On the impact of sample size on median lethal concentration estimation in acute fish toxicity testing: Is n = 7/group enough?

Abstract

The fish acute toxicity test method is foundational to aquatic toxicity testing strategies, yet the literature lacks a concise sample size assessment. Although various sources address sample size, historical precedent seems to play a larger role than objective measures. We present a novel and comprehensive quantification of the effect of sample size on estimation of the median lethal concentration (LC50), covering a wide range of scenarios. The results put into perspective the practical differences across a range of sample sizes, from n = 5/concentration up to n = 23/concentration. We also provide a framework for setting sample size guidance illustrating ways to quantify the performance of LC50 estimation, which can be used to set sample size guidance given reasonably difficult (or worst-case) scenarios. There is a clear benefit to larger sample size studies: they reduce error in the determination of LC50s, and lead to more robust safe environmental concentration determinations, particularly in cases likely to be called worst-case (shallow slope and true LC50 near the edges of the concentration range). Given that the use of well-justified sample sizes is crucial to reducing uncertainty in toxicity estimates, these results lead us to recommend a reconsideration of the current de minimis 7/concentration sample size for critical studies (e.g., studies needed for a chemical registration, which are being tested for the first time, or involving difficult test substances). Environ Toxicol Chem 2018;37:1565-1578. © 2018 SETAC.

A Chronic Aquatic Hazard Assessment for the Perfume Raw Material Octahydro‐tetramethyl‐naphthalenyl‐ethanone

“…Statistical analyses of endpoints in each study, as reported by the contract laboratory organizations, were evaluated using point estimate (EC x ) and/or analysis of variance (NOEC/LOEC) statistics. Raw data were reassessed to harmonize interpretations using EC10 as the preferred statistical measure of chronic toxicity for all studies (Carr et al, 2018). In only one case was an EC10 not reliably calculated (discussed below), and in such cases, NOECs were then used.…”

A Review of Recent Advances in Benchmark Dose Methodology

“…They showed that most of the examined data sets were of sufficient quality for BMD estimation, based on the criteria goodness of fit of a dose–response model, size of the estimated BMD/BMDL ratio, and whether the estimated BMD was within the dose range of the study. Carr, Bailer, Rawlings, and Belanger () showed that a larger sample size is needed in order to estimate the median lethal concentration (LC 50 ) at a given level of precision if the slope of the dose–response curve is shallow than when it is steep, and when the true LC 50 is near the borders of the concentration range compared to when it is in the center. A similar study is warranted for BMD values in the low‐dose range.…”

Impact of Organism Allocations on Potency Estimates from Ceriodaphnia dubia Reproduction Tests

“…This is a method based on a hypothesis test of equal mean across the control and treatment groups, so it does not fit into the context when an effective concentration based on an estimated concentration-response curve is of interest. More recently, Carr et al (2018) conducted a comprehensive study to explore how the sample size affected estimation of the median lethal concentration in the context of a fish acute toxicity test. That study considered a different type of toxicity endpoint, a dichotomous response such as mortality.…”