DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 1 

Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program 

Contract No: EP-W-11-063 

Task Order No: 2 

Statistical Support for Technical Directive #3 

Data Analysis Support for Invertebrate Tier 2 Test and Generation of 

Integrated Summary Report 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

May 21, 2013

BATTELLE 

505 King Avenue 

Columbus, Ohio 43201 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data – 3-8-2013 

i 

Table of Contents 

Page

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 

2. Questions to be addressed. Locations of answers ...................................................... 1 

3. Study data ................................................................................................................... 3 

4. Inter-laboratory analyses ............................................................................................. 4 

5. Comparisons of selected study characteristics across endpoints and across 

generations .................................................................................................................. 5 

6. Results ....................................................................................................................... 20 

7. Summary of Control Results for Key Endpoints ...................................................... 22 

Tables

Table I.1. Ranges of F0 and F1 CV% across Laboratories and Studies. By Category. ............. 6 

Table I.2 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. 

Growth Endpoints. ...................................................................................................... 7 

Table I.3 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. 

Reproductive Endpoints. ............................................................................................. 8 

Table I.4 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. 

Survival Endpoints. .................................................................................................... 8 

Table I.5 Mysid 2-Generation Study Reproduction, Growth, and Survival Endpoints with 

Endpoint Codes ......................................................................................................... 13 

Table I.6 Mysid 2-Generation Study. Percent Deviations from the Corresponding Group 

Means for Detection with 80% Power in the F0 and F1 Generations Based on 

Average within Study Variability. ............................................................................ 14 

Table I.7 LOEC for Comparisons between Test Groups and Control within 

Generations and between Generations. Lindane and Octylphenol. ......................... 19 

Table I.8. Summary of Survival to Termination ....................................................................... 22 

Table I.9 Summary of Time to Maturity .................................................................................. 23 

Table I.10. Summary of Time to First and Second Brood Release ............................................. 24 

Table I.11. Summary of Number of Offspring per Female ......................................................... 25 

Table 1A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for 

Reproduction Endpoints and F0 Generation ............................................................. 26 

Table 1B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Reproduction 

Endpoints and F0 Generation .................................................................................... 27 

Table 1C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for 

Reproduction Endpoints and F1 Generation ............................................................. 28 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 ii 

Table 1D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Reproduction 

Endpoints and F1 Generation .................................................................................... 29 

Table 2A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for Growth 

Endpoints and F0 Generation .................................................................................... 30 

Table 2B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Growth 

Endpoints and F0 Generation .................................................................................... 31 

Table 2C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for Growth 

Endpoints and F1 Generation .................................................................................... 32 

Table 2D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Growth 

Endpoints and F1 Generation .................................................................................... 33 

Table 3A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for Survival 

Endpoints and F0 Generation .................................................................................... 34 

Table 3B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Survival 

Endpoints and F0 Generation .................................................................................... 35 

Table 3C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and 

Standard Errors for Control with Random Laboratory and Study for 

Survival Endpoints and F1 Generation ..................................................................... 36 

Table 3D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance 

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory and Study for Reproduction 

Endpoints and F1 Generation .................................................................................... 37 

Table 4A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Reproductive Endpoints and F0 Generation ............... 38 

Table 4B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Reproductive Endpoints and F1 Generation ............... 39 

Table 5A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Growth Endpoints and F0 Generation ........................ 40 

Table 5B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Growth Endpoints and F1 Generation ........................ 41 

Table 6A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Survival Endpoints and F0 Generation ....................... 42 

Table 6B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction 

Intervals Within Study, Between Studies in a Laboratory, and Between 

Studies and Laboratories for Survival Endpoints and F1 Generation ....................... 43 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 iii 

Table 7A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F0 Generation, Reproduction Endpoints ........... 44 

Table 7B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F1 Generation, Reproduction Endpoints ........... 45 

Table 8A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F0 Generation, Growth Endpoints ..................... 46 

Table 8B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F1 Generation, Growth Endpoints ..................... 47 

Table 9A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F0 Generation, Survival Endpoints ................... 48 

Table 9B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) 

Significance Level. Mysid Study, F1 Generation, Survival Endpoints ................... 49 

Table 10A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Analysis Results for 

Reproduction Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, 

Generation: F0a,b,c ...................................................................................................... 50 

Table 10B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by 

Generation for Reproduction Endpoints, Comparisons between Control 

and Test Chemicals, Generation: F1 a,b,c ................................................................... 51 

Table 11A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by 

Generation for Growth Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and 

Test Chemicals, Generation: F0 a,b,c .......................................................................... 52 

Table 11B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by 

Generation for Growth Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and 

Test Chemicals, Generation: F1 a,b,c .......................................................................... 53 

Table 12A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by 

Generation for Survival Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test 

Chemicals, Generation: F0 a,b,c .................................................................................. 54 

Table 12B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by 

Generation for Survival Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test 

Chemicals, Generation: F1 a,b,c .................................................................................. 55 

Table 13. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results 

between Generations for Reproduction Endpoints, Comparison between 

Two Generations ....................................................................................................... 56 

Table 14. Statistical Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results between Generations for 

Growth Endpoints, Comparison between Two Generations a,b,c ............................... 57 

Table 15. Statistical Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results between Generations for 

Survival Endpoints, Comparison between Two Generations a,b,c .............................. 58 

Table 16A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. .............. 59 

Table 16B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. .............. 61 

Table 17A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Growth Endpoints. ........................ 63 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 iv 

Table 17B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Growth Endpoints. ........................ 64 

Table 18A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Survival Endpoints. ...................... 66 

Table 18B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations 

to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Survival Endpoints. ...................... 67 

Table 19A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Reproductive 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 68

Table 19B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Reproductive 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 70

Table 20A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Growth 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 72

Table 20B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Growth 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 74

Table 21A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F0 Generation, Survival 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 76

Table 21B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol 

Concentrations to Control Across Laboratories, F1 Generation, Survival 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 78

Table 22. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Reproduction Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Lindane .......................................................... 79 

Table 23. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Growth Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Lindane ........................................................... 81 

Table 24. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Survival Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Lindane ........................................................... 82 

Table 25. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Reproduction Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Octylphenol ................................................... 83 

Table 26. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Growth Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Octylphenol ................................................... 85 

Table 27. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Survival Endpoints 

across Laboratories. Test Chemical: Octylphenol ................................................... 86 

Figures

Figure I.1. F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Growth Endpoints. .............. 9 

Figure I.2 F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Reproduction 

Endpoints. ................................................................................................................. 10

Figure I.3 F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Survival Endpoints. ........... 11 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 v 

Figure I.4 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the 

Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Growth 

Parameters. ................................................................................................................ 15

Figure I.5 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the 

Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. 

Reproduction Parameters. ......................................................................................... 16 

Figure I.6 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the 

Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Survival 

Parameters. ................................................................................................................ 17

Figure 1. Control Study, First Brood Sizes, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................ 87 

Figure 2. Control Study, Second Brood Sizes, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................ 88 

Figure 3. Control Study, Brood Sizes for First Two Broods, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................... 89 

Figure 4. Control Study, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................ 90 

Figure 5. Control Study, Days to Second Brood, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................ 91 

Figure 6. Control Study, Days to Between first Two Broods, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................... 92 

Figure 7. Control Study, Mature Days, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to 

the Average Across Studies. ..................................................................................... 93 

Figure 8. Control Study, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F0 

Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. 

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................. 94 

Figure 9. Control Study, Number of Offspring per Female per Reproductive Day, F0 

Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. 

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................. 95 

Figure 10. Control Study, % of Female Reproductively Active, F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................. 96 

Figure 11. Control Study, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................... 97 

Figure 12. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day0) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................... 98 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 vi 

Figure 13. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day7) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................ 99 

Figure 14. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day14) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 100 

Figure 15. Control Study, Dry Weight (Termination) (mg), F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. 

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................ 101 

Figure 16. Control Study, Length (Day 0) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 102 

Figure 17. Control Study, Length (Day 7) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 103 

Figure 18. Control Study, Length (Day 14) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 104 

Figure 19. Control Study, Length (Termination) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 105 

Figure 20. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 106 

Figure 21. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 107 

Figure 22. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 108 

Figure 23. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 109 

Figure 24. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 110 

Figure 25. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F0 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 111 

Figure 26. Control Study, First Brood Sizes, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 112 

Figure 27. Control Study, Second Brood Sizes, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 113 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 vii 

Figure 28. Control Study, Brood Sizes for First Two Broods, F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The 

Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ....................... 114 

Figure 29. Control Study, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 115 

Figure 30. Control Study, Days to Second Brood, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 116 

Figure 31. Control Study, Days to Between first Two Broods, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 117 

Figure 32. Control Study, Mature Days, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors 

for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds 

to the Average Across Studies. ............................................................................... 118 

Figure 33. Control Study, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 

Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. 

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................ 119 

Figure 34. Control Study, Number of Offspring per Female per Reproductive Day, F1 

Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. 

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................ 120 

Figure 35. Control Study, % of Female Reproductively Active, F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 121 

Figure 36. Control Study, Sex Ratio, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to | 

the Average Across Studies. ................................................................................... 122 

Figure 37. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day0) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 123 

Figure 38. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day7) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 124 

Figure 39. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day14) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 125 

Figure 40. Control Study, Dry Weight (Termination) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 126 

Figure 41. Control Study, Length (Day 0) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 127 

Figure 42. Control Study, Length (Day 7) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 128 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 viii 

Figure 43. Control Study, Length (Day 14) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line 

Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .......................................................... 129 

Figure 44. Control Study, Length (Termination) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 130 

Figure 45. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 131 

Figure 46. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 132 

Figure 47. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 133 

Figure 48. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 134 

Figure 49. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference 

Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. .................................................. 135 

Figure 50. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F1 Generation: 

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid 

Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. ................................ 136 

Figure 51. Mysid, Lindane First Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were 

Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ................. 137 

Figure 52 Mysid, Lindane, Second Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 138 

Figure 53. Mysid, Lindane, First Two Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 139 

Figure 54. Mysid, Lindane, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 140 

Figure 55. Mysid, Lindane, Days to Second Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 141 

Figure 56. Mysid, Lindane, Days between the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 142 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 ix 

Figure 57. Mysid, Lindane, Mature Days, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were 

Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ................. 143 

Figure 58. Mysid, Lindane, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F0 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group ........... 144 

Figure 59. Mysid, Lindane, Total Reproductive Number of Offspring Per Reproductive 

Day Per Female for the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. ............................................................. 145 

Figure 60. Mysid, Lindane, % of Female Reproductively Active, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 146 

Figure 61. Mysid, Lindane, Sex Ratio (males/females), F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 147 

Figure 62. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 148 

Figure 63. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 149 

Figure 64. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 150 

Figure 65. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 151 

Figure 66. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 152 

Figure 67. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 153 

Figure 68. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 154 

Figure 69. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 155 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 x 

Figure 70. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 156 

Figure 71. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 157 

Figure 72. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model). .......................................................................................... 158 

Figure 73. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group ............................... 159 

Figure 74. Mysid, Lindane, First Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were 

Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ................. 160 

Figure 75. Mysid, Lindane, Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 161 

Figure 76. Mysid, Lindane, First Two Broods Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 162 

Figure 77. Mysid, Lindane, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 163 

Figure 78. Mysid, Lindane Days to Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 164 

Figure 79. Mysid, Lindane Days between First Two Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 165 

Figure 80. Mysid, Lindane, Mature Day, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least 

Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........................... 166 

Figure 81. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group ............................... 167 

Figure 82. Mysid, Lindane, Number of Offspring Per Day Per Female for First Two 

Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group ............................................................................................... 168 

Figure 83. Mysid, Lindane, % of Females Productively Active, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xi 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 169 

Figure 84. Mysid, Lindane, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 170 

Figure 85. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 171 

Figure 86. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 172 

Figure 87. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 173 

Figure 88. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 174 

Figure 89. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 175 

Figure 90. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 176 

Figure 91. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 177 

Figure 92. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 178 

Figure 93. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 179 

Figure 94. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 180 

Figure 95. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Termination, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xii 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 181 

Figure 96. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 182 

Figure 97. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 183 

Figure 98. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 184 

Figure 99. Mysid, Octylphenol, First Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were 

Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ................. 185 

Figure 100. Mysid, Octylphenol, Second Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 186 

Figure 101. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring of the First Two Broods, F0 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

 (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated 

Based on a Random Effect Model) ......................................................................... 187 

Figure 102. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 188 

Figure 103. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to the Second Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 189 

Figure 104. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days between the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 190 

Figure 105. Mysid, Octylphenol, Mature Days, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 191 

Figure 106. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, 

F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. ..... 192 

Figure 107. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring Per Day Per Female, F0 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. .......... 193 

Figure 108. Mysid, Octylphenol, % of Females Productively Active, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xiii 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 194 

Figure 109. Mysid, Octylphenol, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 195 

Figure 110. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 196 

Figure 111. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 197 

Figure 112. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 198 

Figure 113. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 199 

Figure 114. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 200 

Figure 115. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 201 

Figure 116. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 202 

Figure 117. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

 (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated 

Based on a Random Effect Model) ......................................................................... 203 

Figure 118. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

 (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated 

Based on a Random Effect Model) ......................................................................... 204 

Figure 119. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 205 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xiv 

Figure 120. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 206 

Figure 121. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group ............................... 207 

Figure 122. Mysid, Octylphenol, First Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories 

Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) ........ 208 

Figure 123. Mysid, Octylphenol, Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 209 

Figure 124. Mysid, Octylphenol, # of Offspring for the First Two Brood, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 210 

Figure 125. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 211 

Figure 126. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to Second Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 212 

Figure 127. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days between the First Two Broods, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 213 

Figure 128. Mysid, Octylphenol, Mature Days, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

Bars for Each Concentration Group ........................................................................ 214 

Figure 129. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group ........... 215 

Figure 130. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring Per Day Per Female for the 

First Two Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group ............................................................................................... 216 

Figure 131. Mysid, Octylphenol, % of Females Productively Active, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 217 

Figure 132. Mysid, Octylphenol, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 218 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xv 

Figure 133. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 219 

Figure 134. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 220 

Figure 135. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 221 

Figure 136. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 222 

Figure 137. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 223 

Figure 138. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 224 

Figure 139. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 225 

Figure 140. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across 

Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random 

Effect Model) .......................................................................................................... 226 

Figure 141. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 227 

Figure 142. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 228 

Figure 143. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F1 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

(the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated 

Based on a Random Effect Model) ......................................................................... 229 

Figure 144. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data

 xvi 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 230 

Figure 145. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F1 Generation. 

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average 

across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a 

Random Effect Model) ........................................................................................... 231 

Figure 146. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F1 

Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. .......... 232 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

1 

1. INTRODUCTION 

To evaluate the effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals, EPA is currently developing and 

validating a Tier 2, two-generation mysid toxicity test to characterize the adverse consequences of 

exposure to putative endocrine active substances. Tests were carried out by EPA in three labs: SMV, 

UNT, and WLI. All three labs carried out tests with lindane however the WLI test did not meet control 

group standards and so is not included in the inter-laboratory analysis. SMV and WLI carried out tests 

with octylphenol and UNT carried out a test with vinclozolin. A fourth lab, ABC, did not participate in 

the EPA mysid test program but carried out a mysid 2-generation test with octylphenol which is included 

in the inter-laboratory analysis. Thus the inter-laboratory analysis is based on six studies carried out at 

four laboratories with three chemicals. 

2. QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED; LOCATIONS OF ANSWERS 

EPA requested that inter-laboratory analyses be carried out to answer a series of questions. The 

questions raised by EPA and the report tables that pertain to those questions are given below: 

 Is the behavior of controls similar among labs? 

o What are the ranges of control values within a study for a single lab? 

Tables 1A, 1C, 2A, 2C, 3A, 3C display the control group mean values (averaged across 

three tanks) for each laboratory and pooled across laboratories, as well as the CV% across 

laboratories. The CV% incorporates laboratory-to-laboratory variability. The A tables 

correspond to generation F0. The C tables correspond to generation F1. 

Tables 1B, 1D, 2B, 2D, 3B, 3D display the within study variances of the control group 

means within each laboratory, the pooled within study variance across laboratories, the 

random study-to-study variance within laboratories, and the combined laboratory and 

study variance across laboratories. The B tables correspond to generation F0. The D 

tables correspond to generation F1. 

Tables 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B present within study 95% prediction intervals that give 

the anticipated range of control group mean values about the overall mean with 95% 

confidence within a single laboratory and study. The A tables correspond to generation 

F0. The B tables correspond to generation F1. 

o What are the ranges of control values between studies for a single lab (i.e. different 

chemicals)? 

Tables 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B present 95% prediction intervals that give the anticipated 

range of control group mean values about the overall mean with 95% confidence among 

independent studies within the same laboratory. The A tables correspond to generation 

F0. The B tables correspond to generation F1. 

o What are the ranges of control values between multiple labs? 

Tables 4A, 4B, 5A, 5B, 6A, 6B present 95% prediction intervals that give the anticipated 

range of control group mean values about the overall mean with 95% confidence across 

independent laboratories and studies. The A tables correspond to generation F0. The B 

tables correspond to generation F1. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

2 

o Are there differences in the technical proficiency (i.e. variability of controls) among labs? 

Tables 1B, 1D, 2B, 2D, 3B, 3D display the combined laboratory and study variances 

across laboratories and studies. The significance levels of these combined estimates 

indicate whether there is statistical evidence that the true combined laboratory and study 

variance is greater than zero. This indicates whether there is evidence of variability of 

controls among laboratories and studies. The B tables correspond to generation F0. The 

D tables correspond to generation F1. 

Tables 1B, 1D, 2B, 2D, 3B, 3D also display the p-values of tests of homogeneity of 

within study variances. This indicates whether there is evidence of differences in the 

within study variability among laboratories and studies. The B tables correspond to 

generation F0. The D tables correspond to generation F1. 

 

o What is the power for detecting treatment-related effects based on the variability of 

endpoints measured in controls? 

Tables 7A, 7B, 8A, 8B, 9A, 9B display the distances from the control group means and 

the upper and lower alternative values that can be detected with power 80% at 5% 

significance level (two-sided). The A tables correspond to generation F0. The B tables 

correspond to generation F1. 

 Are dose-response relationships similar among labs, in terms of 

o Sensitivity (chemical concentrations that results in differences between treatment and 

controls) 

Tables 10A, 10B, 11A, 11B, 12A, 12B display the summary of the significant differences 

identified between test group and control group responses for lindane and for octylphenol, 

within laboratories and pooled across laboratories. Both overall individually significant 

groups and significant trends across concentration groups are indicated, based on the 

results of overall ANOVA F-tests and tests for linear trend. The A tables correspond to 

generation F0. The B tables correspond to generation F1. Tables 10A to 12B can be 

used to determine the lowest effect concentration as the lowest concentration at which a 

significant difference between test group and control group is observed. 

Tables 16A to 21B display the means and standard errors for each concentration group, 

within laboratories and pooled across laboratories. Significant effects pooled across 

laboratories, if present, are indicated. Tables 16A to 18B correspond to the lindane 

studies. Tables 19A to 21B correspond to the octylphenol studies. Both individual 

significant groups and significant trends across concentration groups are indicated. The 

A tables correspond to generation F0. The B tables correspond to generation F1. 

o Slope (requires fitting the same model to data from all labs involved in comparison) 

Tables 10A to 12B and Tables 16A to 21B show significant trends across concentration 

groups, when present. Individual slope values were not determined. 

 For the same chemical, is there value added to >1 generation (may be within multigenerational 

studies, between 1 generation and >1 generation studies)? 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

3 

Tables 13, 14, 15 display the summary of the significant differences identified between 

the F0 and F1 generations for lindane and for octylphenol, within laboratories and pooled 

across laboratories. Both individual significant groups and significant trends across 

concentration groups are indicated. Tables 13 to 15 can be used to determine the lowest 

effect concentration as the lowest concentration at which a significant difference between 

generations is observed. 

