and explained

relatively sufficiently, e.g. the planarian LC50 num-
bers being very different than the other two species.

Overall Quality Determination^	Low	2.4

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y. ,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Low

x 2
x 1

x 1

Source of CC14 was not reported, but it was noted
that analytical grade CC14 was used.

Purity not reported

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Metric 5:
Metric 6:

Negative Controls

Negative Control Response
Randomized Allocation

Unacceptable x 2

N/A
Low

x 1

N/A
3

The study does not mention a control anywhere.
The study refers to a blank for Dugesia japonica
(planarian) but doesn't say what's in the blank, and
doesn't mention a blank for M. macrocopa (water
flea)

No control reported

Study does not report whether animals were ran-
domly allocated.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	Low

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Low

x 2
x 1
x 1
x 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Unacceptable x 1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1

It is not reported whether the container was closed
or open, and CCL4 is a volatile chemical.

Exposure methods were not reported for each study
group

It was not reported whether nominal or measured

cone were

used.

Exposure occurred over 3 hours, and OECD recom-
mends 48 hours for invertebrate acute tests.

Number of exposure groups and spacing of exposure
levels not reported

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics	Low	X 2	6 Test species is a saltwater invertebrate, and were

used at 5 days old, but the source of the species is
not reported.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y. ,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Study did not report acclimating water fleas.
10 organisms per exposure group. For freshwater in-
vertebrates, OECD recommends at least 20. Num-
ber of replicates not reported.

"Ten M. macrocopa in 100 ml of test solution were
put in a 250-ml vial vessel at 20 " 1"C and the sur-
vivors were counted after 3 hr in order to determine
LC50."

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

Low

X

1

3

Details of outcome assessment were not reported.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control











Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

Unacceptable

X

2

8

The study did not provide enough information to

Procedures









allow a comparison of environmental conditions or









other non treatment related factors across study











groups.

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

X

1

3

Data on health and attrition were not reported for











each study group.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis











Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Medium

X

1

2

Methods used to calculate LC50 were not described

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Low

X

2

6

Data for exposure related findings were not reported











for each study group

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1



Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable





4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.7.

Extracted

No









Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions	Low	x	1	3

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per	Low	x	1	3
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions	Medium	x	1	2

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, three of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the
score is presented solely to increase transparency.

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

J]. (Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y. ,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1:
Metric 2:

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source

Metric 3: Test Substance Purity

High
Low

Medium

x 2
x 1

x 1

Source of CC14 was not reported, but it was noted
that analytical grade CC14 was used.

Analytical grade CC14 was used.

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Unacceptable x 2

Metric 5: Negative Control Response
Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

N/A
Low

x 1

N/A
3

The study does not mention a control anywhere.
The study refers to a blank for Dugesia japonica
(planarian), and Figure 1 indicates the blank for
nitrobenzene is a concentration of 0 mg/L. Study
doesn't mention a blank for the O. latipes (red kil-
lifish) LC50 test..

No control reported

Study does not report how test organisms were allo-
cated

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Low
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration

Low

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	Low

X 2	6 LC50 test methods do not describe measures taken

to minimize loss of test substance and concentra-
tions of test substance not reported as being mea-
sured during study. For the oxygen uptake test, test
was completed in a closed container (sealed with an
electrode), but there were uncertainties about how
much air space there was in the flask.

X 1	3	Exposure methods were not reported for each study

group

X 1	3	It was not reported whether nominal or measured

cone were used.

X 2	6	Exposure occurred over 48 hours, and it sounds like

a static test but it is not clear. OECD recommends
96 hours for fish acute tests.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y. ,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain

Metric

Rating^ MWF* Score

Comments^

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

x 1

x 1

For CC14, it is unclear how many exposure groups
were used for the LC50 determination. (For the oxy-
gen uptake it looks like 5 exposure groups according
to figure 2 but that was a different test. )

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions Medium

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium
Group

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

Medium	X 2	4 Minor uncertainties about the quality of the test or-

ganisms given they were collected from the market.
Study reports, "Orizias latipes (ca. 3 cm, 0. 3 g)
was obtained from the market and acclimated for at
least 1 week in dechlorinated water at 20" C (total
hardness was about 80 mg/liter).

X 1	2 Fish were acclimatized for at least 1 week and OECD

recommends 12 days before they are used for testing.

X 1	2 10 organisms per exposure group. OECD recom-

mends at least 7. Number of replicates was not re-
ported

Medium	x 1	2 10 fish in 2 liters of water which is a little more than

what OECD would recommend. At 0.3 g each and
10 fish per container, it should be a 3 liter flask.

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
Low

x 2
x 1

Details of outcome assessment were not reported.

