Search

The relative ability of the NOEC (no-observed-effect concentration) and ECx (the effect concentration corresponding to x-percent response) to determine benchmark toxicant concentrations, which are expected to ensure environmental safety, when there are large uncertainties in data was investigated with Monte Carlo simulations. We assumed a hypothetical true concentration-response function, and examined how random fluctuations of responses around the true responses affected the NOEC and ECx values. For assessment of the relative performances of these endpoints, we adopted two criteria: how large uncertainties were allowed for the minimum requirement for safety to be met, and the probability with which the estimated endpoints exceeded the minimum requirement for safety. The results of simulations indicated that, when there were small uncertainties in the data, performance of the NOEC was comparable with or slightly better than the ECx (EC5 and EC10) in providing benchmark concentrations that satisfied the minimum requirement for safety. With larger random variation of data (the coefficient of variation in responses between replicates within treatments or in the control was noticeably larger than 10 percent), the NOEC performed considerably worse than the ECx in terms of the frequency of simulated runs in which the endpoints exceeded the minimum requirement of safety. We conclude that the NOEC is as relevant as the ECx for risk assessment of chemicals under limited situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological niche models (ENMs) are widely used in spatial prioritization for biodiversity conservation (e.g. selecting conservation areas). However, it is unclear whether ENMs are always beneficial for such purposes. We quantified the benefit of using ENMs in conservation prioritization, comparing the numbers of species covered by conservation areas selected on the basis of probabilities estimated by ENMs (ENM approach) and those selected on the basis of raw observation data (raw-data approach), while controlling survey range, survey bias, and target size of conservation area. We evaluated three ENM algorithms (GLM, GAM, and random forests). We used virtual community data generated by simulation for the evaluation. ENM approach was effective when survey bias is strong, survey range is narrow, and target size of conservation area is moderate. The percentage of cases in which the ENM approach outperformed the raw-data approach ranged from 0.0 to 33% (GLM), 31% (GAM), and 75% (random forests) depending on conditions. The number of rare species (< 20 presence records) included in the conservation area based on the ENM approach was less than, or the same as, that of the raw-data approach. The unexpectedly limited cases in which the ENM approach was effective in the present research may depend on the conservation target we used (to cover as many species as possible in conservation area). Our results highlight urgent need for evaluating ENM's effectiveness under other conservation targets for wise use of ENM in conservation prioritization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]