Tables 22 to 27 display the differences of averages between the F0 and F1 generations 

and their standard errors for each concentration group, pooled across laboratories. 

Significant effects, if present, are indicated. Tables 22 to 24 correspond to the lindane 

studies. Tables 25 to 27 correspond to the octylphenol studies. Both individual 

significant groups and significant trends across concentration groups are indicated. 

 

3. STUDY DATA 

The study endpoints that are included in the inter-laboratory analyses are the same as those that 

were included in the intra-laboratory analyses. 

The test method specifies 25 endpoints. Some of the endpoints are recorded per mysid or 

composite of mysids (e.g. day 0 weight), some are recorded per breeding pair, and some are recorded per 

basket (i.e. per replicate tank). These endpoints are divided among three categories: 

(i) Reproduction (F0, F1) (11)

a. Sex ratio (per basket) 

b. Time to mature (per basket) 

c. Time to first brood release (per breeding pair) 

d. Time to second brood release (per breeding pair) 

e. Interbrood duration, time between release of first and second brood (per breeding pair) 

f. Number of young per female in the first brood (per breeding pair) 

g. Number of young per female in the second brood (per breeding pair) 

h. Total number of young in the first two broods per female (per breeding pair) 

i. Percentage of females that are reproductively active in the first two broods (per basket) 

j. Total reproduction days in the first two broods (per breeding pair) 

k. Number of young per female per reproductive day in the first two broods (per breeding pair) 

(ii) Survival (F0, F1) (6) 

a. Survival rate for reproduction animals at days 7, 14 and termination (reproduction survival, 

per basket) 

b. Survival rate for all animals including both the growth and reproduction animals at days 7, 14 

and termination (total survival, per tank) 

The survival rates were adjusted for the number removed for weight and length determinations 

(i.e. were omitted from both the numerator and denominator) and other non-treatment related deaths. 

(iii) Growth (F0, F1) (8)1

 

a. Length at day 0 (per mysid) 

b. Length at day 7 (per mysid) 

c. Length at day 14 (per mysid) 

 

1

 Day 14 and terminal weights and lengths were reported by gender. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

4 

d. Length at termination (per mysid) 

e. Weight at day 0 (on average per composite of 5 mysids ) 

f. Weight at day 7 (on average per composite of 2 mysids) 

g. Weight at day 14 (per mysid) 

h. Weight at termination (per mysid) 

(iv) Key Endpoints (F0, F1) (5)

EPA specified five endpoints as “key parameters”. These are: 

a. Survival to termination (F0, F1) 

b. Time to maturation (i.e. first day marsupial pouch is visible) (F0, F1) 

c. Time to first brood release (F0, F1) 

d. Time to second brood release (F0, F1) 

e. Number of young per (surviving) female in the first two broods (F0, F1) 

These endpoints will be analyzed along with the remainder but their analysis results will be discussed in 

greater detail. 

4. INTER-LABORATORY ANALYSES 

The inter-laboratory analysis is composed of three parts. The first part pertains to the comparison 

of the control group results among the studies to assess the range of variation within studies, among 

studies within laboratories, and among laboratories. The second part pertains to power analyses based on 

the control groups to detect alternatives form the control groups that can be detected with high power 

within studies, based on average within study variability. The third part pertains to the comparisons of 

the treatment group-control group results for the key parameters. 

Comparisons among control groups were carried out for the F0 generation results and for the F1 

generation results. All six studies were included in the comparisons – SMV lindane and octylphenol, 

UNT lindane and vinclozolin, WLI octylphenol, and ABC octylphenol. The variation in control results 

was compared among laboratories and studies. Heterogeneous variance random effects analysis of 

variance models with random effects laboratory and study within laboratory were fitted to the control 

results from each of the laboratories. Individual studies within study variances were included for each 

laboratory. Pooled within study variance was determined as the unweighted averages of the individual 

within study variances with degrees of freedom based on Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

Pooled within study variation, study-to-study variation within laboratories, and laboratory-tolaboratory variation were determined. The six studies were divided among four laboratories. SMV and 

UNT each carried out two studies while WLI and ABC each had just one study included in the interlaboratory analyses. The study-to-study variation alone was estimated based on a mixed effects model 

that included laboratory as a fixed effect and study as a random effect. Based on this model study-tostudy variation was estimated as the difference in study effects within each of the two laboratories that 

carried out two studies. This is a reliable estimate of study variation, independent of laboratory variation. 

The combined laboratory and study variation was based on a random effects model that treated both 

laboratory and study as random effects. Due to the limitations of the data and the confounding of 

laboratory and study effects in the two laboratories that carried out just one study the random effects 

model does not provide precise estimates of each of the laboratory and study variance components 

individually. The variance components are highly negatively correlated so the sum of the laboratory and 

study variance components is determined with greater reliability than either of the individual variance 

components. Since the estimate of study variance alone from the mixed effects model is considered to be 

more reliable than the laboratory + study total variance estimate from the six studies random effects 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

5 

model, if the study variance estimate exceeds the laboratory + study variance estimate , then the estimated 

study variance is also used as the laboratory + study variance estimate. 

The pooled within study variation, random study variation, and random laboratory and study 

variation were used to construct 95% two-sided prediction intervals about the average within study 

control group mean. Three levels of prediction intervals were constructed: 

 Within study variation 

avg 0.975, wi Varavg Varwi ˆ t  

 Study-to-study within laboratory variation 

avg 0.975,st Varavg Varwi Varst ˆ t   

 Laboratory-to-laboratory and study-to-study variation 

avg 0.975, tot Varavg Varwi Vartot ˆ t   

Varavg is the variance of the average response pooled across studies. Varwi is the within study variance. 

Varst is the study-to-study variance within laboratories. Vartot is the combined study variance + laboratory 

variance. By the way it is defined the estimated total variance must exceed the estimated study variance. 

Degrees of freedom νwi, νst, and νtot were determined by Satterthwaite’s method. The prediction intervals 

estimate the ranges of control group mean values that may be expected with 95% confidence: within a 

study, among studies within a laboratory, and among studies and laboratories. 

Power determinations were carried out for each endpoint based on the control group within run 

variance. Alternatives that can be distinguished from the control group mean with power 80% with a 5% 

(two-sided) significance level within a study were determined. These alternatives are based on the noncentral t-distribution with noncentrality parameter |δ|/(2swi) where swi is the pooled within study standard 

error. Degrees of freedom are twice that for the control group and vary with endpoint. For example 

brood size is reported on a per brood basis and there are 21 breeding pairs per group, so the degrees of 

freedom is 2×(21-1) = 40. Survival rate is reported on a per tank basis and there are 3 reproduction tanks 

per group so the degrees of freedom is 2×(3-1) = 4. 

5. COMPARISONS OF SELECTED STUDY CHARACTERISTICS ACROSS ENDPOINTS 

AND ACROSS GENERATIONS 

The inter-laboratory analysis output includes numerous tables and figures that display numerous 

summary characteristics for each endpoint. Additional summary displays were prepared for several of the 

study characteristics to highlight their comparisons across endpoints and across generations. 

Table I.1 to I.4 and Figures I.1 to I.3 pertain to comparisons of inter-laboratory CVs across 

endpoints. Table I.1 shows the range of and median CVs for the growth, reproduction, and survival 

endpoints in generations F0 and F1. Within each endpoint category the endpoints are sorted by generation 

F0 CV. Although the median CVs in each category tend to be higher or about equivalent in generation F0 

than in generation F1, 15 of 25 endpoints have larger CVs in generation F1 than in generation F0. 

Tables I.2 to I.4 display the CVs across laboratories and studies and significance levels for heterogeneity 

across laboratories and studies for the growth, reproduction, and survival endpoints respectively. These 

are displayed in Figures I.1 to I.3. The tables and figures show positive associations between the CVs in 

generations F0 and F1 and greater CVs in generation F1 than in generation F0 for the majority of 

endpoints (15 of 25). 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

6 

Tables I.5 and I.6 and Figure I.4 to I.6 display the percent distances from the control group means 

that can be detected with 80% power at 5% significance level, in generation F0 and generation F1. The 

endpoints are sorted within each endpoint category (growth, reproduction, survival) by the generation F0 

percent distance. The generation F1 percent distance is displayed as is the ratio of generation F1 to 

generation F0 percent distances. Table I.6 and Figures I.4 to I.6 show that the F1 percent distance is 

greater than the F0 percent distance for nearly all (23 of 25) endpoints and there is a positive association 

between the F0 percent distance and the F1 percent distance in each endpoint category. 

Comparison of Inter-Laboratory CVs across Endpoints 

The 25 mysid assay parameters were divided into 3 categories: 8 growth parameters, 11 

reproduction parameters, and 6 survival parameters. For each parameter the CV across labs and the 

associated p-value for significance of the laboratory + study random variation (i.e. differences among 

laboratories and among studies within laboratories) for the F0 and F1generations were summarized and 

are shown below. 

For each category the parameters were sorted in order of F0 generation CV, from smallest to 

largest. The F1 generation CV and the F0 and F1 generation p-values were presented alongside the F) 

generation CV for comparison. Separate tables are shown for the growth, reproduction, and survival 

endpoints respectively. 

The ranges of CVs can be compared across categories by comparisons within and across tables. 

The CVs are larger for the growth and reproduction endpoints and smaller for the survival endpoints. The 

ranges are summarized in Table I.1. 

Table I.1. Ranges of F0 and F1 CV% across Laboratories and Studies. By Category. 

 F0 F1 

Category CV Range Median CV Range Median # F1 > F0 

Growth 12.6 – 84.5 23.9 16.2 – 39.5 18.3 4 of 8 

Reproduction 4.2 – 35.2 24.9 1.4 – 68.8 15.5 7 of 11 

Survival 1.9 – 20.0 6.1 3.1 – 22.2 6.3 4 of 6 

Total 1.9 – 84.5 20.0 1.4 – 68.8 16.2 15 of 25 

Although the median CVs are about equal or larger between the F0 and F1 generations, the F1 

CVs tend to exceed the F0 CVs for the same parameter. This is reflected in 15 of 25 F1 CVs exceeding 

the corresponding F0 CVs. 

Tables I.2, I.3, and I.4 and Figures I.1, I.2, and I.3 below show that there is positive association 

between the F0 and F1 CVs, particularly for the reproduction and survival parameters. For example the 

reproduction parameters Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods and # Offspring per Female 

per Reproduction Day for the First Two Broods have relatively small CVs for both the F0 and F1 

generations. By contrast Number of Offspring for Brood 1, for Brood 2, and for two broods have 

relatively large CVs for both the F0 and F1 generations. 

Figures I.1, I.2, and I.3 show the positive associations between the corresponding F0 and F1CVs. 

The reference lines in each figure are the lines of equality of the F0 and F1 CVs. For those points above 

the reference lines the F1 CVs exceed the corresponding F0 CVs. 

Several CVs stand out as removed from the remainder. For example for the growth endpoints the 

F0 CV for dry weight (day 7) is 84.5%, far in excess of any other growth endpoint CV. As shown in 

Table 2A, the average across laboratories is 0.280 mg, the WLI octylphenol average is 0.597 mg, and the 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

7 

SMV octylphenol average is 0.083 mg. Average weight varies among labs by a factor of more than 7. 

Based on the observed variability across laboratories and studies, Table 5A shows a 95% normal 

distribution based prediction interval across studies and laboratories ranging from 0.000 to 0.854. Both 

the WLI octylphenol and the SMV octylphenol averages fall within this range. 

For the reproduction endpoints the F1 CVs for number of offspring in brood 1, brood 2, and the 

two broods are somewhat larger than the other CVs. The F1 CV for number of offspring in brood 1 is 

68.8%. As shown in Table 1C, the average across laboratories is 4.93, the WLI octylphenol average is 

1.36, and the ABC octylphenol average is 7.71. Table 4B shows a 95% normal distribution based 

prediction interval across studies and laboratories ranging from 0.000 to 13.200. Both the WLI 

octylphenol and the ABC octylphenol averages fall within this range. 

This suggests that the variation among labs represents normal variation among laboratories and 

studies within laboratories. Note that it would be preferable if the determination of the prediction 

intervals had been based on studies other than those being evaluated relative to their ranges. 

Table I.2 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. Growth 

Endpoints. 

Growth Endpoints 

Categ Param CVF0 CVF1 PF0 PF1 

 

Growth G5 Length (mm) (day 0) 12.589 18.446 0.001 0.001

 G7 Length (mm) (day 14) 12.632 23.558 0.001 0.001

 G3 Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 14.643 16.468 0.001 0.001

 G8 Length (mm) (Termination) 21.725 18.067 0.001 0.001

 G4 Dry Weight (mg) (Termination) 26.105 25.123 0.001 0.001

 G6 Length (mm) (day 7) 28.817 16.204 0.001 0.001

 G1 Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 37.991 39.547 0.001 0.003

 G2 Dry Weight (mg) (day 7) 84.464 18.223 0.001 0.047
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

8 

Table I.3 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. 

Reproductive Endpoints. 

Reproductive Endpoints 

Categ Param CVF0 CVF1 PF0 PF1 

 

Repro R8 Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods 4.252 8.651 1.000 0.552

R9 # of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day 

for the First Two Broods 

4.343 7.951 1.000 0.945

 R7 Time to Mature (females) 12.229 22.588 0.001 0.001

 R10 % of Female Reproductively Active 13.127 1.408 0.001 0.259

 R11 Sex Ratio (males/females) 21.837 38.342 0.555 0.059

 R5 Days to Brood 2 24.899 13.868 0.001 0.001

 R4 Days to Brood 1 25.550 15.457 0.001 0.001

 R6 Days Between Broods 1 and 2 25.656 7.679 0.001 0.059

 R2 Number Offspring (Brood 2) 31.483 64.161 0.001 0.001

 R3 Number Offspring (two broods) 33.032 57.475 0.001 0.001

 R1 Number Offspring (brood 1) 35.188 68.846 0.001 0.001

Table I.4 F0 and F1 CV% and Significance Levels across Laboratories and Studies. Survival 

Endpoints. 

Survival Endpoints 

Categ Param CVF0 CVF1 PF0 PF1 

 

Repro S1 Reproduction Survival Rate (%) day 7) 1.912 3.729 0.373 0.179

 S4 Total Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 2.719 5.284 0.639 0.001

 S5 Total Survival Rate (%) (day 14) 5.254 3.061 0.229 0.953

 S6 Total Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 6.857 11.602 1.000 0.087

 S2 Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (day 14) 10.143 7.324 0.001 0.003

 S3 Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 19.978 22.154 0.001 0.004
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

9 

Figure I.1. F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Growth Endpoints. 

CVF1

10203040

CVF0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

10 

Figure I.2 F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Reproduction Endpoints. 

CVF1

0

10203040506070

CVF0

0 10 20 30 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

11 

Figure I.3 F0 CV% Vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Survival Endpoints.

CVF1

13579

11131517192123

CVF0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

12 

Comparison of Within Study Power Sensitivity across Endpoints and between Generations 

The 25 mysid assay parameters were divided into 3 categories: 8 growth parameters, 11 

reproduction parameters, and 6 survival parameters. Each parameter was assigned a code: G1 to G8, R1 

to R11, and S1 to S6. The endpoint categories and codes as well as the parameter descriptions are 

displayed in Table I.5. 

Power analyses were carried out to determine deviations from the control group means that could 

be detected with power 80% at the 5% (two-sided) significance level. The power analyses were based on 

the average within study variability for the control group parameters in each of the five intra-laboratory 

analyses. The sample sizes assumed are the nominal sample sizes for the control group, pooled across the 

three growth baskets or the three reproduction baskets. Table I.6 displays for each endpoint category the 

endpoint codes, the F0 and F1 generation control group means, the F0 and F1 control group nominal 

sample size, the F0 and F1 generation percent distances from the control group mean that can be detected 

with power 80%, and the ratio of the F1 percent deviation to the F0 percent deviation for the 

corresponding parameters. Within each category the parameters are ordered by F0 percent deviation, 

from smallest to largest. 

The F0 and F1 nominal sample sizes (n_Nom_F0 and n_Nom_F1) are determined as follows: 

Reproduction parameters 

 Parameters R1 to R9 are based on the number of breeding pairs – 7 per tank×3 tanks 

 Parameters R10 and R11 are determined on a per tank basis – 3 tanks per group 

Survival parameters 

 All the survival parameters are determined on a per tank basis 

Growth parameters 

 Parameters G1 and G2 (dry weight on days 0 and 7) are based on three composites per tank with 

5 mysids (day 0) and 2 mysids (day 7) per composite 

 Parameters G5 and G6 G2 (length on days 0 and 7) are based on the number of growth mysids 

per tank (15 on day 0 and 6 on day 7) selected to have length determinations 

 Parameters G3 and G4, G7 and G8 (dry weight on days 14 and termination, length on day 14 and 

termination) are based on the approximate average sample sizes across laboratories and studies 

for F0 and F1 respectively. There were fewer mysids remaining in the growth baskets (day 14) 

and reproduction baskets (termination) in the F1 generation than in the F0 generation. 

Figures I.4, I.5, and I.6 display the F0 vs.F1 percent deviations from the control group means for 

the corresponding parameters for detection with 80% power with 5% (two-sided) significance level. The 

reference lines correspond to equality of the F0 and F1 percent deviations. Parameters lying above the 

reference line have greater F1 percent deviation than F0 deviation. 

The figures show positive associations between the F0 deviations and the F1 deviations for each 

of the categories. The F1 generation deviations exceed the corresponding F0 deviations for all the growth 

and reproduction parameters and for 4 of 6 of the survival parameters. Parameter G1 among the growth 

parameters (dry weight day 0) and R11 among the reproduction parameters (sex ratio) stand out as being 

particularly far removed from the reference lines of equality. Table 8A and 8B for the growth endpoints 

show that the means (standard errors) for dry weight on day 0 are F0: 0.034(0.002) and F1: 0.028(0.007). 

The means do not differ much between generations but the F1 generation standard error is 3.5 times the 

F0 generation standard error. Tables 7A and 7B for the reproduction endpoints show that the means 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

13 

(standard errors) for sex ratio are F0: 1.34(0.32) and F1: 1.28(0.48). The means do not differ much 

between generations but the F1 generation standard error is 1.5 times the F0 generation standard error. 

The F1 standard errors tend to exceed the corresponding F0 standard errors. This may be due to 

greater variation among tanks or smaller numbers of mysids per tank in F1 compared to F0. 

Table I.5 Mysid 2-Generation Study Reproduction, Growth, and Survival Endpoints with 

Endpoint Codes 

Category Endpoint Parameter 

Repro 

R1 First Brood Size 

R2 Second Brood Size 

R3 First Two Brood Sizes 

R4 Days to First Brood 

R5 Days to Second Brood 

R6 Days between Two Broods 

R7 Days to Maturity (females) 

R8 Total Reproductive Days for First Two Broods 

R9 # of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day for the 

First Two Broods 

R10 % of Females Productively Active 

R11 Sex Ratio (males/females) 

Growth 

G1 Dry Weight Day 0 

G2 Dry Weight Day 7 

G3 Dry Weight Day 14 

G4 Dry Weight Termination 

G5 Length Day 0 

G6 Length Day 7 

G7 Length Day 14 

G8 Length Termination 

Surv 

S1 Reproduction Survival rate day 7 

S2 Reproduction Survival rate day 14 

S3 Reproduction Survival rate Termination 

S4 Total Survival rate day 7 

S5 Total Survival rate day 14 

S6 Total Survival rate Termination 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

14 

Table I.6 Mysid 2-Generation Study. Percent Deviations from the Corresponding Group Means for Detection 

the F0 and F1 Generations Based on Average within Study Variability. 

