Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39946177›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental toxicology and chemistry2025

Prioritizing chemicals of emerging concern in the Great Lakes Basin using covariance of chemical concentrations and diverse biological responses from a variety of species.

Kelsey Vitense, Luke C Loken, Erin M Maloney, Brett R Blackwell, Timothy W Collette, Steven R Corsi, Christine M Custer, Erik D Davenport, Satomi Kohno, Stephanie L Hummel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Kelsey VitenseCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, MN, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2455-5513
Luke C LokenUpper Midwest Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Madison, WI, United States.
Erin M MaloneyDepartment of Biology, University of Minnesota-Duluth, Duluth, MN, United States.
Brett R BlackwellCenter for Computational Toxicology and Exposure, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, MN, United States.
Timothy W ColletteCenter for Environmental Measurement and Modeling, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA, United States.
Steven R CorsiUpper Midwest Water Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Madison, WI, United States.
Christine M CusterUpper Midwest Environmental Sciences Center, U.S. Geological Survey, La Crosse, WI, United States.
Erik D DavenportNational Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, MD, United States.
Satomi KohnoDepartment of Biological Sciences, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, MN, United States.
Stephanie L HummelRegion 3 Regional Office, Ecological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bloomington, MN, United States.

Funding

Chemical Safety for Sustainability National Research ProgramEnvironmental Protection Agency's Chemical Safety for Sustainability National Research ProgramGreat Lakes Restoration InitiativeIntramural EPA EPA999999U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative aims to protect and restore the nation's largest freshwater resource, in part, by furthering our understanding of the effects of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and chemical mixtures on aquatic and terrestrial organisms. To address this goal, an interagency team conducted field studies at sites along the Maumee River in Ohio, USA, in 2016-2017, monitoring CEC levels along with diverse in vitro and in vivo biological effects in ecologically relevant species (fathead minnows, tree swallows, and golden clams). The objective of the present work was to prioritize the CECs in these studies for further monitoring and assessment by determining if there are patterns in chemical-bioeffect relations across data sets, species, and response types that indicate relatively high or low hazard to aquatic life from CEC exposure. Of the 748 monitored chemicals, 425 were detected and were analyzed for covariance with bioeffects. All 748 chemicals were placed into 10 bins based on their frequencies of monitoring, detection, and covariance with bioeffects across studies and species. We describe how chemicals can be prioritized across bins to aid monitoring and assessment efforts. Our approach using effects-based monitoring data is especially useful for prioritizing chemicals with little or no traditional toxicity testing data. Similar evidence-based prioritizations will allow agencies to more efficiently allocate limited resources to improve the ability to protect aquatic and terrestrial organisms from adverse impacts due to contaminant exposure.

Indexed as

Environmental MonitoringWater Pollutants, ChemicalAnimalsBivalviaCyprinidaeGreat Lakes RegionLakesWater Pollutants, Chemicalcontaminants of emerging concerneffects-based monitoringmixturesmultivariate statisticsprioritization

Identifiers

PMID39946177
PMCPMC11980044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.