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and Low
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

Low

x 2

x 1

Study did not provide enough information to allow
a comparison of environmental conditions or other
non-treatment-related factors across study groups,
and the omitted information is likely to have a sub-
stantial impact on study results.

Data on health and attrition were not reported for
each study group.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods

Low

x 1

Methods used to calculate LC50 were not described

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Yoshioka, Y.,Ose, Y.,Sato, T.. 1986. Correlation of the Five Test Methods to Assess Chemical Toxicity and Relation to Physical

Properties. 12:15-21
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3617749

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

Low x 2
High x 1

6
1

Data for exposure related findings not reported for
each study group

Overall Quality Determination"'"

Unacceptable

4.0

Metric mean score**: 2.5.

Extracted

No







** Consistent with our Application of Systematic Review in TSCARisk Evaluations document, if a metric for a data source receives a score of Unacceptable (score = 4),
EPA will determine the study to be unacceptable. In this case, one of the metrics were rated as unacceptable. As such, the study is considered unacceptable and the score
is presented solely to increase transparency.

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / J] . MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is crossed
out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3617867

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance
Metric 1
Metric 2
Metric 3

Test Substance Identity
Test Substance Source
Test Substance Purity

High x 2
Medium x 1
Medium x 1

Source was not provided

Purity was not provided. Authors described the
chemical purity as "reagent grade"

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

Medium x 2

Metric 5: Negative Control Response

Metric 6: Randomized Allocation

Low
Low

x 1

x 1

Authors referred to a control when discussing how
they calculated their EC50 value, but additional de-
tails were not reported. The authors indicated that
the details of the test setup can be found at the fol-
lowing source: Lin JH, Kao WC, Tsai KP, Chen CY.
2005. A novel algal toxicity testing technique for
assessing the toxicity of both metallic and organic
toxicants. Water Res 39:1869" 1877.

Negative Control response was not specifically re-
ported in the study, but was incorporated into the
calculation of the percent inhibition.

Researchers did not report how organisms were al-
located to study groups

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

High
Medium

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low
posure Levels

x 2

x 1
x 1

Medium x 2
x 1

Test concentrations were reported in terms of nom-
inal concentrations, but analytical confirmation of
the test concentrations was performed at the begin-
ning and end of the test by HPLC. This was intended
to quantify any potential degradation.

The test was 48 hours, but should be 72/96 hrs in
duration.

The study report indicated that both a range finding
and definitive test were conducted but did not report
the test concentrations.

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3617867

Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF*

Score Comments^

Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X 1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism









Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

x 2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

x 1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

x 1

1



Group







Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

x 1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	Medium x 1	2 Data on attrition was not reported for each study

group, but is unlikely to have a substantial impact
on results.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	Medium X 2	4 Quantitative results were not provided.

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.5

Extracted

Yes





Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Tsai, K. P.,Chen, C. Y.. 2007. An Algal Toxicity Database of Organic Toxicants Derived by a Closed-System Technique. Environmental

Toxicology and Chemistry 26:1931-1939
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Plants

Hero ID:	3617867

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

^ (Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

^ Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.

-I

o


-------
Study Citation:	Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3625489

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments"^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Study did not report whether allocation to study
groups was random.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration
Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency
Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-
posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

High
Low

High
High

High

x 2

x 1
x 1

x 2
x 1

x 1

Nominal concentrations were used. An experiment
was conducted to evaluate rate of loss of CC14 from
the exposure vials. After 24 hours, the solution CC14
concentration was 46 percent of the initial nominal
concentration

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

Low

X

1

3

10 embryos per dose group,



Group









many replicates.

Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation:	Schell, J. D. J.. 1987. Interactions of Halogenated Hydrocarbon Mixtures in the Embryo of the Japanese Medaka (Oryzias latipes).

Data Type:	Other; Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3625489

Domain	Metric	Ratingt MWF* Score	Commentstt

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology
Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High
High

x 2
x 1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	Medium x 1	2

Data on attrition was reported in each exposure
group. Other health outcomes were not reported.
Adults were periodically treated with a chemical
regime to prevent disease. Eggs were not collected
from females of a breeding group that had been
chemically treated for disease until at least one week
following the treatment.

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods
Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High x 1
Medium x 2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

x 1

Most but not all outcomes were reported; only minor
uncertainties.

Overall Quality Determination^

High

1.4

Extracted

Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3634436

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-	High	x 2	2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High	x 1	1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	High	x 1	1
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High	x 2	2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	High	x 1	1
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High	x 1	1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Allocation not reported; does state that procedures
in ASTM. 1980. Standard practice for conducting
acute toxicity tests with fishes, macroinvertebrates,
and amphibians. E729-80, were followed

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3634436

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21
Metric 22
Metric 23

Statistical Methods	High x 1	1

Reporting of Data	High x 2 2

Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"

High

1.1

Extracted

Yes





* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

^ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

4	if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating.

U Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3634436

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported; does state that procedures
in ASTM. 1980. Standard practice for conducting
acute toxicity tests with fishes, macroinvertebrates,
and amphibians. E729-80, were followed

Report states "all test chambers were open to the
atmosphere" but water samples were collected for
analysis at 0, 48 and 96 hours., and at 24 or 72
hours in odd- or even-numbered tanks.

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium x 2 4
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High x 1	1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- High x 1	1

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High x 2 2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- High x 1	1

posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	High x 1	1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

Medium x 2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions High x 1	1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per Medium x 1	2

Group

Adult amphipods were collected from the Eau Claire
River. Douglas County, WI.

The number of organisms in each test chamber was
five or ten for amphipods. Number used in the CC14
test not specified

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Brooke, L.. 1987. Report of the Flow-Through and Static Acute Test Comparisons with Fathead Minnows and Acute Tests with an

Amphipod and a Cladoceran.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3634436

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment









Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.2

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Geiger, D. L.,Brooke, L. T.,Call, D. J.. 1990. Acute toxicities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): Volume
V.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3660853

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2

Metric 2

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1

Domain 2: Test Design











Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2

Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1

Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization









Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2



tion









Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1

Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1



tion









Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1



posure Levels









Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1

Domain 4: Test Organism











Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Geiger, D. L.,Brooke, L. T.,Call, D. J.. 1990. Acute toxicities of organic chemicals to fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas): Volume
V.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3660853

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.0

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Weber, L. J.,Gingerich, W. H.,Pfeifer, K. F.. 1979. Alterations in Rainbow Trout Liver Function and Body Fluids Following Treatment

with Carbon Tetrachloride or Monochlorobenzene. 99:401-413
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3662132

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Medium

X

1

2

Only source listed, no other details

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Purity/Grade not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

Medium

X

2

4

Injection dosing described but test chambers and



tion









set-up not described

Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

Not measured



tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1

1 study only has 1 concentration



posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Weber, L. J.,Gingerich, W. H.,Pfeifer, K. F.. 1979. Alterations in Rainbow Trout Liver Function and Body Fluids Following Treatment

with Carbon Tetrachloride or Monochlorobenzene. 99:401-413
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3662132

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.4

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Richie, J. P., Jr.,Mills, B. J.,Lang, C. A.. 1984. The Verification of a Mammalian Toxicant Classification Using a Mosquito Screening

Method. 4:1029-1035
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3673049

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

High

X

1

1



Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

The info was not provided

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation method not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

x 2

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-	High
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-	Low
tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency	High

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-	High
posure Levels

Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit	Medium x 1

Exposure concentrations were not reported, though
their determination was described

Solubility of some of the test chemicals and solvents
used were described, but not pertaining to CC14

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Richie, J. P., Jr.,Mills, B. J.,Lang, C. A.. 1984. The Verification of a Mammalian Toxicant Classification Using a Mosquito Screening

Method. 4:1029-1035
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3673049

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	High	x 2	2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High	x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.3

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Koskinen, H.,Pehkonen, P.,Vehniainen, E.,Krasnov, A.,Rexroad, C.,Afanasyev, S.,Molsa, H.,Oikari, A.. 2004. Response of Rainbow

Trout Transcriptome to Model Chemical Contaminants. 320:745-753
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3684136

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

The info was not provided

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

The info was not provided

Domain 2: Test Design

Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not described

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization

Metric 7: Experimental System/Test Media Prepara- Medium x 2
tion

Metric 8: Consistency of Exposure Administration	High x 1

Metric 9: Measurement of Test Substance Concentra- Low	x 1

tion

Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex- Low

posure Levels
Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Medium x 2
x 1

Low

x 1

Domain 4: Test Organism

Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2

Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1

Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1



Group









Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1

Domain 5: Outcome Assessment

Test system described but not in great detail

Only nominal concentrations were reported

Justification for exposure duration and frequency
not provided

Details about exposure groups and concentration
levels not provided

Solvents were discussed, but not for CC14

Continued on next page


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Koskinen, H.,Pehkonen, P.,Vehniainen, E.,Krasnov, A.,Rexroad, C.,Afanasyev, S.,Molsa, H.,Oikari, A.. 2004. Response of Rainbow

Trout Transcriptome to Model Chemical Contaminants. 320:745-753
Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3684136

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology	High x 2 2

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment	High x 1	1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control

Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and High x 2 2
Procedures

Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure	High x 1	1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis

Metric 21: Statistical Methods	High	x 1	1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data	High	x 2	2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes	High	x 1	1

Overall Quality Determination"'"	High	1.5

Extracted	Yes

* MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

$ The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

if any metric is Unacceptable

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; X MWF;) / J] . MWF,

(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
tt Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic

to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia

magna.













Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish











Hero ID: 3684293













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia
magna.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3684293

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.1

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic

to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia

magna.













Data Type: Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates











Hero ID: 3684293













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia
magna.

Data Type:	Acute (0-96 hour); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3684293

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.1

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic

to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia

magna.













Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish











Hero ID: 3684293













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia
magna.

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	3684293

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.1

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic

to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia

magna.













Data Type: Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates











Hero ID: 3684293













Domain

Metric

Rating^

MWF* Score

Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance













Metric 1

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Source/Information not reported

Metric 3

Test Substance Purity

High

X

1

1



Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6

Randomized Allocation

Low

X

1

3

Allocation not reported

Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

High

X

1

1





tion











Metric 10: Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11: Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

High

X

1

1





posure Levels











Metric 12: Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

High

X

1

1



Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13: Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14: Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15: Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16: Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17: Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kimball, G.. 1978. The Effects of Lesser Known Metals and One Organic to Fathead Minnows (Pimephales promelas) and Daphnia
magna.

Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Invertebrates

Hero ID:	3684293

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.1

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------
Study Citation: Kotsanis, N.,Metcalfe, C. D.. 1988. Accelerating an in vivo trout carcinogenesis assay with carbon tetrachloride and partial hepatec-

tomy. 15th Annual Aquatic Toxicity Workshop
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	4338225

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Domain 1: Test Substance

Metric 1:

Test Substance Identity

High

X

2

2



Metric 2:

Test Substance Source

Low

X

1

3

Not reported

Metric 3:

Test Substance Purity

Low

X

1

3

Not reported

Domain 2: Test Design













Metric 4:

Negative Controls

High

X

2

2



Metric 5:

Negative Control Response

High

X

1

1



Metric 6:

Randomized Allocation

High

X

1

1



Domain 3: Exposure Characterization











Metric 7:

Experimental System/Test Media Prepara-

High

X

2

2





tion











Metric 8:

Consistency of Exposure Administration

High

X

1

1



Metric 9:

Measurement of Test Substance Concentra-

Low

X

1

3

nominal injection



tion











Metric 10:

Exposure Duration and Frequency

High

X

2

2



Metric 11:

Number of Exposure Groups/Spacing of Ex-

Low

X

1

3

There was only a single injection dose.



posure Levels











Metric 12:

Testing at or Below Solubility Limit

Low

X

1

3

This was not discussed.

Domain 4: Test Organism













Metric 13:

Test Organism Characteristics

High

X

2

2



Metric 14:

Acclimitization and Pretreatment Conditions

High

X

1

1



Metric 15:

Number of Organisms and Replicates per

High

X

1

1





Group











Metric 16:

Adequacy of Test Conditions

High

X

1

1



Domain 5: Outcome Assessment











Metric 17:

Outcome Assessment Methodology

High

X

2

2



Continued on next page . . .


-------
. continued from previous page

Study Citation: Kotsanis, N.,Metcalfe, C. D.. 1988. Accelerating an in vivo trout carcinogenesis assay with carbon tetrachloride and partial hepatec-

tomy. 15th Annual Aquatic Toxicity Workshop
Data Type:	Chronic (>21 days); Aquatic; Fish

Hero ID:	4338225

Domain	Metric	Rating^ MWF* Score	Comments^

Metric 18: Consistency of Outcome Assessment

High

X

1

1

Domain 6: Confounding / Variable Control









Metric 19: Confounding Variables in Test Design and

High

X

2

2

Procedures









Metric 20: Outcomes Unrelated to Exposure

High

X

1

1

Domain 7: Data Presentation and Analysis









Metric 21: Statistical Methods

High

X

1

1

Metric 22: Reporting of Data

High

X

2

2

Metric 23: Explanation of Unexpected Outcomes

High

X

1

1

Overall Quality Determination^	High	1.4

Extracted	Yes

*	MWF = Metric Weighting Factor

t High = 1; Medium = 2; Low = 3; Unacceptable = 4; N/A has no value.

*	The overall rating is calculated as necessary. EPA may not always provide a comment for a metric that has been categorized as High.

Overall rating =

(Metric Score; x MWF;) / ^ MWFj

if any metric is Unacceptable
(round to the nearest tenth) otherwise

where High: > 1 to < 1.7; Medium: > 1.7 to < 2.3; Low: > 2.3 to < 3. If the reviewer determines that the overall rating needs adjustment, the original rating is
crossed out and an arrow points to the new rating,
ft Metrics that are rated 'High' met the criteria for high confidence as expected for this type of study, and may not require additional comments.


-------