Category Endpoint Parameter Gener_F0 n_Nom_F0 Mean_F0 Gener_F1 n_Nom_F1 Mean_F1 pctdist_F0 

Growth 

G8 Length Termination F0 36 7.5237 F1 26 7.2371 3.021 

G7 Length Day 14 F0 36 5.3783 F1 22 6.2860 4.432 G5 Length Day 0 F0 45 1.7066 F1 45 1.5675 5.370 G6 Length Day 7 F0 18 4.0506 F1 18 4.3791 8.538 G4 Dry Weight Termination F0 36 1.1319 F1 26 1.1364 13.743 G3 Dry Weight Day 14 F0 36 0.5764 F1 22 0.7192 16.518 G2 Dry Weight Day 7 F0 9 0.2803 F1 9 0.2907 22.527 G1 Dry Weight Day 0 F0 9 0.0341 F1 9 0.0279 29.619 

Repro 

R7 Days to Maturity (females) F0 21 12.3873 F1 21 11.6428 11.010 R5 Days to Second Brood F0 21 25.6595 F1 21 22.9763 14.217 R4 Days to First Brood F0 21 19.3977 F1 21 17.5818 14.903 R8 Total Reproductive Days for First Two Broods F0 21 9.3427 F1 21 8.3755 17.284 R9 # of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction 

Day for the First Two Broods 

F0 21 1.5801 F1 21 1.9302 22.518 

R10 % of Females Productively Active F0 3 91.5148 F1 3 99.6364 22.857 R3 First Two Brood Sizes F0 21 12.4476 F1 21 12.6056 37.688 R1 First Brood Size F0 21 5.4298 F1 21 4.9304 39.309 R6 Days between Two Broods F0 21 6.0302 F1 21 5.2999 42.181 R2 Second Brood Size F0 21 7.1212 F1 21 7.2776 54.600 R11 Sex Ratio (males/females) F0 3 1.3364 F1 3 1.2764 126.803 

Surv 

S4 Total Survival rate day 7 F0 3 98.3917 F1 3 94.6138 11.699 

S1 Reproduction Survival rate day 7 F0 3 98.9118 F1 3 97.3666 16.565 S2 Reproduction Survival rate day 14 F0 3 89.0174 F1 3 93.6278 17.441 S5 Total Survival rate day 14 F0 3 90.1102 F1 3 89.1070 21.867 S3 Reproduction Survival rate Termination F0 3 78.9797 F1 3 79.0539 29.778 S6 Total Survival rate Termination F0 3 77.4641 F1 3 85.1435 36.506 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

15 

Figure I.4 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding Parameters to D

Power 80%. Growth Parameters.

pctdist_F1

0

102030405060708090

100110120

pctdist_F0

0 10 20 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

16 

Figure I.5 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding Parameters to D

Power 80%. Reproduction Parameters.

pctdist_F1

102030405060708090

100110120130140150160170180190200210

pctdist_F0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

17 

Figure I.6 F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding Parameters to D

Power 80%. Survival Parameters. 

pctdist_F1

102030405060

pctdist_F0

10 20 30 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

18 

Lowest Effect Concentration (LOEC) across Endpoints and Across Generations 

The LOEC is the lowest test concentration group (groups 2 to 6) at which a significant difference 

occurs, either significantly different from the control group (group 1) within a generation or significantly 

different between generations. Table I.7 displays the LOECs within generations or between generations 

for each category and endpoitn within category. 

 There are not many significant differences based on average results pooled across studies. Where 

significant differences are shown, more detailed information about the nature and direction of the effects 

(positive or negative or increasing or decreasing trend) is found by reviewing Tables 10A to 15 or Tables 

16A to 27. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

19 

Table I.7 LOEC for Comparisons between Test Groups and Control within Generations and between Generat

and Octylphenol. 

Lindane Octylphenol

Category Endpoint Parameter F0 F1 F1-F0 F0 F1 

Repro 

R1 First Brood Size 5 R2 Second Brood Size 6 R3 First Two Brood Sizes 6 R4 Days to First Brood R5 Days to Second Brood R6 Days between Two Broods R7 Days to Maturity (females) NA R8 Total Reproductive Days for First Two Broods NA NA NA NA NA R9 

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day for the First Two Broods 

NA NA NA NA NA 

R10 % of Females Productively Active R11 Sex Ratio (males/females) 

Growth 

G1 Dry Weight Day 0 G2 Dry Weight Day 7 G3 Dry Weight Day 14 6 G4 Dry Weight Termination NA G5 Length Day 0 5 G6 Length Day 7 G7 Length Day 14 G8 Length Termination NA 

Surv 

S1 Reproduction Survival rate day 7 S2 Reproduction Survival rate day 14 S3 Reproduction Survival rate Termination S4 Total Survival rate day 7 6 NA S5 Total Survival rate day 14 NA S6 Total Survival rate Termination NA NA NA NA 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

20 

6. RESULTS 

Tables 1A – 9B and Figures 1- 50 display the results of the inter-laboratory analyses on the 

control group values, alternatives that can be distinguished from the control group means with 80% power, 

and side-by-side comparisons of the intra-laboratory analysis results. Tables 10A to 12B and 16A to 21B 

display comparisons of treatment group results vs. control group results within generation F0 or 

generation F1, within individual studies or pooled across studies based on the same chemical (lindane or 

octylphenol). Tables 13 to 15 and 22 to 27 display comparisons between generations, within individual 

studies or pooled across studies based on the same chemical (lindane or octylphenol). 

Tables 1A to 1D present estimates of control group mean values and variance components for the 

reproduction endpoints and the F0 and F1 generations, Tables 2A to 2D present the same estimates for the 

growth endpoints, and Tables 3A to 3D present the same estimates for the survival endpoints. For each 

grouping of endpoints the A and C tables display (for the F0 and F1 generations respectively) the control 

group average values and the standard errors for each study, and the average values and the standard 

errors across studies based on a random effects analysis of variance with random effects laboratory and 

study within laboratory and heterogeneous within study variance. The coefficient of variation across 

studies is calculated as [(Across Stdy Std Err)6/(Across Stdy Mean)]×100%. 

For each grouping of endpoints the B and D tables display (for the F0 and F1 generations 

respectively) the within study variances and degrees of freedom for each of the studies, the pooled within 

study variance calculated as the unweighted average of the individual within study variances and 

associated degrees of freedom based on Satterthwaite’s approximation, and the random study effect 

within laboratory variance and the total variance (study and laboratory) with associated p-values based on 

likelihood ratio tests. The total variance is based on a random effects model including random effects 

laboratory and study within laboratory, and heterogeneous within study variances. Because two of the 

labs (WLI and ABC) conducted just one study that is included in the inter-laboratory analyses, the study 

variance estimate and the laboratory variance estimate are highly intercorrelated and each variance 

component is less reliably estimated based on this study than is the sum of the two variance components. 

The study within labs variance component itself is more reliably estimated based on just the SMV and 

UNT laboratories, each of which conducted two studies. This estimate is obtained by fitting a mixed 

effects model and treating laboratory as a fixed effect and study within laboratory as a random effect. 

This estimate of study variance is effectively based on just the two laboratories that conducted two studies 

and is considered to be more reliable than the estimate of study variance based on the full model with 

both laboratory and study as random effects. Thus the study variance component is based on the mixed 

effects model and the total variance (i.e. laboratory+study variance) is based on the full random effects 

model. If the estimate of study variance exceeds the initial estimate of total variance then the estimate of 

study variance is substituted for the estimate of total variance. The B and D tables include estimates of 

the variance of the pooled mean and associated degrees of freedom as well as the p-value for the test of 

homogeneity of the within study variances based on a one-way ANOVA test on the natural logarithms of 

the within study variances. 

Tables 4A to 6B display the variance component estimates and 95% prediction intervals about the 

pooled control mean to reflect the range of control values within study, between studies within a 

laboratory, and between studies and laboratories. Tables 4A and 4B pertain to the reproduction endpoints, 

Tables 5A and 5B pertain to the growth endpoints, and Tables 6A and 6B pertain to the survival 

endpoints. The A tables correspond to the F0 generation and the B tables correspond to the F1 generation. 

Tables 7A to 9B display alternatives to the control group means that can be detected with 80% 

power at the 5% (two-sided) significance level. The power analyses are based on the non-central tdistribution with degrees of freedom depending on the endpoint. Tables 7A and 7B pertain to the 

reproduction endpoints, Tables 8A and 8B pertain to the growth endpoints, and Tables 9A and 9B pertain 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

21 

to the survival endpoints. The A tables correspond to the F0 generation and the B tables correspond to the 

F1 generation. 

Tables 10A to 12B display side-by-side comparisons within generation of the significant 

deviations from the control group for each intra-laboratory analysis separately and for the inter-laboratory 

analyses pooled over studies with the same chemical (lindane or octylphenol). The A tables correspond 

to the F0 generation and the B tables correspond to the F1 generation. Tables 10A, 10B correspond to the 

reproduction endpoints, Tables 11A, 11B correspond to the growth endpoints, and Tables 12A, 12B 

correspond to the survival endpoints. “↑” denotes that the test group mean is significantly greater than the 

control group mean. “↓” denotes that the test group mean is significantly less than the control group 

mean. 

Tables 13 to 15 pertain to the comparisons between the F0 and F1 generations for the 

reproduction (Table 13), growth (Table 14), and survival (Table 15) endpoints respectively. “↓” denotes 

that the F1 generation is significantly smaller than the F0 generation. “↑” denotes that the F1 generation 

is significantly greater than the F1 generation. 

Tables 16A to 21B display the group mean (simple means) and standard errors within generations 

for each concentration group within each study as well as well as the group means (least squares means) 

pooled across studies. Overall significant concentration effects and concentration trend effects are 

indicated in the two right most columns for the inter-laboratory comparisons, where present. Otherwise 

the columns are left blank. The A(B) tables correspond to the F0(F1) generations. Tables 16A to 18B 

correspond to the lindane studies. Tables 19A to 21B correspond to the octylphenol studies. Tables 16A, 

16B, 19A, 19B correspond to the reproduction endpoints. Tables 17A, 17B, 20A, 20B correspond to the 

growth endpoints. Tables 18A, 18B, 21A, 21B correspond to the survival endpoints. 

Tables 22 to 27 display the differences of group means (least squares means) and standard errors 

between generations (F1 – F0) for each concentration group pooled across studies. Positive (negative) 

f=differences indicate that the F1 mean is greater (less) than the F0 mean. If either the generation main 

effect or the generation by concentration interaction was significant then t-tests based on the analysis of 

variance were performed on each concentration group to determine those concentration groups for which 

the F0 and F1 generation means were significantly different at the 5% significance level. Step-down 

trend tests for significant trends in differences between generations were performed, starting with the 

highest concentration group and moving downward. Tables 22 to 24 correspond to the lindane studies 

(Table 22 reproduction, Table 23 growth, Table 24 survival). Tables 25 to 27 correspond to the 

octylphenol studies (Table 25 reproduction, Table 26 growth, Table 27 survival). 

Figures 1 to 50 display side-by-side comparisons of the within study control means and weighted 

pooled means across studies for the reproduction (Figures 1 to 11, 26 to 36), growth (Figures 12 to 19, 37 

to 44), and survival endpoints (Figures 20 to 25, 45 to 50). Two standard error bars are shown above and 

below the control group means. The standard error bars for the individual studies reflect within study 

variability. For the averages across studies that standard error bars reflect both within study variability 

and study-to-study variability. Figures 1 to 25 correspond to the F0 generation and Figures 26 to 50 

correspond to the F1 generation. 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

22 

7. SUMMARY OF CONTROL RESULTS FOR KEY ENDPOINTS 

This section elaborates on the control results for the five key endpoints specified by EPA and 

enumerated in Section 3(iv). For each endpoint the number of studies, the range of control mean values 

across studies, the weighted average of individual means across studies and the %CV, a 95% prediction 

interval for the range of responses across studies and laboratories are given for both the F0 and the F1 

generation. In addition, the control group mean and alternatives that can be detected with 80% power at 

5% (two-sided) significance level are shown. 

A. Survival to Termination F0, F1

Table I.8 summarizes survival to termination for key endpoints across laboratories, which is 

detailed in Tables 3A to 3D, 6A to 6B, 9A to 9B. This endpoint is subdivided into two endpoints: 

reproduction survival to termination and total survival to termination. 

Table I.8. Summary of Survival to Termination 

Generation Reproduction Survival 

% to Termination 

Total Survival % 

to Termination 

F0 # Studies 6 2 

 Range across Studies 72-98 76-79 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 79 77 

 CV% 20% 7% 

 95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 41-100 62-93 

F1 # Studies 6 2 

 Range across Studies 62-93 78-92 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 79 85 

 CV% 22% 12% 

95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 36-100 38-100 

Generation Reproduction Survival 

% to Termination 

Total Survival % 

to Termination 

F0 # Replicates Per Group 3 3 

 Control Group Mean 79 77 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 55 49 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power NA NA 

F1 # Replicates Per Group 3 3 

 Control Group Mean 79 85 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 36 63 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power NA NA 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

23 

B. Time to Maturity F0, F1

Table I.9 summarizes time to maturity across laboratories, which is detailed in Tables 1A to 1D, 

4A to 4B, 7A to 7B. 

Table I.9 Summary of Time to Maturity 

Generation Time to Maturity 

F0 # Studies 5 

 Range across Studies 10-14 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 12 

 CV% 12% 

 95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 8-17 

F1 # Studies 5 

 Range across Studies 9-14 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 12 

 CV% 23% 

95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 5-19 

Generation Time to Maturity 

F0 # Replicates Per Group 21 

 Control Group Mean 12 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 11 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 14 

F1 # Replicates Per Group 21 

 Control Group Mean 12 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 9 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 14 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

24 

C. Time to First Brood Release, Time to Second Brood Release F0, F1

Table I.10 summarizes time to first brood release and time to second brood release across 

laboratories, which are detailed in Tables 1A to 1D, 4A to 4B, 7A to 7B. 

Table I.10. Summary of Time to First and Second Brood Release 

Generation Time to First 

Brood Release 

Time to Second 

Brood Release 

F0 # Studies 6 6 

 Range across Studies 16-26 21-34 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 19 26 

 CV% 26% 25% 

 95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 7-31 10-41 

F1 # Studies 6 6 

 Range across Studies 15-20 20-26 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 18 23 

 CV% 15% 14% 

95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 11-24 15-31 

Generation Time to First 

Brood Release 

Time to Second 

Brood Release 

F0 # Replicates Per Group 21 21 

 Control Group Mean 19 26 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 17 22 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 22 29 

F1 # Replicates Per Group 21 21 

 Control Group Mean 18 23 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 14 19 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 21 27 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

25 

D. Number of Offspring per (Surviving) Female (two broods) F0, F1

Table I.11 summarizes number of offspring per (surviving) female (two broods) across 

laboratories, which is detailed in Tables1A to 1D, 4A to 4B, 7A to 7B. 

Table I.11. Summary of Number of Offspring per Female 

Generation Number of Offspring per 

(Surviving) Female (two broods) 

F0 # Studies 6 

 Range across Studies 9-16 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 12 

 CV% 33% 

 95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 2-13 

F1 # Studies 6 

 Range across Studies 4-19 

 Weighted Average Across Studies 13 

 CV% 57% 

95% Pred Intvl Betw Studies and Labs 0-30 

Generation Number of Offspring per 

(Surviving) Female (two broods) 

F0 # Replicates Per Group 21 

 Control Group Mean 12 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 8 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 17 

F1 # Replicates Per Group 21 

 Control Group Mean 13 

 Lower Limit to Detect with 80% Power 7 

 Upper Limit to Detect with 80% Power 18.5 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

26 

Table 1A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Reproduction Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a

Average A

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Mean 

(Standard E

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 5.476 (0.349) 6.048 (0.550) 5.941 (0.661) 3.800 (0.490) 7.714 (0.474) 3.471 (0.576) 5.430 (0.7

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) 8.800 (0.605) 8.238 (0.807) 6.308 (1.227) 4.900 (0.767) 8.619 (1.004) 5.800 (1.176) 7.121 (0.9

Number Offspring 

(two broods) 14.300 (0.612) 14.286 (1.096) 12.077 (1.483) 8.700 (1.049) 16.333 (1.210) 9.067 (1.293) 12.448 (1.

Days to Brood 1 15.810 (0.178) 19.000 (0.333) 19.294 (0.580) 17.800 (0.614) 16.476 (0.178) 26.250 (1.468) 19.398 (2.Days to Brood 2 21.200 (0.388) 23.500 (0.407) 23.800 (0.712) 25.412 (0.912) 22.619 (0.428) 34.077 (1.734) 25.659 (2.

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 5.400 (0.320) 4.500 (0.154) 4.900 (0.100) 7.588 (0.832) 6.238 (0.377) 9.000 (1.177) 6.030 (0.6

Time to Mature (females)d 10.333 (0.333) 13.000 (0.000) 13.235 (0.585) 11.333 (0.333) NAf 14.000 (0.000) 12.387 (0.

Total Reproductive Days for the 

First Two Broods 9.200 (0.388) 9.500 (0.407) NA NA NA NA 9.343 (0.2

# of Offspring Per Female Per 

Reproduction Day for the First 

Two Broods 

1.567 (0.054) 1.636 (0.112) NA NA NA NA 1.580 (0.0

% of Females Productively 

Activee 100.000 (0.000) 95.238 (4.762) 80.952 (4.762) 95.233 (4.767) 100.000 (0.000) 76.167 (4.767) 91.515 (4.

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 1.268 (0.367) 1.773 (0.261) 1.126 (0.180) 1.472 (0.164) 1.417 (0.542) 1.064 (0.233) 1.336 (0.

