Author:
Duquesne Sabine,Alalouni Urwa,Gräff Thomas,Frische Tobias,Pieper Silvia,Egerer Sina,Gergs René,Wogram Jörn
Abstract
AbstractThe minimum detectable difference (MDD) is a measure of the difference between the means of a treatment and the control that must exist to detect a statistically significant effect. It is a measure at a defined level of probability and a given variability of the data. It provides an indication for the robustness of statistically derived effect thresholds such as the lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC) and the no observed effect concentration (NOEC) when interpreting treatment-related effects on a population exposed to chemicals in semi-field studies (e.g., micro-/mesocosm studies) or field studies. MDD has been proposed in the guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products in edge of field surface waters (EFSA Journal 11(7):3290, 2013), in order to better estimate the robustness of endpoints from such studies for taking regulatory decisions. However, the MDD calculation method as suggested in this framework does not clearly specify the power which is represented by the beta-value (i.e., the level of probability of type II error). This has implications for the interpretation of experimental results, i.e., the derivation of robust effect values and their use in risk assessment of PPPs. In this paper, different methods of MDD calculations are investigated, with an emphasis on their pre-defined levels of type II error-probability. Furthermore, a modification is suggested for an optimal use of the MDD, which ensures a high degree of certainty for decision-makers.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Pollution,Environmental Chemistry,General Medicine
Reference29 articles.
1. Brock TCM, Hammers-Wirtz M, Hommen U, Preuss TG, Ratte T, Roessink I, Strauss T, van den Brink PJ (2015) The minimum detectable difference (MDD) and the interpretation of treatment-related effects of pesticides in experimental ecosystems. Environ Sci Pollut Res 22:1160–1174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3398-2
2. Conquest LL (1983) Assessing the statistical effectiveness of ecological experiments: utility of the coefficient of variation. Int J Environ Stud 20(3–4):209–221
3. EC 2009 [European Commission] (2009) Regulation
4. (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market and repealing Council Directives 79/117/EEC and 91/414/EEC. OJ L 309/1, 24.11.2009, pp. 1-50
5. EFSA PPR Panel (EFSA Panel on Plant Protection Products and their Residues)(2013) Guidance on tiered risk assessment for plant protection products for aquatic organisms in edge-of-field surface waters. EFSA Journal 11(7):3290, 186 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3290
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献