ArticleGlobal change biology2025
Calibrating Predicted Mixture Toxic Pressure to Observed Biodiversity Loss in Aquatic Ecosystems.
Article in Global change biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities: Time for a Reboot.Environmental science & technology · 2026Review
- Challenges and Initiatives to Operationalize the Planetary Boundaries for Novel Entities.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Framework for Function-Based Pesticide Substitution.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- The use of diagnostic tools to assess the risks of chemicals to freshwater ecosystems: towards a unified evaluation framework.Environmental management · 2025Article
- Calibrating Predicted Mixture Toxic Pressure to Observed Biodiversity Loss in Aquatic Ecosystems.Global change biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Unlike practices in applied ecology, assessing the impact of chemical pollution on biodiversity depends on species sensitivity data from laboratory toxicity effect tests. There are ~12,000 chemicals with such data, enabling quantification of a metric that characterizes the magnitude of the toxic pressure of chemical mixtures on aquatic organisms. However, the calibration between this lab-based metric and biodiversity effects in the field is lacking. To address this gap, we calibrated both. We quantified mixture toxic pressure levels from extensive water quality monitoring data across 1286 sampling sites and expressed it as multi-substance potentially affected fraction of species (msPAF). We furthermore quantified species abundance and richness loss for those sites. Calibration of both yielded that the observed potentially disappeared fraction of species (PDF) can be quantified from msPAF as biodiversity impact metric. Species abundance and richness generally declined with increasing toxic pressure, and a near 1:1 PAF-to-PDF relationship was derived. Both metrics are key in regulatory chemical policies and comparative biodiversity impact assessments, with PDF also widely used for biodiversity footprinting to assess species loss. Our results imply that the lab-based mixture toxic pressure metric can roughly be interpreted in terms of species loss under field conditions, that assumed regulatory "safe concentrations" may not fully protect exposed species assemblages, and that comparative biodiversity impact assessments can be made based on mixture toxic pressure metrics. These outcomes are highly relevant for biodiversity protection, and support the transition toward a "safe chemical economy" by enabling the design of compounds and products with lower environmental impacts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.