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating he

variances. 

c. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 0.0001 for model fit purposes. e. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 1 for model fit purposes.

f. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

27 

Table 1B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Reproduction Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a

Random Variances (pvalues) 

SMV 

Lindane

SMV 

Octylphenol

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin

ABC 

Octylphenol

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Pooled 

Withinb Studyc

Laboratory 

and Studyd,e

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

0.122/20.0 0.302/20.0 0.437/16.0 0.240/19.0 0.224/20.0 0.332/16.0 0.276/92.5 0.839(0.108) 2.580(<0.001) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

0.366/19.0 0.652/20.0 1.505/12.0 0.589/19.0 1.007/20.0 1.383/14.0 0.917/71.6 0.000(1.000) 2.649(<0.001) 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

0.374/19.0 1.200/20.0 2.198/12.0 1.101/19.0 1.464/20.0 1.671/14.0 1.335/75.2 0.476(0.827) 10.467(<0.001) 

Days to Brood 1 0.032/20.0 0.111/19.0 0.337/16.0 0.377/19.0 0.032/20.0 2.154/15.0 0.507/28.5 3.073(<0.001) 16.734(<0.001) Days to Brood 2 0.151/19.0 0.166/19.0 0.507/9.0 0.831/16.0 0.183/20.0 3.006/12.0 0.807/28.3 1.773(<0.001) 26.848(<0.001) 

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 0.102/19.0 0.024/19.0 0.010/9.0 0.692/16.0 0.142/20.0 1.385/12.0 0.392/29.0 1.566(0.002) 1.942(<0.001) 

Time to Mature (females) 0.111/2.0 0.000/2.0 0.342/16.0 0.111/2.0 NAh 0.000/20.0 0.113/16.2 2.601(<0.001) 2.601(<0.001) 

Total Reproductive Days for the First Two 

Broods 0.151/19.0 0.166/19.0 NA NA NA NA 0.158/37.9 0.000(1.000) 0.000(1.000) 

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction 

Day for the First Two Broods 0.003/19.0 0.012/19.0 NA NA NA NA 0.008/27.4 0.000(1.000) 0.000(1.000) 

% of Females Productively Active 1.000/2.0 22.677/2.0 22.677/2.0 22.721/2.0 1.000/2.0 22.721/2.0 15.466/8.3 30.416(0.286) 98.876(<0.001) 

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 

0.134/2.0 0.068/2.0 0.032/2.0 0.027/2.0 0.293/2.0 0.054/2.0 0.102/6.5 0.030(0.555) 0.030(0.555)) 

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 1A. 

b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

c. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. 

f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory 

freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance, 

variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). 

h. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 

i.
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

28 

Table 1C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Reproduction Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a Average Acro

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Mean 

(Standard Er

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 6.571 (0.445) 6.313 (0.717) 4.867 (0.827) 4.143 (0.421) 7.714 (0.793) 1.364 (0.432) 4.930 (1.38

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) 9.600 (0.654) 7.154 (1.234) 8.143 (1.185) 7.200 (0.541) 11.048 (1.141) 1.818 (0.903) 7.278 (1.90

Number Offspring 

(two broods) 15.950 (0.854) 13.077 (1.820) 13.286 (1.762) 11.350 (0.697) 18.762 (1.419) 4.364 (1.728) 12.606 (2.9

Days to Brood 1 14.857 (0.261) 16.333 (0.702) 17.214 (0.395) 16.095 (0.153) 19.905 (0.194) 19.286 (1.782) 17.582 (1.10Days to Brood 2 20.050 (0.185) 21.182 (0.761) 22.818 (0.615) 21.150 (0.150) 25.600 (0.266) 25.250 (2.287) 22.976 (1.30

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 5.200 (0.258) 5.364 (0.561) 5.545 (0.366) 5.000 (0.072) 5.700 (0.263) 6.500 (1.500) 5.300 (0.16

Time to Mature (females)d 9.667 (0.333) 10.667 (0.333) 11.357 (0.387) 9.333 (1.202) NAf 14.000 (0.000) 11.643 (1.17

Total Reproductive Days for the 

First Two Broods 8.050 (0.185) 9.182 (0.761) NA NA NA NA 8.375 (0.51

# of Offspring Per Female Per 

Reproduction Day for the First Two 

Broods 

1.997 (0.116) 1.754 (0.200) NA NA NA NA 1.930 (0.10

% of Females Productively Activee 100.000 (0.000) 88.571 (5.948) 83.333 (16.667) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 61.667 (7.265) 99.636 (0.57

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 1.364 (0.397) 1.183 (0.376) 0.737 (0.189) 1.434 (0.354) 1.714 (0.286) 2.029 (0.920) 1.276 (0.20

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous 

c. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 0.0001 for model fit purposes. 

e. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 1 for model fit purposes. 

f. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

29 

Table 1D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Reproduction Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a Random Variance(P-value)

Varia

Aver

SMV 

Lindane

SMV 

Octylpheno

l 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozoli

n 

ABC 

Octylpheno

l 

WLI 

Octylphen

ol 

Pooled 

Withinb Studyc Laboratory and Studyd,e 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

0.198/20.

0 0.514/15.0 0.684/14.0 0.178/20.0 0.629/20.0 0.187/10.0 0.398/73.3 0.000(1.000) 7.411(<0.001) 1.92

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

0.428/19.

0 1.524/12.0 1.405/13.0 0.293/19.0 1.302/20.0 0.815/10.0 0.961/65.1 0.711(0.541) 14.057(<0.001) 3.63

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

0.729/19.

0 3.313/12.0 3.104/13.0 0.486/19.0 2.014/20.0 2.987/10.0 2.105/57.2 1.014(0.651) 33.760(<0.001) 8.74

Days to Brood 1 0.068/20. 0 0.492/14.0 0.156/13.0 0.023/20.0 0.038/20.0 3.177/6.0 0.659/9.2 0.642(0.018) 4.571(<0.001) 1.23Days to Brood 2 0.034/19. 0 0.579/10.0 0.378/10.0 0.023/19.0 0.071/19.0 5.228/3.0 1.052/4.4 0.805(0.041) 6.175(<0.001) 1.69

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 0.066/19. 0 0.314/10.0 0.134/10.0 0.005/19.0 0.069/19.0 2.250/3.0 0.473/4.7 0.034(0.700) 0.069(0.059) 0.02

Time to Mature (females) 0.111/2.0 0.111/2.0 0.150/13.0 1.445/2.0 NAh 0.000/10.0 0.363/3.1 0.558(0.115) 4.228(<0.001) 1.38

Total Reproductive Days for the First 

Two Broods 

0.034/19.

0 0.579/10.0 NA NA NA NA 0.306/11.2 0.334(0.552) 0.334(0.552) 0.26

# of Offspring Per Female Per 

Reproduction Day for the First Two 

Broods 

0.014/19.

0 0.040/10.0 NA NA NA NA 0.027/16.9 0.003(0.945) 0.003(0.945) 0.01

% of Females Productively Active 0.000/2.0 35.377/2.0 277.787/2. 0 0.000/2.0 0.000/2.0 52.777/2.0 61.490/3.4 42.362(0.259) 42.362(0.259) 0.32

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 

0.158/2.0 0.142/2.0 0.036/2.0 0.125/2.0 0.082/2.0 0.846/2.0 0.231/4.9 0.068(0.513) 0.110(0.059) 0.04

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 1C. b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxic. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterog

The model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study an

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laborato

of freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance, S

variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). 

h. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

30 

Table 2A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Growth Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a Average A

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Mean 

(Standard Err

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.035 (0.002) 0.034 (0.002) 0.045 (0.003) 0.033 (0.002) 0.018 (0.002) 0.045 (0.003) 0.034 (0.005

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.297 (0.017) 0.083 (0.012) 0.119 (0.015) 0.200 (0.010) 0.221 (0.012) 0.597 (0.021) 0.280 (0.097

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.642 (0.025) 0.440 (0.023) 0.573 (0.025) 0.522 (0.022) 0.619 (0.029) 0.662 (0.016) 0.576 (0.034

Dry Weight (mg) (Termination) 1.098 (0.043) 0.994 (0.032) 0.905 (0.025) 1.043 (0.047) NAd 1.407 (0.043) 1.132 (0.132

Length (mm) (day 0) 1.843 (0.011) 1.703 (0.025) 1.638 (0.026) 1.641 (0.032) 1.493 (0.020) 1.916 (0.017) 1.707 (0.088Length (mm) (day 7) 4.458 (0.098) 3.469 (0.085) 3.144 (0.098) 3.572 (0.086) 3.482 (0.043) 5.550 (0.087) 4.051 (0.477

Length (mm) (day 14) 6.303 (0.056) 5.321 (0.063) 4.680 (0.075) 4.914 (0.064) 5.125 (0.054) 5.837 (0.037) 5.378 (0.277

Length (mm) (Termination) 7.421 (0.052) 7.467 (0.048) 6.311 (0.029) 6.225 (0.072) NA 8.829 (0.070) 7.524 (0.731

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneoc. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

31 

Table 2B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Growth Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a

Random Variance 

(p-value) 

Var

Ave

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol

UNT 

Lindane

UNT 

Vinclozolin

ABC 

Octylphenol

WLI 

Octylphenol Pooled Withinb Studyc 

Laboratory and 

Studyd,e 

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.000/26.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/6.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/37.3 0.000(0.023) 0.000(<0.001) 0.0

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/38.2 0.013(<0.001) 0.041(<0.001) 0.0

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.001/31.0 0.001/35.0 0.001/34.0 0.000/35.0 0.001/24.0 0.000/40.0 0.001/159.7 0.010(<0.001) 0.010(<0.001) 0.0

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 0.002/38.0 0.001/40.0 0.001/35.0 0.002/31.0 NAh 0.002/31.0 0.001/144.4 0.006(0.023) 0.054(<0.001) 0.0

Length (mm) (day 0) 0.000/134.0 0.001/44.0 0.001/44.0 0.001/33.0 0.000/44.0 0.000/44.0 0.001/170.1 0.005(<0.001) 0.032(<0.001) 0.0Length (mm) (day 7) 0.010/17.0 0.007/17.0 0.010/17.0 0.007/17.0 0.002/17.0 0.008/17.0 0.007/90.4 0.282(<0.001) 0.987(<0.001) 0.2

Length (mm) (day 14) 0.003/31.0 0.004/35.0 0.006/34.0 0.004/35.0 0.003/24.0 0.001/40.0 0.004/172.6 0.252(<0.001) 0.371(<0.001) 0.0

Length (mm) (Termination) 0.003/38.0 0.002/40.0 0.001/35.0 0.005/31.0 NA 0.005/31.0 0.003/127.0 0.000(1.000) 1.601(<0.001) 0.5

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 2A. 

b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxi

c. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heteroge

The model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. 

f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laborator

of freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance, S

variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). h. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

32 

Table 2C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Growth Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a Average Acro

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Mean 

(Standard Error)b

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.029 (0.003) 0.023 (0.001) 0.022 (0.001) 0.058 (0.017) 0.016 (0.003) 0.044 (0.006) 0.028 (0.004) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.380 (0.047) 0.252 (0.012) 0.247 (0.014) NAc 0.276 (0.031) 0.340 (0.018) 0.291 (0.024) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.805 (0.042) 0.560 (0.030) 0.719 (0.027) 0.602 (0.018) 0.797 (0.044) 0.847 (0.029) 0.719 (0.048) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 1.046 (0.039) 1.066 (0.051) 1.030 (0.047) 0.931 (0.034) NAd 1.394 (0.049) 1.136 (0.128) 

Length (mm) (day 0) 1.633 (0.032) 1.607 (0.026) 1.482 (0.015) 1.340 (0.018) 1.359 (0.014) 1.889 (0.030) 1.568 (0.118) Length (mm) (day 7) 4.715 (0.061) 4.446 (0.093) 3.956 (0.080) NA 3.778 (0.112) 5.200 (0.140) 4.379 (0.317) 

Length (mm) (day 14) 6.388 (0.073) 6.057 (0.084) 5.641 (0.042) 5.276 (0.037) 5.449 (0.058) 8.040 (0.102) 6.286 (0.605) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination) 7.403 (0.040) 7.311 (0.071) 6.273 (0.059) 6.100 (0.049) NA 8.207 (0.209) 7.237 (0.585) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heteroge

c. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

33 

Table 2D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Growth Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a Random Variance (p-value) 

Va

Av

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol

UNT 

Lindane

UNT 

Vinclozolin

ABC 

Octylphenol

WLI 

Octylphenol Pooled Withinb Studyc 

Laboratory 

and Studyd,e 

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.000/2.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/2.0 0.000/3.0 0.000/10.9 0.000(0.248) 0.000(0.003) 0.

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.002/8.0 0.000/8.0 0.000/8.0 NAh 0.001/8.0 0.000/5.0 0.001/19.3 0.007(0.047) 0.007(0.047) 0.

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.002/17.0 0.001/18.0 0.001/21.0 0.000/28.0 0.002/23.0 0.001/14.0 0.001/88.9 0.017(<0.001) 0.017(<0.001) 0.

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 0.002/36.0 0.003/28.0 0.002/26.0 0.001/33.0 NA 0.002/19.0 0.002/117.9 0.001(0.627) 0.048(<0.001) 0.

Length (mm) (day 0) 0.001/14.0 0.001/44.0 0.000/44.0 0.000/44.0 0.000/14.0 0.001/18.0 0.001/81.7 0.005(<0.001) 0.057(<0.001) 0.Length (mm) (day 7) 0.004/17.0 0.009/17.0 0.006/17.0 NA 0.013/17.0 0.020/11.0 0.010/50.0 0.030(0.079) 0.397(<0.001) 0.

Length (mm) (day 14) 0.005/17.0 0.007/18.0 0.002/21.0 0.001/28.0 0.003/23.0 0.010/14.0 0.005/66.8 0.057(<0.001) 1.472(<0.001) 0.

Length (mm) (Termination) 0.002/36.0 0.005/28.0 0.004/25.0 0.002/33.0 NA 0.044/19.0 0.011/31.0 0.007(0.148) 1.013(<0.001) 0.

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 2C. 

b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

c. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. 

f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory 

freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance, Si2 an

and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). 

h. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

34 

Table 3A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Survival Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a Average Acro

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

Mean 

(Standard Error)b

Reproduction 

Survival Rate 

(%) (day 7)d

96.667 (3.334) 91.667 (6.009) 96.667 (1.667) 100.000 (0.000) 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 98.912 (0.772) 

Reproduction 

Survival Rate

(%) (day 14) 

89.027 (3.584) 86.667 (1.667) 78.333 (1.667) 85.000 (2.887) 97.778 (2.222) 91.667 (4.410) 89.017 (3.686) 

Reproduction 

Survival Rate

(%) 

(Termination) 

75.784 (5.435) 73.000 (5.000) 77.302 (5.808) 72.309 (4.415) 97.619 (2.381) 69.583 (1.969) 78.980 (6.442) 

Total Survival 

Rate (%) 

(day 7) d

96.667 (3.334) 94.333 (2.333) 96.667 (2.205) 100.000 (0.000) NAe 100.000 (0.000) 98.392 (1.196) 

Total Survival 

Ratea (%) 

(day 14)

89.638 (2.162) 86.000 (3.606) 80.392 (6.429) 88.235 (1.698) NA 95.098 (2.594) 90.110 (2.117) 

Total Survival 

Rate (%) 

(Termination) 

75.784 (5.435) 79.000 (5.196) NA NA NA NA 77.464 (3.756) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogec. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 1 for model fit purposes.

e. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

35 

Table 3B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Survival Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a Random Variance (p-value) 

Vari

Aver

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin

ABC 

Octylphenol

WLI 

Octylphenol Pooled Withinb Studyc 

Laboratory and 

Studyd,e 

Reproduction 

Survival Rate (%) 

(day 7) 

11.113/2.0 36.109/2.0 2.778/2.0 0.000/2.0 4.938/2.0 0.000/2.0 9.490/4.4 3.158(0.373) 3.158(0.373) 0.5

Reproduction 

Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14) 

12.846/2.0 2.778/2.0 2.778/2.0 8.333/2.0 4.938/2.0 19.446/2.0 8.520/8.0 7.532(0.331) 50.362(<0.001) 13.5

Reproduction 

Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) 

29.535/2.0 24.999/2.0 33.735/2.0 19.492/2.0 5.669/2.0 3.878/2.0 19.551/9.0 0.000(1.000) 157.216(<0.001) 41.4

Total Survival Rate 

(%) (day 7) 

11.113/2.0 5.443/2.0 4.862/2.0 0.000/2.0 NAh 0.000/2.0 4.684/6.1 1.291(0.736) 3.357(0.639) 1.4

Total Survival 

Ratea (%) (day 14) 

4.675/2.0 13.000/2.0 41.329/2.0 2.883/2.0 NA 6.729/2.0 13.723/4.8 0.000(1.000) 9.369(0.229) 4.4

Total Survival Rate

(%) (Termination) 

29.535/2.0 27.000/2.0 NA NA NA NA 28.267/4.0 0.000(1.000) 0.000(1.000) 14.1

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 3A. 

b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

c. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. 

f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory 

freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance, Si2 an

and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

36 

Table 3C. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Means and Standard Errors for Contr

Laboratory and Study for Survival Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Individual Study Mean (Standard Error)a Ave

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol 

(Stan

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) 

(day 7)d

97.778 (2.222) 95.333 (2.333) 97.778 (2.222) 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 88.533 (4.276) 97

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14)d

95.956 (2.025) 89.333 (5.812) 84.444 (8.012) 93.333 (3.849) 100.000 (0.000) 86.325 (3.557) 93

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) 

92.308 (4.441) 77.000 (9.291) 66.667 (8.333) 72.639 (11.427) 93.333 (3.849) 61.640 (8.328) 79

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 7) 

95.833 (2.406) 92.000 (1.000) 98.889 (1.111) 96.444 (1.937) NAe 89.103 (4.617) 94

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14) 

91.667 (4.167) 86.000 (3.000) 86.111 (3.675) 80.889 (13.026) NA 90.103 (1.245) 89

Total Survival Rate

(%) (Termination) 

92.308 (4.441) 78.333 (3.844) NA NA NA NA 85

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each study were pooled across all samples within the control groups for each study. 

b. Averages and standard errors across studies were based on random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous 

c. CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of study with measurements. 

d. When fitting the model standard error 0 was replaced with 1 for model fit purposes.

e. “NA” denotes that endpoint is not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

37 

Table 3D. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Ra

and Study for Reproduction Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Within Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)a Random Variance/(p-valu

SMV 

Lindane 

SMV 

Octylphenol 

UNT 

Lindane 

UNT 

Vinclozolin 

ABC 

Octylphenol 

WLI 

Octylphenol Pooled Withinb Studyc 

Laboratory 

Studyd,

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7) 4.938/2.0 5.443/2.0 4.938/2.0 4.938/2.0 0.000/2.0 18.288/2.0 6.591/7.1 0.000(1.000) 5.326(0.17

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14) 4.100/2.0 33.775/2.0 64.200/2.0 14.816/2.0 0.000/2.0 12.653/2.0 21.757/6.0 2.377(0.923) 26.404(0.0

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination) 19.722/2.0 86.328/2.0 69.447/2.0 130.574/2.0 14.816/2.0 69.360/2.0 65.041/8.8 23.524(0.714) 181.267(0.0

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 7) 5.788/2.0 1.000/2.0 1.235/2.0 3.752/2.0 NAh 21.317/2.0 6.618/4.3 1.905(0.594) 12.047(<0.0

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14) 17.362/2.0 8.999/2.0 13.504/2.0 169.681/2.0 NA 1.549/2.0 42.219/3.0 1.018(0.953) 1.018(0.95

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) 19.722/2.0 14.776/2.0 NA NA NA NA 17.249/3.9 80.401(0.087) 80.401(0.0

a. The within study variance for each laboratory is the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reported in Table 3C. 

b. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s appc. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating hete

variances. The model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

d. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study 

random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. The p-values are based on likelihood ratio test. 

e. If the estimated study and laboratory variance is less than the study only variance, then the study variance is used as the study and laboratory variance. 

f. Variances for the averages were calculated as the square of the standard error of the pooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among labor

Degrees of freedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random 

reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

g. P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within study variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-study variance). 

h. “NA” denotes that IS not included in the study dataset. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

38 

Table 4A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Reproductive Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Predictio

Pooled Withina Random Studyb

Random Lab

and Studyc Within Studyd

Between St

Within Labo

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 5.430(0.780) 0.276/92.5 0.839/1.1 2.580/2.3 (3.128,7.731) (1.780,9.0

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) 7.121(0.915) 0.917/71.6 0.000/1.0 2.649/1.9 (4.281,9.961) (4.281,9.9

Number Offspring 

(two broods) 12.448(1.679) 1.335/75.2 0.476/0.2 10.467/2.6 (7.636,17.259) (7.164,17.7

Days to Brood 1 19.398(2.023) 0.507/28.5 3.073/1.8 16.734/3.1 (13.537,25.258) (12.512,26.Days to Brood 2 25.659(2.608) 0.807/28.3 1.773/1.4 26.848/2.9 (17.897,33.422) (17.832,33.

