Selection of scenarios for landscape-level risk assessment of chemicals: case studies for mammals

Environmental Sciences Europe

Table 3 Best GLM (lowest AICc among all parameter combinations marked in bold) for modelling the population survival with effect and the treatment-related effect strength for common vole and European rabbit in different landscapes with one to four predictor variables

Species	Endpoint	Parameter no.	Model	AICc	R^b
Common vole	Survival with effect (effect magnitude ~ 25%, N = 40)	1	SizeLarOC	1172.56	0.4682
		2	− BorArCOC + TotalOC	771.87	0.6595
		3	− BorArCOC + IIC + TotalOC	625.73	0.7299
		4	− BorArCOC + IIC − OvResilInd + TotalOC	556.90	0.7636
	Effect strength (treatment/control, mean of year 6–15, N = 40)	1	− PropOC	− 14.59	0.3844
		2	− PropOC − SI	− 20.34	0.4917
		3	BorLenCOCpOC – PropOC − SI^a	− 20.21	0.5192
		4	EC – PropOC – SI − TotalOC^a	− 18.61	0.5309
European rabbit	Survival with effect (effect magnitude ~ 25%, N = 28)	1	TotalOC	141.74	0.9369
		2	− IIC + TotalOC DImultOCN + TotalOC BorArCOC + TotalOC OvResilInd + TotalOC	137.62 138.63 139.16 139.21	0.9429 0.9419 0.9410 0.9417
		3	DImultOCN + OvResilInd + TotalOC	131.49	0.9513
		4	DI − IIC + PropOC + TotalOC DImultOCN − IIC + PropOC + TotalOC − IIC + PropOC − SizeLarOC + TotalOC	127.41 127.81 128.85	0.9575 0.9573 0.9565
	Effect strength (treatment/control, mean of year 6–15, N = 27)	1	− IIC − PropOC BorLenCOCpOC	− 46.55 − 45.84 − 44.93	0.1015 0.0775 0.0461
		2	CompLarOC − IIC^c CompLarOC − PropOC^c	− 46.02 − 45.48	0.1659 0.1491
		3	BorLenCOCpOC + CompLarOC − IIC^c BorLenCOCpOC + CompLarOC − PropOC^c	− 44.59 − 44.38	0.2064 0.2002
		4	BorLenCOCpOC + CompLarOC + OvResilInd − PropOC^c BorLenCOCpOC + CompLarOC – DImultOCNpLS − IIC^c	− 41.73 − 41.66	0.2117 0.2098

The signs of the parameters represent positive or negative influence on the endpoint
^aThere were 8 and 54 additional 3- and 4-parameter models within an AICc range of 2, respectively, all of which had ‘PropOC’ and ‘SI’ as the dominant parameters
^bThis model is within an AICc range of 2 and is therefore considered to be comparable to the model with the lowest AICc
^cThere were 9, 23 and 141 additional 2-, 3- and 4-parameter models within an AICc range of 2, respectively, all of which had ‘IIC’ or ‘PropOC’ included