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 6.030(0.632) 0.392/29.0 1.566/1.6 1.942/3.5 (4.154,7.907) (1.529,10.5

Time to Mature (females) 12.387(0.677) 0.113/16.2 2.601/1.8 2.188/3.6 (10.548,14.227) (6.267,18.5

Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods 9.343(0.281) 0.158/37.9 0.000/1.0 0.000/1.0 (8.371,10.314) (8.371,10.3

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods 1.580(0.049) 0.008/27.4 0.000/1.0 0.000/1.0 (1.378,1.782) (1.378,1.7

% of Females Productively Active 91.515(4.905) 15.466/8.3 30.416/0.8 98.876/3.0 (77.308, 100.000) (67.970, 100

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 1.336(0.119) 0.102/6.5 0.030/0.3 0.030/0.3 (0.557,2.116) (0.336,2.3

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within study variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximation 

b. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degrees of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributismaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

 approximation. e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

freedom\approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

39 

Table 4B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Reproductive Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Prediction 

Pooled Withina Random Studyb

Random Lab

and Studyc Within Studyd

Between Stu

Within Labor

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 4.930(1.386) 0.398/73.3 0.000/1.0 7.411/2.8 (0.886,8.975) (0.886,8.97

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) 7.278(1.906) 0.961/65.1 0.711/0.4 14.057/2.8 (1.798,12.757) (1.411,13.1

Number Offspring 

(two broods) 12.606(2.958) 2.105/57.2 1.014/0.2 33.760/2.8 (4.047,21.164) (3.706,21.5

Days to Brood 1 17.582(1.109) 0.659/9.2 0.642/1.3 4.571/2.6 (14.349,20.814) (13.894,21.2Days to Brood 2 22.976(1.301) 1.052/4.4 0.805/1.2 6.175/2.5 (19.041,26.911) (18.593,27.3

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 5.300(0.166) 0.473/4.7 0.034/0.1 0.069/1.0 (3.511,7.089) (3.430,7.17

Time to Mature (females) 11.643(1.176) 0.363/3.1 0.558/0.9 4.228/2.1 (7.841,15.444) (7.595,15.6

Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods 8.375(0.512) 0.306/11.2 0.334/0.3 0.334/0.3 (6.841,9.910) (4.165,12.5

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day 

for the First Two Broods 1.930(0.109) 0.027/16.9 0.003/0.0 0.003/0.0 (1.529,2.331) (0.985,2.87

% of Females Productively Active 99.636(0.573) 61.490/3.4 42.362/0.5 42.362/0.5 (76.161, 100.000) (62.624, 100.

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females) 1.276(0.200) 0.231/4.9 0.068/0.3 0.110/1.1 (0.029,2.524) (0.000,2.84

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximb. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributio

smaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

approximation. 

e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

40 

Table 5A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Growth Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Prediction Inte

Pooled Withina Random Studyb

Random Lab 

and Studyc Within Studyd

Between Studie

Within Laborator

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.034(0.005) 0.000/37.3 0.000/1.5 0.000/3.2 (0.000,0.071) (0.009,0.060) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.280(0.097) 0.000/38.2 0.013/1.9 0.041/3.6 (0.002,0.558) (0.000,0.676) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.576(0.034) 0.001/159.7 0.010/1.8 0.010/1.8 (0.484,0.669) (0.179,0.974) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 

1.132(0.132) 0.001/144.4 0.006/1.3 0.054/2.1 (0.652,1.611) (0.681,1.582) 

Length (mm) (day 0) 1.707(0.088) 0.001/170.1 0.005/1.6 0.032/3.2 (1.448,1.965) (1.417,1.996) Length (mm) (day 7) 4.051(0.477) 0.007/90.4 0.282/1.9 0.987/3.5 (2.675,5.427) (2.168,5.934) 

Length (mm) (day 14) 5.378(0.277) 0.004/172.6 0.252/1.9 0.371/4.1 (4.625,6.131) (3.615,7.141) 

Length (mm) (Termination) 7.524(0.731) 0.003/127.0 0.000/1.0 1.601/2.0 (4.408,10.639) (4.408,10.639) 

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

b. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributio

smaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

approximation. 

e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

41 

Table 5B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Growth Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Prediction Inte

Pooled Withina Random Studyb

Random Lab 

and Studyc Within Studyd

Between Studies 

Within Laboratory

Dry Weight (mg) (day 0) 0.028(0.004) 0.000/10.9 0.000/0.1 0.000/3.4 (0.008,0.048) (0.000,1.178) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day7) 0.291(0.024) 0.001/19.3 0.007/0.7 0.007/0.7 (0.214,0.368) (0.000,1.367) 

Dry Weight (mg) (day 14) 0.719(0.048) 0.001/88.9 0.017/1.8 0.017/1.8 (0.590,0.848) (0.220,1.218) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 

1.136(0.128) 0.002/117.9 0.001/0.2 0.048/1.9 (0.668,1.605) (0.678,1.595) 

Length (mm) (day 0) 1.568(0.118) 0.001/81.7 0.005/1.6 0.057/3.1 (1.210,1.925) (1.207,1.929) Length (mm) (day 7) 4.379(0.317) 0.010/50.0 0.030/0.7 0.397/2.9 (3.425,5.333) (3.364,5.394) 

Length (mm) (day 14) 6.286(0.605) 0.005/66.8 0.057/1.8 1.472/3.0 (4.399,8.173) (4.474,8.098) 

Length (mm) (Termination) 7.237(0.585) 0.011/31.0 0.007/0.9 1.013/1.9 (4.820,9.654) (4.874,9.600) 

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

b. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributio

smaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

approximation. 

e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

42 

Table 6A. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Survival Endpoints and F0 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Predictio

Pooled Withina Random Studyb

Random Lab

and Studyc Within Studyd

Between 

With

Labora

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 98.912(0.772) 9.490/4.4 3.158/0.4 3.158/0.4 (90.745,100.000) (88.705,1

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (day 14)c 89.017(3.686) 8.520/8.0 7.532/0.6 50.362/2.6 (78.135,99.900) (75.355,1

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 78.980(6.442) 19.551/9.0 0.000/1.0 157.216/2.7 (60.374,97.585) (60.374,

Total Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 98.392(1.196) 4.684/6.1 1.291/0.1 3.357/1.0 (92.822,100.000) (89.546,1

Total Survival Ratea (%) (day 14) c 90.110(2.117) 13.723/4.8 0.000/1.0 9.369/1.0 (80.166,100.000) (80.166,1

Total Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 77.464(3.756) 28.267/4.0 0.000/1.0 0.000/1.0 (62.150,92.778) (62.150,

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

b. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributio

smaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

approximation. 

e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

43 

Table 6B. Interlab Analysis for Control Mysid Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals Within Study

Laboratory, and Between Studies and Laboratories for Survival Endpoints and F1 Generation 

Parameter 

Average 

Mean 

(Std. Error) 

Variance (Degree of Freedom) 95 % Predictio

Pooled Withina

Random 

Studyb

Random Lab

and Studyc Within Studyd

Betwee

W

Labo

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 97.367(1.482) 6.591/7.1 0.000/1.0 5.326/1.1 (90.828,100.000) (90.828

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (day 14)c 93.628(2.800) 21.757/6.0 2.377/0.0 26.404/2.0 (81.464,100.000) (71.857

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 79.054(7.150) 65.041/8.8 23.524/0.1 181.267/2.3 (55.579,100.000) (44.935

Total Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 94.614(2.236) 6.618/4.3 1.905/0.3 12.047/1.2 (86.557,100.000) (85.600

Total Survival Ratea (%) (day 14) c 89.107(1.220) 42.219/3.0 1.018/0.0 1.018/0.0 (68.952,100.000) (65.524

Total Survival Rate (%) (Termination) 85.144(6.985) 17.249/3.9 80.401/0.7 80.401/0.7 (68.785,100.000) (37.843

a. Pooled Within is the unweighted average of the within laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approxim

b. Variance between study is based a random effect model with laboratory as a fixed effect and study and laboratory treated as random effect, incorporating heterogen

model is applied to the two laboratories SMV and UNT, which each have two studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. 

c. Random study and laboratory variance is the sum of the random laboratory and random study variances, as estimated using a random effects model with study and 

effects, incorporating heterogeneous within study variances. The model is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distributio

smaller than random study, then random study is used in its place. 

d. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), where υ is degree of freedom as calculate

approximation. 

e. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study), where υ is degree of freed

Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

f. The prediction interval for within laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ √((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random study and laboratory), where υ is 

using Satterthwaite’s approximation. 

g. In general the 95% prediction intervals are in an increasing order from within lab to between study to between study and laboratory. However, this order is not held 

approximation. 

h. The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative. For endpoints measured in “%’, the upper limits are truncated at 100%
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

44 

Table 7A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Reproduction Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

First Brood Size 5.4298 0.52566 21 2.1344 

Second Brood Size 7.1212 0.95759 21 3.8882 

First Two Brood Sizes 12.4476 1.15534 21 4.6912 

Days to First Brood 19.3977 0.71195 21 2.8908 

Days to Second Brood 25.6595 0.89845 21 3.6481 

Days between Two Broods 6.0302 0.62645 21 2.5436 Days to Maturity (females) 12.3873 0.33591 21 1.3639 

Total Reproductive Days for First Two Broods 9.3427 0.39769 21 1.6148 

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day for the 

First Two Broods 1.5801 0.08762 21 0.3558 

% of Females Productively Active 91.5148 3.93264 3 20.9175 

Sex Ratio (males/females) 1.3364 0.31860 3 1.6946 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w

f. Estimated upper limits above 100% are labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant higher % of Females Productively Active than 

size, variability, and degrees of freedom. 

g. Estimated lower limit with a negative value is labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant lower sex ratio than control under the cur

degrees of freedom. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

45 

Table 7B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Reproduction Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

First Brood Size 4.9304 0.63117 21 2.5628 

Second Brood Size 7.2776 0.98037 21 3.9807 

First Two Brood Sizes 12.6056 1.45100 21 5.8917 

Days to First Brood 17.5818 0.81181 21 3.2963 

Days to Second Brood 22.9763 1.02569 21 4.1647 

Days between Two Broods 5.2999 0.68783 21 2.7929 Days to Maturity (females) 11.6428 0.60273 21 2.4473 

Total Reproductive Days for First Two Broods 8.3755 0.55353 21 2.2476 

# of Offspring Per Female Per Reproduction Day 

for the First Two Broods 

1.9302 0.16371 21 0.6647 

% of Females Productively Active 99.6364 7.84157 3 41.7089 

Sex Ratio (males/females) 1.2764 0.48100 3 2.5584 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w

f. Estimated upper limits above 100% are labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant higher % of Females Productively Active than 

size, variability, and degrees of freedom. 

g. Estimated lower limit with a negative value is labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant lower sex ratio than control under the cur

degrees of freedom.. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

46 

Table 8A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Growth Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

Dry Weight Day 0 0.03410 0.002392 9 0.01010 Dry Weight Day 7 0.28028 0.014960 9 0.06314 

Dry Weight Day 14 0.57641 0.023698 36 0.09521 

Dry Weight Termination 1.13189 0.038719 36 0.15555 

Length Day 0 1.70655 0.022877 45 0.09164 Length Day 7 4.05064 0.084795 18 0.34583 

Length Day 14 5.37834 0.059332 36 0.23836 

Length Termination 7.52366 0.056584 36 0.22732 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

47 

Table 8B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Growth Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

Dry Weight Day 0 0.02787 0.00743 9 0.03136 Dry Weight Day 7 0.29073 0.02775 9 0.11711 

Dry Weight Day 14 0.71917 0.03283 22 0.13316 

Dry Weight Termination 1.13641 0.04446 26 0.17965 

Length Day 0 1.56751 0.02359 45 0.09451 Length Day 7 4.37914 0.10107 18 0.41220 

Length Day 14 6.28599 0.06988 22 0.28341 

Length Termination 7.23710 0.10609 26 0.42864 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w

f. Estimated lower limit with a negative value is labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant lower value than control under the curren

degrees of freedom. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

48 

Table 9A. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Survival Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

Reproduction Survival rate day 7 98.9118 3.08054 3 16.3852 

Reproduction Survival rate day 14 89.0174 2.91893 3 15.5256 

Reproduction Survival rate Termination 78.9797 4.42168 3 23.5187 

Total Survival rate day 7 98.3917 2.16416 3 11.5110 

Total Survival rate day 14 90.1102 3.70450 3 19.7040 

Total Survival rate Termination 77.4641 5.31671 3 28.2793 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w

f. Estimated upper limits above 100% are labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant higher survival rate than control under the curre

degrees of freedom. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

49 

Table 9B. Alternatives that Can be Detected with 80 % Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Mys

Generation, Survival Endpoints 

Parameter 

Mean 

(Control)a

Standard Error 

(Control)b

Sample Size 

Per Groupc

Detection 

Distanced

Reproduction Survival rate day 7 97.3666 2.56729 3 13.6553 

Reproduction Survival rate day 14 93.6278 4.66446 3 24.8100 

Reproduction Survival rate Termination 79.0539 8.06482 3 42.8963 

Total Survival rate day 7 94.6138 2.57264 3 13.6837 

Total Survival rate day 14 89.1070 6.49764 3 34.5605 

Total Survival rate Termination 85.1435 4.15323 3 22.0908 

a. Weighted mean across studies for control group as presented in the interlaboratory analysis of control data. b. Square root of pooled within run variances for control group as presented in the inter-lab analysis of control data. 

c. Control group sample size and projected sample sizes per concentration group. 

d. Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of significance with 80% power. 

e. A concentration group mean value below the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly different from control group at the 5% level w

f. Estimated upper limits above 100% are labeled as “NA”, which indicates that it is impossible to detect a significant higher survival rate than control under the 

and degrees of freedom.
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

50 

Table 10A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Analysis Results for Reproduction 

Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, Generation: F0a,b,c

Parameters 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV WLI 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Time to Mature 

(females) 

Decreasing trend 

for the two highest 

concentration 

groups 

 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 

Increasing trends 

for the two highest 

concentration 

groups 

Group 6(↑) 

Groups 

3(↓) & 

4(↓) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) Group 5(↓)

Group 

2(↓), 

3(↓), 4(↓) 

& 5(↓) 

A decreasing trend 

for the highest 

concentration group 

Number Offspring (two 

broods) Group 5(↑) 

Groups 

2(↓) and 

3(↓), 5(↓) 

and 6(↓) 

Group 

4(↓) & 

5(↓) 

A decreasing trend 

for the highest 

concentration group 

Days to Brood 1 Groups 3(↓), 5(↓) 

and 6(↓) 

Decreasing trend 

for the two highest 

concentration 

groups 

 Group 2(↓)

Increasing trend for 

the two highest 

concentration 

groups 

Days to Brood 2 Groups 3(↓) and 

5(↓) Group 6(↓) 

Days Between Broods 1 

and 2 

Groups 

2(↑) & 

5(↑) 

Total Reproductive 

Days for the First Two 

Broods 

Groups 3(↓) and 

5(↓) NA NA NA NA 

# of Offspring Per 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods 

Increasing trends 

for the two highest 

concentration 

groups 

NA NA NA NA 

% of Females 

Productively Active 

Decreasing trend 

for the highest 

concentration 

group 

Sex Ratio 

(males/females) Group 6(↑) 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV, ABC and WLI for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are 

available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”. 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

51 

Table 10B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by Generation 

for Reproduction Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, 

Generation: F1 a,b,c

Parameter 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Time to Mature 

(females) NA 

Number Offspring (brood 1) Groups 4(↓) 

and 5(↓) 

Decreasing trends for the 

highest concentration 

group 

Number Offspring (brood 2) Group 4(↓) 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration 

group 

Number Offspring (two broods) Groups 3(↓) 

and 4(↓) Group 2(↑) 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration 

group 

Days to Brood 1 Groups 2(↑), 

3(↑) and 4(↑) 

Days to Brood 2 Group 3(↑) 

Increasing trend for the 

highest concentration 

group 

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 Group 6(↑) 

Total Reproductive Days for the 

First Two Broods Group 3(↑) NA NA NA 

# of Offspring Per Female Per 

Reproduction Day for the First 

Two Broods8

Groups 3(↓) 

and 4(↓) NA NA NA 

% of Females Productively Active 

Sex Ratio 

(males/females) 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV and ABC for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, 

inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”.
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

52 

Table 11A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by Generation 

for Growth Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, Generation: 

F0 a,b,c

Parameter 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV WLI 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Dry 

Weight(mg) 

(day 7) 

Group 6(↑) 

Increasing 

trend for the 

two highest 

concentration 

groups 

Group 3(↓) 

Dry 

Weight(mg) 

(day 14) 

Increasing 

trend for the 

three highest 

concentration 

groups 

Groups 2(↑) 

& 6(↑) 

Decreasing 

trend for the 

two highest 

concentration 

groups 

 Group 6(↓) 

Dry Weight 

(mg) 

(Termination) 

Group 5(↑) 

Decreasing 

trend for the 

highest 

concentration 

group 

Length (mm) 

(day 7) 

Groups 5(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

Groups 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑), 

5(↑) & 6(↑) 

Decreasing 

trend for the 

two highest 

concentration 

groups 

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 

Groups 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑), 5(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

Increasing 

trends for 

the four 

highest 

groups 

Increasing 

trends for all 

concentration 

groups 

Groups 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑), 5(↑) 

& 6(↑) 

Groups 2(↑) 

and 4(↑) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination) Group 5(↑) 

Decreasing 

trends for the 

three highest 

concentration 

groups 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV, ABC and WLI for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are 

available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

53 

Table 11B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by Generation 

for Growth Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, Generation: 

F1 a,b,c

Parameters 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Dry Weight(mg) 

(day 0) 

Dry Weight(mg) 

(day 7) 

Dry Weight(mg) 

(day 14) 

Groups 

3(↓) and 

4(↓) 

 Group 6(↓) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) NA 

Length (mm) 

(day 0) 

Increasing trend for 

the highest 

concentration group

Length (mm) 

(day 7) 

Group 

6(↓) 

Increasing 

concentration trends 

for the two highest 

concentration groups. 

 Groups 2(↑) & 5(↑) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 

Groups 

3(↓) and 

4(↓) 

Group 3(↓) 

Increasing 

concentration trends 

for the two highest 

concentration groups. 

Length (mm) 

(Termination) 

Groups 

4(↓) and 

5(↑) 

Group 6(↑) NA 

Increasing trend for 

the highest four 

concentration 

groups 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV and ABC for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, 

inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

54 

Table 12A. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by Generation 

for Survival Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, Generation: 

F0 a,b,c

Parameters 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV WLI

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7) 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration group

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination) 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration group 

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 7) 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration group

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14) NA NA 

Decreasing trend for the 

highest concentration group

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) NA NA 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV, ABC and WLI for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are 

available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”. 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

55 

Table 12B. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results by Generation 

for Survival Endpoints, Comparisons between Control and Test Chemicals, Generation: 

F1 a,b,c

Parameters 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7) Group 6(↓) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14) Group 6(↓) 

Decreasing trend for 

the highest 

concentration group 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) 

(Termination) 

Decreasing for the 

highest concentration 

group 

Total Survival Rate 

(%) (day 7) 

Decreasing trend for 

the highest 

concentration group 

NA 

Total Survival Rate 

(%) (day 14) Group 6(↓) NA Group 5(↓) 

Total Survival Rate 

(%) (Termination) NA NA 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control group is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory and inter-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If the 

data are not available for the intra-laboratory analysis, it is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” Less than control. 

“↑” Greater than control 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane, and SMV and ABC for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, 

inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a “NA”. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

56 

Table 13. Summary of Intra-Laboratory Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results between 

Generations for Reproduction Endpoints, Comparison between Two Generations a,b,c

Parameter 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV Across Laboratoriesd UNT 

Time to Mature (females) Group 2(↓) 

Number Offspring (brood 1) Groups 4(↓) 

and 5(↓) Group 5 (↓) Group 2(↑) Groups 3(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

Number Offspring (brood 2) Group 4(↓) Groups 2(↑) 

and 5(↑) Groups 2(↑) and 5(↑) Group 3(↑) 

Number Offspring (two broods) 

Groups 3(↓), 

4(↓), and 

5(↓) 

Groups 2(↑) 

and 5(↑) Groups 2(↑) and 5(↑) Groups 2(↑) 

and 3(↑) 

Days to Brood 1 

Groups 3(↑), 

4(↑), and 

5(↑) 

Group 2(↓) 

Groups 1(↓), 

3(↓), 4(↓), and 

6(↓) 

Days to Brood 2 Groups 3(↑) 

and 5(↑) 

Groups 

2(↓) and 

5(↓) 

Groups 1(↓), 

4(↓), 5(↓) and 

6(↓) 

A decreasing trend in 

differences for the highest 

concentration 

group 

Group 5(↓) 

Days Between Broods 1 and 2 

Total Reproductive Days for the 

First Two Broods 

Groups 3(↑) 

and 5(↑) NA NA 

# of Offspring Per Female Per 

Reproduction Day for the First 

Two Broods8

Groups 3(↓), 

4(↓) and 5(↓) NA Groups 2(↑), 

4(↑), 5(↑), 6(↑) NA 

% of Females Productively Active Group 6(↑) 

Sex Ratio (males/females) 

Groups 2(↓) 

and 3(↓) 

Group 4(↓), 

5(↓) and 6(↓) 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If only one generation of 

the data were available, comparisons of two generation was not performed and is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane for both generation, and SMV, ABC and WLI for F0 generation and SMV and 

ABC for the F1 generation for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a 

“NA”. 

 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

57 

Table 14. Statistical Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results between Generations for Growth 

Endpoints, Comparison between Two Generations a,b,c

Parameter 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin 

SMV UNT 

Across 

Laboratoriesd SMV 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Dry Weight(mg) (day 

7) Group 6(↑) Groups 1(↑), 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑) and 6(↑) 

Dry Weight(mg) (day 

14) 

Groups 1(↑), 

2(↑), 4(↑), 

5(↓) and 6(↑) 

Groups 1(↑), 

2(↑), 3(↑), 

4(↑) and 5(↑) 

A decreasing trend 

in differences (F1-

F0) for the highest 

concentration 

group 

Groups 3(↑), 4(↑) 

and 5(↑) 

Groups 4(↑), 5(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 

Groups 2(↓) 

and 5(↓) Group 6(↑) 

Length (mm) (day 7) 

Groups 1(↑), 

2(↑), 3(↓), 

4(↑) and 5(↑) 

Groups 1(↑), 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑), 5(↑) and 

6(↑) 

Length (mm) (day 

14) 

Groups 3(↓), 

4(↓) and 5(↓) 

Groups 1(↑), 

2(↑) and 4(↑) 

Groups 1(↑), 2(↑), 

3(↑), 4(↑), 5(↑) and 

6(↑) 

Group 5(↑) Group 6(↑) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination) 

Groups 3(↓) 

and 6(↑) 

Groups 2(↓), 3(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If only one generation of 

the data were available, comparisons of two generation was not performed and is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane for both generation, and SMV, ABC and WLI for F0 generation and SMV and 

ABC for the F1 generation for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a 

“NA”. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

58 

Table 15. Statistical Analysis and Inter-Laboratory Results between Generations for Survival 

Endpoints, Comparison between Two Generations a,b,c

Parameter 

Lindane Octylphenol Vinclozolin

SMV UNT Across Laboratoriesd SMV 

Across 

Laboratoriesd UNT 

Reproduction Survival Rate 

(%) (day 7) 

Group 

4(↑) Group 6(↓) 

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) 

(day 14) 

Group 

4(↑) Group 5(↓)

Reproduction Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) 

Group 

1(↑) 

Groups 2(↑) 

and 6(↑) 

Total Survival Rate (%) (day 7) 

A decreasing trend in 

differences (F1-F0) for 

the highest 

concentration 

group 

 Group 5(↓)

Total Survival Rate (%) (day 

14) 

Group 

4(↑) Group 6(↓) Group 5(↓)

Total Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination) NA NA NA 

a. Test concentration groups are group 2 to 6 and control is group 1. 

b. Statistical analysis results are based on the intra-laboratory analysis. Significant findings are summarized in the table. If only one generation of 

the data were available, comparisons of two generation was not performed and is marked with a “NA”. 

c. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 

d. The inter-laboratory analysis includes SMV, UNT for lindane for both generation, and SMV, ABC and WLI for F0 generation and SMV and 

ABC for the F1 generation for octylphenol. If only one laboratory data are available, inter-laboratory analysis is not performed and marked with a 

“NA”. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

59 

Table 16A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

SMV 5.476 (0.349) 6.619 (0.623) 6.381 (0.537) 6.381 (0.445) 8.048 (0.362) 6.667 (0.427) 

UNT 5.941 (0.661) 6.550 (0.573) 5.450 (0.578) 5.222 (0.461) 6.000 (0.463) 8.100 (0.533) 

Average 5.665 (0.639) 6.583 (0.679) 5.928 (0.662) 5.807 (0.621) 7.082 (0.606) 7.338 (0.631) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

SMV 8.800 (0.605) 10.444 (0.506) 8.762 (0.752) 7.947 (1.010) 10.556 (0.764) 9.000 (1.073) 

UNT 6.308 (1.227) 8.421 (1.168) 8.684 (1.017) 8.588 (0.758) 6.667 (1.022) 7.286 (2.135) 

Average 7.778 (1.097) 9.583 (1.067) 8.636 (1.098) 8.404 (1.098) 8.816 (1.101) 8.267 (1.366) 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

SMV 14.300 (0.612) 17.333 (1.032) 15.143 (1.161) 14.158 (0.956) 18.611 (0.950) 16.125 (1.235)

UNT 12.077 (1.483) 14.947 (1.559) 14.263 (1.172) 13.765 (0.678) 12.467 (1.203) 16.286 (2.974)

Average 13.277 (1.466) 16.214 (1.564) 14.701 (1.522) 14.030 (1.403) 15.769 (1.487) 15.694 (1.810)

Days to Brood 1

SMV 15.810 (0.178) 16.048 (0.428) 15.150 (0.412) 15.333 (0.252) 14.190 (0.203) 15.238 (0.266)

UNT 19.294 (0.580) 18.389 (0.915) 18.167 (0.305) 18.389 (0.429) 17.591 (0.382) 16.421 (0.353)

Average 17.429 (1.443) 17.291 (1.485) 16.673 (1.441) 16.836 (1.438) 15.844 (1.433) 15.880 (1.435)

Days to Brood 2 

SMV 21.200 (0.388) 20.611 (0.372) 20.250 (0.396) 20.389 (0.293) 19.444 (0.246) 20.929 (0.549)

UNT 23.800 (0.712) 24.643 (0.617) 23.750 (0.371) 23.000 (0.181) 23.400 (0.340) 19.800 (0.663)

Average 22.493 (1.587) 22.571 (1.577) 22.003 (1.561) 21.696 (1.546) 21.408 (1.551) 20.433 (1.596)

Days Between Broods 1 

and 2

SMV 5.400 (0.320) 4.500 (0.390) 5.100 (0.100) 5.000 (0.000) 5.278 (0.226) 6.154 (0.608) 

UNT 4.900 (0.100) 6.067 (0.483) 5.824 (0.456) 5.125 (0.272) 5.667 (0.497) 5.667 (1.706) 

Average 5.073 (0.278) 5.179 (0.386) 5.303 (0.296) 5.051 (0.264) 5.405 (0.334) 6.101 (0.644) 

Time to Mature 

(females)

SMV 10.333 (0.333) 9.667 (0.333) 9.667 (0.333) 9.333 (0.333) 9.000 (0.000) 9.667 (0.333) 

UNT 13.235 (0.585) 12.444 (0.908) 12.167 (0.305) 12.333 (0.420) 11.591 (0.382) 10.105 (0.275)

Average 11.721 (1.257) 10.941 (1.282) 10.919 (1.236) 10.809 (1.244) 10.267 (1.228) 9.853 (1.234) 

Total Reproductive Days 

for the First Two Broods

SMV 9.200 (0.388) 8.611 (0.372) 8.250 (0.396) 8.389 (0.293) 7.444 (0.246) 9.000 (0.588) 

UNT NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

# of Offspring Per SMV 1.567 (0.054) 2.028 (0.093) 1.983 (0.136) 1.801 (0.117) 2.554 (0.157) 2.003 (0.152) 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

60 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods

UNT NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

% of Females 

Productively Active

SMV 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 95.238 (4.762) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 

UNT 80.952 (4.762) 90.476 (9.524) 90.476 (9.524) 95.238 (4.762) 100.000 (0.000) 95.238 (4.762)

Average 93.173 (4.491) 96.951 (4.890) 92.865 (6.076) 97.626 (4.491) 100.000 (4.063) 97.626 (4.491)

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females)

SMV 1.268 (0.367) 1.334 (0.139) 1.357 (0.327) 0.696 (0.161) 1.052 (0.322) 1.014 (0.201) 

UNT 1.126 (0.180) 1.773 (0.146) 1.706 (0.199) 1.956 (0.438) 1.568 (0.666) 1.228 (0.486) 

Average 1.041 (0.257) 1.552 (0.220) 1.527 (0.261) 0.986 (0.253) 1.264 (0.352) 1.175 (0.275) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

61 

Table 16B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

SMV 6.571 (0.445) 6.048 (0.579) 4.810 (0.423) 3.947 (0.310) 4.700 (0.411) 5.300 (0.689) 

UNT 4.867 (0.827) 5.824 (0.431) 3.867 (0.363) 4.800 (0.313) 5.294 (0.803) 8.375 (0.999) 

Average 5.955 (0.636) 5.924 (0.587) 4.320 (0.543) 4.373 (0.516) 4.913 (0.623) 6.494 (0.746) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

SMV 9.600 (0.654) 8.150 (0.812) 7.100 (0.710) 5.313 (0.751) 10.632 (1.035) 7.533 (1.234) 

UNT 8.143 (1.185) 7.667 (0.843) 7.000 (0.992) 7.842 (0.989) 7.917 (1.158) 7.667 (2.333) 

Average 9.130 (0.775) 7.914 (0.756) 7.060 (0.760) 6.365 (0.773) 9.384 (0.909) 7.567 (1.218) 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

SMV 15.950 (0.854) 14.300 (0.904) 11.900 (0.906) 9.375 (0.816) 15.421 (1.170) 13.200 (1.200)

UNT 13.286 (1.762) 13.467 (0.940) 11.167 (0.984) 12.474 (1.047) 12.833 (1.450) 17.000 (2.517)

Average 15.129 (1.149) 13.890 (1.007) 11.546 (1.017) 10.763 (1.009) 14.290 (1.198) 14.182 (1.394)

Days to Brood 1

SMV 14.857 (0.261) 16.571 (0.496) 16.667 (0.319) 16.737 (0.512) 15.650 (0.455) 16.000 (0.333)

UNT 17.214 (0.395) 16.000 (0.268) 17.500 (0.374) 17.350 (0.254) 16.882 (0.477) 16.091 (0.513)

Average 15.956 (0.598) 16.197 (0.613) 17.078 (0.602) 17.049 (0.614) 16.260 (0.641) 16.076 (0.626)

Days to Brood 2 

SMV 20.050 (0.185) 20.944 (0.347) 21.895 (0.374) 21.563 (0.524) 21.105 (0.524) 21.167 (0.520)

UNT 22.818 (0.615) 21.500 (0.292) 22.100 (0.233) 23.000 (0.412) 21.125 (0.295) 20.333 (0.667)

Average 21.145 (0.636) 21.224 (0.609) 21.991 (0.606) 22.319 (0.655) 21.090 (0.636) 20.812 (0.703)

Days Between Broods 1 

and 2

SMV 5.200 (0.258) 4.778 (0.286) 5.263 (0.263) 4.938 (0.063) 5.474 (0.328) 5.417 (0.417) 

UNT 5.545 (0.366) 5.286 (0.286) 4.900 (0.100) 5.611 (0.389) 4.700 (0.213) 5.333 (0.333) 

Average 5.337 (0.278) 5.032 (0.268) 5.029 (0.215) 5.097 (0.224) 5.000 (0.256) 5.369 (0.316) 

Time to Mature 

(females)

SMV 9.667 (0.333) 8.667 (0.667) 10.667 (0.667) 9.667 (0.333) 10.000 (0.577) 10.667 (0.333)

UNT 11.357 (0.387) 10.000 (0.268) 11.429 (0.388) 11.350 (0.254) 10.882 (0.477) 10.000 (0.504)

Average 10.491 (0.639) 9.420 (0.666) 11.038 (0.689) 10.536 (0.622) 10.443 (0.694) 10.454 (0.656)

Total Reproductive Days 

for the First Two Broods

SMV 8.050 (0.185) 8.944 (0.347) 9.895 (0.374) 9.563 (0.524) 9.105 (0.524) 9.167 (0.520) 

UNT NAf NA NA NA NA) NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

# of Offspring Per SMV 1.997 (0.116) 1.699 (0.114) 1.269 (0.095) 1.004 (0.090) 1.772 (0.141) 1.620 (0.168) 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

62 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods

UNT NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

% of Females 

Productively Active

SMV 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 95.238 (4.762)

UNT 83.333 (16.667) 100.000 (0.000) 93.333 (6.667) 90.476 (4.762) 89.683 (5.204) 83.333 (16.667) 

Average 99.598 (1.205) 100.000 (0.888) 99.524 (1.192) 99.282 (1.178) 99.312 (1.183) 94.047 (4.623)

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females)

SMV 1.364 (0.397) 1.694 (0.282) 1.430 (0.253) 1.022 (0.152) 0.985 (0.200) 0.931 (0.153) 

UNT 0.737 (0.189) 0.807 (0.096) 1.500 (0.551) 0.992 (0.179) 1.183 (0.409) 0.933 (0.204) 

Average 0.932 (0.248) 1.088 (0.204) 1.424 (0.295) 1.005 (0.199) 1.022 (0.254) 0.927 (0.204) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

63 

Table 17A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Growth Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7)

SMV 0.297 (0.017) 0.357 (0.017) 0.281 (0.026) 0.316 (0.018) 0.359 (0.025) 0.304 (0.019) 

UNT 0.119 (0.015) 0.108 (0.018) 0.094 (0.012) 0.072 (0.009) 0.149 (0.017) 0.222 (0.028) 

Average 0.208 (0.101) 0.233 (0.101) 0.188 (0.101) 0.192 (0.101) 0.253 (0.101) 0.257 (0.101) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14)

SMV 0.642 (0.025) 0.616 (0.025) 0.675 (0.035) 0.891 (0.034) 0.997 (0.034) 1.031 (0.045) 

UNT 0.573 (0.025) 0.472 (0.024) 0.485 (0.028) 0.481 (0.027) 0.563 (0.026) 0.595 (0.030) 

Average 0.608 (0.158) 0.544 (0.158) 0.581 (0.158) 0.685 (0.158) 0.778 (0.158) 0.810 (0.159) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination)

SMV 1.098 (0.043) 1.188 (0.047) 1.069 (0.043) 1.047 (0.040) 1.288 (0.055) 1.018 (0.067) 

UNT 0.905 (0.025) 1.014 (0.034) 1.057 (0.034) 1.048 (0.040) 0.961 (0.056) 1.027 (0.076) 

Average 0.998 (0.081) 1.098 (0.082) 1.065 (0.082) 1.047 (0.082) 1.125 (0.086) 1.020 (0.092) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7)

SMV 4.458 (0.098) 4.466 (0.062) 4.670 (0.130) 4.791 (0.099) 4.838 (0.085) 4.583 (0.054) 

UNT 3.144 (0.098) 3.200 (0.078) 3.272 (0.072) 3.383 (0.068) 3.744 (0.084) 4.039 (0.140) 

Average 3.801 (0.606) 3.834 (0.604) 3.958 (0.606) 4.080 (0.605) 4.291 (0.605) 4.261 (0.606) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 

SMV 6.303 (0.056) 6.568 (0.067) 6.636 (0.094) 6.815 (0.060) 6.971 (0.054) 6.582 (0.089) 

UNT 4.680 (0.075) 4.710 (0.090) 4.905 (0.097) 5.211 (0.122) 5.195 (0.094) 5.294 (0.074) 

Average 5.491 (0.828) 5.649 (0.828) 5.771 (0.829) 6.008 (0.829) 6.093 (0.828) 5.949 (0.829) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination)

SMV 7.421 (0.052) 7.488 (0.061) 7.370 (0.054) 7.368 (0.066) 7.662 (0.072) 7.385 (0.094) 

UNT 6.311 (0.029) 6.344 (0.041) 6.405 (0.044) 6.239 (0.059) 6.313 (0.064) 6.455 (0.086) 

Average 6.866 (0.556) 6.914 (0.557) 6.892 (0.557) 6.803 (0.557) 6.981 (0.558) 6.925 (0.559) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e.If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and 

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests.
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

64 

Table 17B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Growth Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 0)

SMV 0.029 (0.003) 0.030 (0.006) 0.027 (0.004) 0.033 (0.006) 0.025 (0.006) 0.025 (0.005) 

UNT 0.022 (0.001) 0.023 (0.002) 0.023 (0.002) 0.017 (0.002) 0.023 (0.002) 0.022 (0.002) 

Average 0.025 (0.003) 0.026 (0.004) 0.025 (0.004) 0.021 (0.004) 0.025 (0.004) 0.025 (0.004) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7)

SMV 0.380 (0.047) 0.383 (0.050) 0.294 (0.025) 0.307 (0.026) 0.337 (0.022) 0.318 (0.012) 

UNT 0.247 (0.014) 0.234 (0.010) 0.265 (0.024) 0.237 (0.013) 0.256 (0.013) 0.291 (0.045) 

Average 0.287 (0.039) 0.273 (0.038) 0.281 (0.040) 0.272 (0.038) 0.294 (0.038) 0.285 (0.038) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14)

SMV 0.805 (0.042) 0.783 (0.044) 0.588 (0.030) 0.622 (0.038) 0.788 (0.034) 0.688 (0.043) 

UNT 0.719 (0.027) 0.716 (0.026) 0.633 (0.023) 0.705 (0.024) 0.672 (0.025) 0.618 (0.047) 

Average 0.755 (0.041) 0.744 (0.041) 0.612 (0.038) 0.669 (0.040) 0.725 (0.039) 0.655 (0.046) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination)

SMV 1.046 (0.039) 1.022 (0.031) 0.978 (0.036) 0.986 (0.043) 1.137 (0.049) 0.937 (0.054) 

UNT 1.030 (0.047) 0.972 (0.037) 1.031 (0.038) 0.995 (0.038) 0.993 (0.042) 1.007 (0.044) 

Average 1.039 (0.034) 1.000 (0.028) 1.003 (0.030) 0.991 (0.032) 1.055 (0.035) 0.978 (0.037) 

Length (mm) 

(day0) 

SMV 1.633 (0.032) 1.671 (0.017) 1.627 (0.025) 1.705 (0.016) 1.689 (0.018) 1.699 (0.024) 

UNT 1.482 (0.015) 1.482 (0.017) 1.469 (0.017) 1.427 (0.017) 1.467 (0.021) 1.462 (0.028) 

Average 1.565 (0.107) 1.576 (0.106) 1.551 (0.106) 1.567 (0.106) 1.578 (0.106) 1.581 (0.107) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7)

SMV 4.715 (0.061) 4.622 (0.102) 4.644 (0.105) 4.544 (0.134) 4.863 (0.099) 4.334 (0.094) 

UNT 3.956 (0.080) 3.772 (0.055) 4.074 (0.091) 4.100 (0.101) 4.194 (0.079) 4.150 (0.080) 

Average 4.340 (0.312) 4.179 (0.313) 4.359 (0.316) 4.329 (0.319) 4.526 (0.315) 4.250 (0.314) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14)

SMV 6.388 (0.073) 6.333 (0.043) 6.111 (0.053) 6.058 (0.071) 6.474 (0.080) 6.547 (0.136) 

UNT 5.641 (0.042) 5.574 (0.063) 5.347 (0.059) 5.463 (0.064) 5.585 (0.058) 5.525 (0.084) 

Average 6.018 (0.385) 5.953 (0.385) 5.729 (0.385) 5.768 (0.386) 6.011 (0.386) 5.980 (0.390) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination)

SMV 7.403 (0.040) 7.351 (0.048) 7.230 (0.054) 7.124 (0.055) 7.673 (0.087) 7.220 (0.114) 

UNT 6.273 (0.059) 6.110 (0.040) 6.092 (0.054) 6.128 (0.049) 6.352 (0.073) 6.711 (0.068) 

Average 6.839 (0.546) 6.729 (0.546) 6.661 (0.546) 6.626 (0.546) 7.009 (0.548) 6.994 (0.549) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

65 

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

66 

Table 18A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Survival Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concen

Trend 

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7)

SMV 96.667 (3.334) 90.000 (2.887) 98.333 (1.667) 88.333 (1.667) 95.000 (2.887) 95.000 (2.887)

UNT 96.667 (1.667) 98.333 (1.667) 98.333 (1.667) 100.000 (0.000) 95.000 (0.000) 100.000 

(0 000)

Average 96.276 (3.448) 94.603 (3.380) 98.333 (3.201) 94.467 (3.127) 94.605 (3.287) 97.708 (3.287)

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14)

SMV 89.027 (3.584) 84.298 (6.153) 91.818 (1.818) 87.895 (1.848) 86.619 (3.845) 86.475 (3.766)

UNT 78.333 (1.667) 86.667 (1.667) 88.333 (4.410) 95.000 (5.000) 80.000 (5.000) 80.000 

(10 408)

Average 82.406 (3.157) 86.100 (3.500) 90.645 (3.321) 90.055 (3.413) 83.819 (4.026) 85.281 (4.736)

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination)

SMV 75.784 (5.435) 72.729 (5.739) 85.279 (2.788) 80.370 (4.815) 76.111 (2.003) 69.697 (8.018)

UNT 77.302 (5.808) 83.056 (4.035) 71.528 (12.529) 67.703 (6.347) 64.128 (4.391) 46.296 (5.543)

Average 76.461 (6.582) 78.821 (6.274) 81.350 (6.873) 74.548 (6.553) 70.703 (5.733) 56.145 (7.057)

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

7)

SMV 96.667 (3.334) 92.500 (0.000) 97.500 (1.443) 89.167 (3.005) 94.167 (2.205) 95.000 (2.887)

UNT 96.667 (2.205) 96.667 (2.205) 99.167 (0.833) 99.167 (0.833) 97.500 (0.000) 98.333 (0.833)

Average 96.082 (2.488) 94.254 (1.930) 98.032 (1.829) 96.991 (1.911) 95.910 (1.930) 96.767 (1.908)

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

14) 

SMV 89.638 (2.162) 86.958 (2.741) 90.196 (2.594) 83.001 (5.021) 85.817 (6.581) 86.608 (0.908)

UNT 80.392 (6.429) 79.412 (6.123) 90.196 (3.535) 86.275 (4.274) 86.275 (3.535) 84.314 (5.187)

Average 88.698 (2.049) 85.698 (2.502) 90.196 (2.091) 84.899 (3.254) 86.172 (3.114) 86.540 (0.895)

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination)

SMV 75.784 (5.435) 72.729 (5.739) 85.279 (2.788) 80.370 (4.815) 76.111 (2.003) 69.697 (8.018)

UNT NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

67 

Table 18B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Lindane Concentrations to Control Across 

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Survival Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Con

Tre

Control 

(Group 1) 

32 ng/L 

(Group 2) 

80 ng/L 

(Group 3) 

200 ng/L 

(Group 4) 

500 ng/L 

(Group 5) 

1250 ng/L (Group 6) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7)

SMV 97.778 (2.222) 93.333 (3.849) 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 95.556 (2.222) 

UNT 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 93.333 (6.667) 100.000 (0.000) 86.667 (6.667) 68.889 (8.012) 

Average 97.778 (1.571) 99.578 (0.968) 97.334 (2.108) 100.000 (0.707) 99.707 (0.989) 93.651 (2.141) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14)

SMV 95.956 (2.025) 88.487 (2.798) 97.917 (2.083) 100.000 (0.000) 94.118 (3.396) 91.667 (2.083) 

UNT 84.444 (8.012) 95.556 (2.222) 88.889 (4.444) 93.333 (6.667) 82.222 (5.880) 46.667 (13.878)

Average 91.200 (7.001) 92.200 (6.334) 93.593 (6.522) 96.753 (6.732) 88.646 (6.902) 81.755 (7.579) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination)

SMV 92.308 (4.441) 77.835 (2.215) 89.744 (6.784) 86.931 (3.031) 85.769 (5.426) 66.667 (6.060) 

UNT 66.667 (8.333) 82.165 (9.301) 75.354 (4.067) 70.476 (5.793) 64.545 (10.594) 58.333 (8.333) 

Average 82.770 (7.941) 72.991 (7.390) 82.215 (7.706) 79.581 (7.401) 77.488 (8.440) 61.864 (8.409) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

7)

SMV 95.833 (2.406) 91.667 (2.406) 98.611 (1.389) 98.611 (1.389) 95.833 (4.167) 89.683 (3.118) 

UNT 98.889 (1.111) 98.889 (1.111) 85.556 (9.876) 100.000 (0.000) 82.222 (2.222) 67.778 (4.843) 

Average 97.435 (5.199) 95.441 (5.199) 95.123 (6.229) 99.314 (5.105) 88.354 (5.531) 79.844 (5.768) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

14) 

SMV 91.667 (4.167) 87.247 (2.190) 97.222 (1.389) 97.101 (2.898) 88.889 (3.675) 86.905 (0.595) 

UNT 86.111 (3.675) 91.667 (2.406) 75.611 (10.448) 93.056 (5.008) 70.833 (6.365) 44.444 (9.108) 

Average 88.923 (9.495) 89.425 (9.225) 88.443 (10.101) 94.881 (9.517) 80.298 (9.764) 70.380 (9.900) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination)

SMV 92.308 (4.441) 77.835 (2.215) 89.744 (6.784) 86.931 (3.031) 85.769 (5.426) 66.667 (6.060) 

UNT NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

68 

Table 19A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentration 

Testsc

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

SMV 6.048 (0.550) 5.050 (0.373) 4.450 (0.407) 4.524 (0.349) 6.000 (0.602) 4.842 (0.336) 

ABC 7.714 (0.474) 5.714 (0.677) 7.053 (1.039) 7.429 (0.461) 5.100 (0.571) 1.100 (0.376) 

WLI 3.471 (0.576) 3.150 (0.559) 3.211 (0.575) 2.300 (0.548) 2.056 (0.591) 3.867 (0.956) 

Average 5.760 (1.173) 4.632 (1.175) 4.778 (1.200) 4.756 (1.163) 4.383 (1.182) 3.108 (1.182) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

SMV 8.238 (0.807) 5.889 (0.993) 6.389 (0.897) 6.842 (0.738) 5.238 (0.556) 6.111 (0.779) 

ABC 8.619 (1.004) 2.905 (0.676) 7.579 (1.140) 4.429 (1.041) 4.300 (0.808) 0.200 (0.156) 

WLI 5.800 (1.176) 2.167 (0.668) 1.722 (0.553) 1.222 (0.482) 0.500 (0.345) 3.100 (1.140) 

Average 7.504 (1.558) 3.632 (1.517) 5.031 (1.533) 4.111 (1.514) 3.287 (1.488) 2.789 (1.512) 

A decreasing t

the highe

concentration 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

SMV 14.286 (1.096) 10.944 (1.077) 10.944 (1.127) 11.579 (0.762) 11.238 (0.894) 11.056 (0.982)

ABC 16.333 (1.210) 8.619 (1.086) 14.632 (1.914) 11.857 (1.339) 9.400 (0.832) 1.300 (0.442) 

WLI 9.067 (1.293) 5.278 (0.966) 4.944 (0.895) 3.667 (0.824) 2.556 (0.692) 7.200 (1.788) 

Average 13.224 (2.539) 8.282 (2.516) 9.889 (2.562) 8.963 (2.509) 7.711 (2.487) 6.066 (2.531) 

A decreasing t

the highe

concentration 

Days to Brood 1

SMV 19.000 (0.333) 17.500 (0.256) 18.450 (0.525) 19.238 (0.601) 18.143 (0.504) 19.895 (0.630)

ABC 16.476 (0.178) 16.450 (0.135) 17.000 (0.459) 16.238 (0.168) 16.800 (0.304) 17.889 (0.539)

WLI 26.250 (1.468) 26.778 (1.569) 28.938 (1.841) 26.438 (3.260) 30.357 (2.106) 25.800 (1.349)

Average 20.722 (3.152) 20.104 (3.151) 20.923 (3.164) 20.564 (3.160) 20.729 (3.160) 21.680 (3.167)

Days to Brood 2 

SMV 23.500 (0.407) 23.778 (0.655) 23.053 (0.538) 24.278 (0.571) 24.000 (0.684) 25.500 (0.567)

ABC 22.619 (0.428) 22.615 (0.572) 23.556 (0.720) 21.938 (0.382) 23.000 (0.570) 25.500 (2.500)

WLI 34.077 (1.734) 33.222 (1.722) 35.100 (2.243) 38.167 (2.750) 35.000 (4.582) 36.000 (1.915)

Average 26.788 (3.796) 26.838 (3.806) 26.923 (3.809) 26.792 (3.802) 27.247 (3.814) 28.763 (3.828)

Days Between Broods 1 

and 2

SMV 4.500 (0.154) 6.278 (0.631) 4.579 (0.220) 5.222 (0.250) 6.050 (0.521) 5.500 (0.445) 

ABC 6.238 (0.377) 6.308 (0.536) 6.778 (0.639) 5.625 (0.386) 6.438 (0.584) 8.500 (2.500) 

WLI 9.000 (1.177) 9.000 (1.354) 7.900 (1.531) 10.000 (2.266) 6.667 (1.667) 9.000 (1.653) 

Average 6.223 (0.995) 7.101 (1.046) 6.267 (1.018) 6.354 (1.011) 6.932 (1.047) 7.015 (1.100) 

Time to Mature SMV 13.000 (0.000) 13.000 (0.000) 13.000 (0.000) 13.000 (0.000) 13.000 (0.000) 13.000 (0.000)
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

69 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentration 

Testsc

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

(females) ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI 14.000 (0.000) 14.000 (0.000) 14.000 (0.000) 14.000 (0.000) 14.000 (0.000) 14.000 (0.000)

Average 13.500 (0.500) 13.500 (0.500) 13.500 (0.500) 13.500 (0.500) 13.500 (0.500) 13.500 (0.500)

Total Reproductive Days 

for the First Two Broods

SMV 9.500 (0.407) 9.778 (0.655) 9.053 (0.538) 10.278 (0.571) 10.000 (0.684) 11.500 (0.567)

ABC NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

# of Offspring Per 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods

SMV 1.636 (0.112) 1.126 (0.083) 1.242 (0.082) 1.194 (0.063) 1.229 (0.095) 0.975 (0.081) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

% of Females 

Productively Active

SMV 95.238 (4.762) 95.238 (4.762) 95.238 (4.762) 100.000 

(0 000)

100.000 (0.000) 90.476 (4.762)

ABC 100.000 

(0 000)

95.238 (4.762) 100.000 

(0 000)

100.000 

(0 000)

100.000 (0.000) 47.619 

(12 99) WLI 76.167 (4.767) 85.700 (8.256) 76.167 (4.767) 71.400 (8.256) 66.633 (4.767) 71.400 (8.256)

Average 91.648 (8.247) 89.239 (8.740) 91.648 (8.247) 91.861 (8.221) 91.698 (8.217) 79.449 (9.054)

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females)

SMV 1.773 (0.261) 2.300 (0.581) 1.783 (0.468) 1.457 (0.583) 1.613 (0.162) 1.607 (0.301) 

ABC 1.417 (0.542) 1.667 (0.583) 1.589 (0.585) 1.464 (0.669) 1.135 (0.452) 0.929 (0.214) 

WLI 1.064 (0.233) 0.878 (0.148) 1.245 (0.025) 0.896 (0.111) 1.094 (0.263) 0.920 (0.019) 

Average 1.384 (0.253) 1.218 (0.243) 1.502 (0.204) 1.162 (0.228) 1.290 (0.236) 1.176 (0.203) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

70 

Table 19B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Reproductive Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentr

Trend T

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

SMV 6.313 (0.717) 7.842 (0.876) 6.056 (0.521) 5.706 (0.435) 6.450 (0.622) 4.688 (0.481) 

ABC 7.714 (0.793) 6.867 (1.013) 7.579 (0.818) 7.905 (0.636) 9.154 (0.815) NAf

Average 7.018 (0.968) 7.519 (1.046) 6.813 (0.927) 6.705 (0.889) 7.663 (0.950) 5.438 (0.987) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

SMV 7.154 (1.234) 11.000 (0.956) 7.800 (0.879) 7.500 (1.194) 9.500 (0.781) 6.200 (1.061) 

ABC 11.048 (1.141) 11.071 (1.216) 13.167 (1.205) 11.952 (1.105) 10.000 (1.664) NA 

Average 9.126 (1.835) 11.154 (1.803) 10.309 (1.789) 9.759 (1.823) 10.071 (1.833) 7.451 (2.210) 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

SMV 13.077 (1.820) 19.111 (1.627) 13.533 (1.023) 13.125 (1.241) 15.722 (1.146) 10.933 (1.115)

ABC 18.762 (1.419) 17.929 (1.841) 20.722 (1.676) 19.857 (1.275) 19.154 (2.130) NA 

Average 16.006 (2.768) 18.680 (2.804) 16.864 (2.695) 16.479 (2.675) 17.532 (2.765) 13.003 (3.112)

Days to Brood 1

SMV 16.333 (0.702) 17.789 (0.610) 15.778 (0.222) 16.765 (0.621) 16.750 (0.428) 16.250 (0.521)

ABC 19.905 (0.194) 20.533 (0.515) 19.211 (0.511) 18.476 (0.321) 19.077 (0.288) NA 

Average 18.396 (1.408) 19.163 (1.438) 17.338 (1.404) 17.407 (1.418) 17.870 (1.405) 17.606 (1.502)

Days to Brood 2 

SMV 21.182 (0.761) 22.889 (0.646) 20.929 (0.370) 21.333 (0.310) 21.353 (0.342) 20.231 (0.632)

ABC 25.600 (0.266) 26.286 (0.508) 24.389 (0.543) 23.600 (0.234) 25.846 (0.706) NA 

Average 23.599 (1.789) 24.588 (1.802) 22.654 (1.785) 22.436 (1.766) 23.428 (1.792) 21.928 (1.920)

Days Between Broods 1 

and 2

SMV 5.364 (0.561) 4.944 (0.262) 5.286 (0.304) 5.000 (0.389) 4.882 (0.146) 4.385 (0.140) 

ABC 5.700 (0.263) 5.786 (0.114) 5.222 (0.190) 5.350 (0.131) 6.769 (0.752) NA 

Average 5.512 (0.390) 5.426 (0.318) 5.197 (0.337) 5.159 (0.336) 5.253 (0.363) 4.594 (0.379) 

Time to Mature 

(females)

SMV 10.667 (0.333) 12.000 (0.000) 12.333 (0.882) 11.667 (0.333) 13.000 (1.000) 11.000 (0.577)

ABC NAf NA NA NA NA) NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

Total Reproductive Days 

for the First Two Broods

SMV 9.182 (0.761) 10.889 (0.646) 8.929 (0.370) 9.333 (0.310) 9.353 (0.342) 8.231 (0.632) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

# of Offspring Per SMV 1.754 (0.200) 1.787 (0.128) 1.618 (0.123) 1.669 (0.082) 1.741 (0.087) 1.471 (0.158) 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

71 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentr

Trend T

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day for 

the First Two Broods

ABC NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

% of Females 

Productively Active

SMV 88.571 (5.948) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 94.444 (5.556) 100.000 (0.000) 94.444 (5.556)

ABC 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) NA 

Average 99.686 (0.986) 100.000 (0.707) 100.000 (0.707) 99.826 (0.984) 100.000 (0.707) 94.444 (5.556)

Sex Ratio 

(males/ females)

SMV 1.183 (0.376) 0.927 (0.121) 0.640 (0.239) 0.807 (0.262) 1.003 (0.055) 1.130 (0.304) 

ABC 1.714 (0.286) 3.640 (2.682) 1.081 (0.262) 0.944 (0.199) 0.905 (0.238) NA 

Average 1.520 (0.228) 0.933 (0.121) 0.841 (0.176) 0.894 (0.158) 0.998 (0.053) 1.130 (0.304) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

72 

Table 20A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Growth Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7)

SMV 0.083 (0.012) 0.144 (0.014) 0.124 (0.019) 0.137 (0.027) 0.159 (0.026) 0.146 (0.016) 

ABC 0.221 (0.012) 0.203 (0.013) 0.221 (0.011) 0.224 (0.010) 0.204 (0.009) 0.137 (0.012) 

WLI 0.597 (0.021) 0.508 (0.014) 0.488 (0.039) 0.600 (0.024) 0.533 (0.032) 0.518 (0.029) 

Average 0.297 (0.129) 0.285 (0.129) 0.286 (0.129) 0.320 (0.129) 0.299 (0.129) 0.266 (0.129) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14)

SMV 0.440 (0.023) 0.544 (0.016) 0.456 (0.023) 0.440 (0.016) 0.440 (0.013) 0.553 (0.015) 

ABC 0.619 (0.029) 0.625 (0.026) 0.657 (0.023) 0.653 (0.033) 0.651 (0.028) 0.441 (0.017) 

WLI 0.662 (0.016) 0.598 (0.014) 0.643 (0.017) 0.624 (0.017) 0.590 (0.018) 0.560 (0.016) 

Average 0.574 (0.057) 0.589 (0.056) 0.586 (0.057) 0.570 (0.057) 0.558 (0.057) 0.519 (0.056) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination)

SMV 0.994 (0.032) 1.032 (0.045) 1.027 (0.033) 1.011 (0.034) 1.012 (0.032) 0.995 (0.036) 

ABC NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI 1.407 (0.043) 1.462 (0.038) 1.400 (0.045) 1.427 (0.044) 1.394 (0.041) 1.326 (0.065) 

Average 1.198 (0.199) 1.250 (0.199) 1.217 (0.199) 1.216 (0.199) 1.204 (0.199) 1.177 (0.200) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7)

SMV 3.469 (0.085) 4.062 (0.065) 3.926 (0.072) 3.893 (0.075) 3.809 (0.101) 3.927 (0.076) 

ABC 3.482 (0.043) 3.432 (0.058) 3.501 (0.057) 3.487 (0.048) 3.461 (0.052) 3.016 (0.080) 

WLI 5.550 (0.087) 5.083 (0.061) 5.094 (0.114) 5.233 (0.064) 4.911 (0.113) 4.989 (0.108) 

Average 4.168 (0.536) 4.192 (0.536) 4.178 (0.537) 4.205 (0.536) 4.069 (0.537) 3.978 (0.537) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 

SMV 5.321 (0.063) 5.763 (0.057) 5.699 (0.043) 5.649 (0.049) 5.558 (0.085) 5.848 (0.047) 

ABC 5.125 (0.054) 5.132 (0.042) 5.174 (0.037) 4.920 (0.053) 5.033 (0.050) 4.601 (0.064) 

WLI 5.837 (0.037) 6.090 (0.058) 6.234 (0.046) 6.220 (0.059) 6.217 (0.062) 6.185 (0.053) 

Average 5.427 (0.342) 5.662 (0.342) 5.703 (0.342) 5.596 (0.342) 5.605 (0.343) 5.550 (0.343) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination)

SMV 7.467 (0.048) 7.412 (0.064) 7.375 (0.055) 7.240 (0.052) 7.313 (0.073) 7.128 (0.053) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA) NA 

WLI 8.829 (0.070) 8.915 (0.063) 8.830 (0.077) 8.959 (0.075) 8.948 (0.062) 8.936 (0.111) 

Average 8.159 (0.789) 8.163 (0.789) 8.109 (0.789) 8.091 (0.789) 8.132 (0.789) 7.997 (0.789) 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

73 

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

74 

Table 20B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Growth Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concentra

Trend Tes

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 0)

SMV 0.023 (0.001) 0.020 (0.001) 0.020 (0.001) 0.020 (0.001) 0.026 (0.003) 0.021 (0.004) 

ABC 0.016 (0.003) 0.015 (0.002) 0.011 (0.001) 0.017 (0.004) 0.017 (0.002) 0.011 (0.006) 

Average 0.019 (0.004) 0.017 (0.004) 0.015 (0.004) 0.017 (0.004) 0.021 (0.004) 0.017 (0.005) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7)

SMV 0.252 (0.012) 0.292 (0.015) 0.263 (0.024) 0.252 (0.014) 0.230 (0.014) 0.276 (0.013) 

ABC 0.276 (0.031) 0.240 (0.005) 0.287 (0.020) 0.294 (0.014) 0.267 (0.016) NAf 

Average 0.260 (0.022) 0.262 (0.019) 0.276 (0.023) 0.273 (0.020) 0.248 (0.020) 0.276 (0.027) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14)

SMV 0.560 (0.030) 0.553 (0.031) 0.597 (0.032) 0.579 (0.037) 0.562 (0.025) 0.627 (0.031) 

ABC 0.797 (0.044) 0.860 (0.039) 0.769 (0.048) 0.812 (0.037) 0.817 (0.046) NA 

Average 0.680 (0.125) 0.699 (0.124) 0.697 (0.125) 0.696 (0.125) 0.686 (0.124) 0.748 (0.127) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination)

SMV 1.066 (0.051) 1.039 (0.040) 1.060 (0.042) 0.996 (0.047) 1.014 (0.044) 0.989 (0.050) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Length (mm) 

(day0) 

SMV 1.607 (0.026) 1.581 (0.018) 1.586 (0.017) 1.610 (0.022) 1.608 (0.022) 1.582 (0.019) 

ABC 1.359 (0.014) 1.465 (0.032) 1.404 (0.035) 1.372 (0.018) 1.498 (0.026) 1.424 (0.027) 

Average 1.478 (0.093) 1.518 (0.093) 1.496 (0.093) 1.490 (0.093) 1.551 (0.093) 1.502 (0.093) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7)

SMV 4.446 (0.093) 4.943 (0.100) 4.466 (0.099) 4.739 (0.124) 4.863 (0.082) 4.651 (0.077) 

ABC 3.778 (0.112) 3.617 (0.072) 3.873 (0.054) 3.763 (0.054) 3.710 (0.055) NA 

Average 4.107 (0.495) 4.270 (0.494) 4.181 (0.493) 4.248 (0.494) 4.282 (0.492) 4.188 (0.521) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14)

SMV 6.057 (0.084) 6.554 (0.146) 6.212 (0.081) 6.334 (0.099) 6.823 (0.087) 6.412 (0.113) 

ABC 5.449 (0.058) 5.654 (0.046) 5.417 (0.069) 5.613 (0.040) 5.482 (0.071) NA 

Average 5.759 (0.453) 6.099 (0.455) 5.815 (0.453) 5.980 (0.453) 6.145 (0.453) 5.986 (0.486) 

Length (mm) 

(Termination)

SMV 7.311 (0.071) 7.542 (0.084) 7.479 (0.076) 7.296 (0.071) 7.399 (0.097) 7.099 (0.066) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

75 

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

76 

Table 21A. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F0 Generation, Survival Endpoints. 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concen

Trend 

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7)

SMV 91.667 (6.009) 93.333 (3.334) 93.333 (4.410) 91.667 (4.410) 91.667 (6.009) 91.667 (3.334) 

ABC 97.778 (2.222) 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 93.333 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000)

WLI 100.000 (0.000) 98.333 (1.667) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 96.667 (1.667) 

Average 97.204 (2.547) 96.397 (2.541) 98.153 (2.396) 98.005 (2.396) 94.962 (2.425) 96.699 (2.416) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14)

SMV 86.667 (1.667) 91.667 (3.334) 91.667 (3.334) 91.667 (4.410) 83.333 (8.819) 86.667 (1.667) 

ABC 97.778 (2.222) 97.778 (2.222) 97.778 (2.222) 100.000 (0.000) 88.889 (4.444) 100.000 (0.000)

WLI 91.667 (4.410) 96.667 (3.334) 86.667 (8.333) 95.000 (2.887) 98.333 (1.667) 95.000 (0.000) 

Average 92.368 (3.289) 95.090 (3.395) 94.305 (3.575) 95.651 (3.262) 94.179 (3.570) 94.112 (3.040) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination)

SMV 73.000 (5.000) 64.333 (7.310) 78.000 (5.774) 70.333 (3.712) 75.333 (7.535) 65.000 (5.507) 

ABC 97.619 (2.381) 91.111 (2.222) 93.016 (0.159) 95.238 (4.762) 88.889 (4.444) 100.000 (0.000)

WLI 69.583 (1.969) 82.185 (5.075) 57.778 (5.880) 75.000 (6.250) 74.644 (2.718) 60.513 (7.715) 

Average 79.966 (8.695) 79.357 (8.929) 76.684 (8.842) 79.832 (8.952) 79.469 (8.931) 78.136 (8.918) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

7)

SMV 94.333 (2.333) 95.000 (2.887) 95.333 (2.667) 94.333 (2.963) 92.667 (4.334) 92.000 (1.000) 

ABC NAf NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI 100.000 (0.000) 99.167 (0.833) 100.000 (0.000) 99.167 (0.833) 100.000 (0.000) 97.500 (0.000) 

Average 97.353 (2.785) 96.678 (2.758) 97.493 (2.794) 96.625 (2.759) 97.325 (2.817) 94.750 (2.702) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

14) 

SMV 86.000 (3.606) 86.000 (2.000) 85.000 (4.582) 91.000 (3.464) 85.333 (7.689) 83.000 (1.000) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI 95.098 (2.594) 96.078 (1.961) 90.196 (5.459) 96.078 (0.980) 98.039 (1.961) 94.118 (1.698) 

Average 90.488 (5.236) 91.045 (4.990) 87.969 (5.939) 91.662 (4.914) 93.100 (5.186) 88.163 (4.877) 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination)

SMV 79.000 (5.196) 70.333 (3.180) 77.000 (5.033) 79.333 (2.028) 81.000 (7.000) 71.667 (4.703) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

WLI NA NA NA NA NA NA 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

77 

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Concen

Trend 

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

78 

Table 21B. Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Mysid Octylphenol Concentrations to Control Acr

Laboratories, F1 Generation, Survival Endpoints.

Parameter Laboratory 

Mean Standard Errora,b

Conc

Tren

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 7)

SMV 95.333 (2.333) 95.333 (2.333) 84.333 (4.334) 88.667 (4.334) 95.333 (2.333) 100.000 (0.000)

ABC 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) NAf 

Average 97.221 (3.217) 97.221 (3.217) 96.529 (3.255) 96.748 (3.255) 97.221 (3.217) 102.980 (3.275)

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (day 14)

SMV 89.333 (5.812) 95.333 (2.333) 83.000 (2.082) 81.667 (3.180) 93.000 (0.000) 97.667 (2.333) 

ABC 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) 100.000 (0.000) NA 

Average 94.675 (6.579) 97.320 (6.298) 91.786 (6.279) 91.650 (6.367) 96.500 (6.217) 102.983 (7.314)

Reproduction Survival 

Rate (%) (Termination)

SMV 77.000 (9.291) 90.000 (5.000) 75.000 (4.163) 68.333 (7.055) 88.000 (2.082) 93.000 (3.512) 

ABC 93.333 (3.849) 90.278 (1.690) 97.778 (2.222) 97.778 (2.222) 93.333 (0.000) NA 

Average 85.926 (9.455) 89.239 (8.696) 86.891 (8.643) 85.410 (8.972) 90.576 (8.407) 98.886 (10.789)

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

7)

SMV 92.000 (1.000) 94.667 (3.930) 87.667 (2.906) 87.667 (3.930) 95.333 (2.333) 94.333 (2.963) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) (day 

14) 

SMV 86.000 (3.000) 90.333 (3.844) 81.333 (1.667) 77.667 (5.334) 90.000 (1.000) 90.333 (5.044) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Total 

 Survival Rate (%) 

(Termination)

SMV 78.333 (3.844) 84.000 (4.726) 76.333 (4.177) 69.333 (4.484) 86.333 (0.333) 86.667 (4.910) 

ABC NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Average NA NA NA NA NA NA 

a. Means and their associated standard errors for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples within the concentration group with

laboratory. 

b. Averages and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on random effects model with concentration group treated as a fixed effect 

laboratory and interaction of laboratory and concentration group treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory. 

c. Step-down trend test were performed. 

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above random effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed concentration effect were estimated as 

2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of 

for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001) 

e. If concentration effect is significant, then pairwise comparisons of test concentrations to the control were performed using both unadjusted two-sample t-tests and th

Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and with 

detected using the Dunnett’s tests. 

f. Data were not available 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

79 

Table 22. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Reproduction Endpoints across Laboratories. Te

Chemical: Lindanea,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

(Standard Error)c Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1)

0.272 (0.912) -0.658 (0.907) -1.606 

(0.866) 

-1.435 

(0.818) 

-2.165 

(0.881) 

-0.819 

(0.987) Group 

Number Offspring 

(brood 2)

1.181 (1.268) -1.743 (1.225) -1.644 

(1.258) 

-2.001 

(1.266) 

0.511 (1.354) -0.890 

(1.780) 

Number Offspring 

(two broods)

1.686 (1.842) -2.375 (1.829) -3.161 

(1.799) 

-3.217 

(1.696) 

-1.522 

(1.880) 

-1.629 

(2.275) 

Days to 

Brood 1 

-1.466 

(1.164) 

-1.108 (1.224) 0.409 (1.163) 0.190 (1.166) 0.419 (1.175) 0.225 (1.168)

Days to 

Brood 2 

-1.199 

(1.411) 

-1.325 (1.386) -0.019 

(1.367) 

0.599 (1.373) -0.318 

(1.370) 

0.348 (1.451)

Days Between 

Broods 1 and 2 

0.277 (0.377) -0.132 (0.458) -0.233 

(0.345) 

0.070 (0.330) -0.379 

(0.404) 

-0.722 

(0.703) 

Time to Mature 

(females) (days) 

-1.204 

(0.916) 

-1.533 (0.968) 0.091 (0.925) -0.277 

(0.887) 

0.180 (0.917) 0.605 (0.897)

Total Reproductive 

Days for the First Two 

Broods 

Only SMV data available 

# of Offspring Per 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day 

for the First 

Two Broods 

Only SMV data available 

% of Females 

Productively Active 

3.215 (4.587) 3.063 (4.212) 4.388 (5.966) -1.266 

(4.252) 

-3.841 

(3.967) 

-5.583 

(6.289) 

Sex Ratio -0.159 (0.365) -0.476 (0.303) -0.144 (0.398) -0.029 (0.335) -0.251 (0.442) -0.224 (0.354) 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

80 

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, lab

by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance acr

laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (H

Makambi, 2001) 

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the a

random effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which 

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. 

f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

81 

Table 23. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Growth Endpoints across Laboratories. Test Chem

Lindanea,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

(Standard Error)c

Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7) 

0.092 (0.069) 0.057 (0.069) 0.092 (0.068) 0.082 (0.067) 0.044 (0.068) 0.037 (0.069)

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14) 

0.153 (0.148) 0.204 (0.148) 0.031 (0.148) -0.017 

(0.148) 

-0.049 

(0.148) 

-0.154 

(0.151) 

A decreasing trend 

in differences for 

the highest 

concentration 

group 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 

0.044 (0.082) -0.099 (0.081) -0.062 

(0.081) 

-0.056 

(0.082) 

-0.064 

(0.088) 

-0.043 

(0.094) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7) 

0.537 (0.345) 0.350 (0.343) 0.406 (0.349) 0.251 (0.350) 0.236 (0.345) -0.002 

(0.347) 

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 

0.527 (0.445) 0.299 (0.445) -0.043 

(0.447) 

-0.243 

(0.447) 

-0.076 

(0.446) 

0.048 (0.450)

Length (mm) 

(Termination) 

-0.026 

(0.127) 

-0.186 (0.128) -0.228 

(0.129) 

-0.176 

(0.132) 

0.022 (0.140) 0.096 (0.149)

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, lab

by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance acr

laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (H

Makambi, 2001) 

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the a

random effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which 

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. 

f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

82 

Table 24. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Survival Endpoints across Laboratories. Test Ch

Lindanea,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

(Standard Error)c

Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

(day 7) 

1.350 (4.850) 3.356 (4.850) -2.015 

(5.189) 

5.577 (4.402) 2.074 (5.027) -7.855 

(5.348) 

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

(day 14) 

9.291 (5.781) 5.525 (5.497) 3.986 (5.502) 7.645 (5.645) 5.760 (6.336) 1.470 (7.044)

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

(Termination) 

5.943 (7.886) -3.170 (7.252) 1.965 (7.747) 5.312 (7.254) 7.285 (7.754) 5.992 (8.681)

Total Survival (%) 

(day 7) 

0.990 (5.180) 1.238 (4.940) -2.114 

(5.538) 

4.420 (4.918) -8.173 

(5.265) 

-16.088 

(5.567) 

A decreasing trend 

in differences for 

the highest 

concentration 

group 

Total Survival (%) 

(day 14) 

2.991 (7.939) 5.658 (7.651) 0.403 (8.020) 9.979 (8.058) -5.511 

(8.422) 

-10.492 

(7.903) 

Total Survival (%) 

 (Termination) Only SMV data are available 

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, lab

by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance acr

laboratories, Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (H

Makambi, 2001) 

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the a

random effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which 

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. 

f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation.
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

83 

Table 25. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Reproduction Endpoints across Laboratories. Te

Chemical: Octylphenola,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

(Standard Error)c Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Number Offspring 

(brood 1) 0.559 (1.373) 2.069 (1.431) 1.316 (1.376) 1.324 (1.310) 2.676 (1.371) 1.331 (1.670)

Number Offspring 

(brood 2) 1.622 (2.466) 7.501 (2.417) 5.314 (2.417) 5.647 (2.430) 6.732 (2.425) 4.652 (2.791) Groups 2

5(

Number Offspring 

(two broods) 2.762 (3.942) 10.327 (3.951) 7.104 (3.907) 7.531 (3.856) 9.755 (3.914) 6.809 (4.447) Groups 2

5(

Days to Brood 1 

-2.369 

(4.180) -0.931 (4.188) -3.518 (4.187) -3.078 (4.188) -2.826 (4.184) -4.057 (4.228) 

Days to Brood 2 

-3.155 

(5.052) -2.224 (5.064) -4.276 (5.061) -4.390 (5.049) -3.809 (5.067) -6.820 (5.123) 

A decreasing trend 

in differences for 

the highest 

concentration 

group 

Days Between 

Broods 1 and 2 0.122 (0.516) -0.903 (0.569) -0.161 (0.509) -0.397 (0.491) -0.657 (0.603) -1.340 (0.695) 

Time to Mature 

(females) (days) 

-2.583 

(0.741) -1.250 (0.662) -0.917 (1.103) -1.583 (0.741) -0.250 (1.199) -2.250 (0.878) 

Total Reproductive 

Days for the First Two 

Broods 

Only SMV data available 

# of Offspring Per 

Female Per 

Reproduction Day 

for the First Two 

Broods 

Only SMV data available 

% of Females 

Productively Active 

-0.149 

(1.379) 2.656 (3.216) 0.284 (1.226) -0.260 (1.244) 0.195 (0.996) 6.991 (6.823)

Sex Ratio 0.116 (0.373) -0.213 (0.319) -0.646 (0.309) -0.277 (0.316) -0.245 (0.293) 0.028 (0.402)

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, laborato

generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

84 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across l

Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makam

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the above r

effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which the t

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

85 

Table 26. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Growth Endpoints across Laboratories. Test Che

Octylphenola,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

(Standard Error)c

Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 7) 0.090 (0.042) 0.101 (0.040) 0.111 (0.043) 0.076 (0.041) 0.072 (0.041) 0.145 (0.049)

Dry Weight (mg) 

(day 14) 0.120 (0.077) 0.132 (0.076) 0.118 (0.078) 0.143 (0.077) 0.146 (0.076) 0.233 (0.091)

Dry Weight (mg) 

(Termination) 

-0.033 

(0.267) -0.112 (0.266) -0.058 (0.266) -0.122 (0.266) -0.092 (0.266) -0.090 (0.267) 

Length (mm) 

(day 7) 0.410 (0.312) 0.549 (0.309) 0.473 (0.309) 0.513 (0.310) 0.683 (0.309) 0.693 (0.354)

Length (mm) 

(day 14) 0.590 (0.196) 0.690 (0.202) 0.372 (0.196) 0.642 (0.197) 0.798 (0.199) 0.729 (0.262) Group 

Length (mm) 

(Termination) 

-0.095 

(0.082) 0.156 (0.097) 0.137 (0.089) 0.003 (0.083) 0.039 (0.110) -0.076 (0.082) 

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, laborato

generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across l

Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makam

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the above r

effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which the t

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. 

f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

86 

Table 27. Differences (F1-F0) between Two Generations for Survival Endpoints across Laboratories. Test Che

Octylphenola,b. 

Parameters 

Difference of Averages Between F0 and F1 Generations 

 (Standard Error)c

Concentration 

Trend Testsd

Group

Signif

Differ

betw

Genera

Control 

(Group 1) 

0.26 μg/L 

(Group 2) 

0.64 μg/L 

(Group 3) 

1.6 μg/L 

(Group 4) 

4.0 μg/L 

(Group 5) 

10 μg/L 

(Group 6) 

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

(day 7) 

1.806 (2.395) 2.495 (2.387) -1.045 (2.340) -0.238 (2.340) 4.119 (2.226) 7.784 (2.688)

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

 (day 14) 

3.232 (3.507) 2.682 (3.306) -1.421 (3.456) -2.454 (3.291) 3.917 (3.616) 9.201 (4.175)

Reproductive Survival 

(%) 

 (Termination) 

1.815 (8.563) 5.556 (8.009) 6.537 (7.835) 2.019 (8.273) 7.439 (7.782) 19.299 (9.774) 

Total Survival (%) 

 (day 7) 

-4.071 

(3.751) -0.729 (5.330) -8.545 (4.646) -7.677 (5.330) -0.711 (4.330) 0.865 (4.608)

Total Survival (%) 

 (day 14) 

-2.117 

(7.329) 1.659 (7.540) -4.265 (7.425) -11.625 (8.375) -0.729 (6.741) 4.541 (8.135)

Total Survival (%) 

 (Termination) Only SMV data are available 

a. A random effects model with generation, concentration group and interaction of generation and concentration group treated as fixed effect, and laboratory, laborato

generation and laboratory by generation by group as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory and generation. 

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2 + Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2 is the total random variance across l

Si2 and dfi are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2, and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makam

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two generations and standard errors across laboratory for each concentration group were based on the above r

effect models.. 

d. Step-down trend test were performed in the differences between the two generations. 

e. If generation or the interaction of generation and concentration group effect is significant, then F-tests were used to identify the concentration groups in which the t

generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level. 

f. “↓” F1 generation less than F0 generation. 

“↑” F1 generation greater than F0 generation. 
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

87 

Figure 1. Control Study, First Brood Sizes, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Ac

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F0)

0123456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

A

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

88 

Figure 2. Control Study, Second Brood Sizes, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F0)

23456789

101112

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

89 

Figure 3. Control Study, Brood Sizes for First Two Broods, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Ea

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F0)

02468

101214161820

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

90 

Figure 4. Control Study, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F0)

1015202530

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

91 

Figure 5. Control Study, Days to Second Brood, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F0)

2025303540

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

92 

Figure 6. Control Study, Days to Between first Two Broods, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for E

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F0)

23456789

101112

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

93 

Figure 7. Control Study, Mature Days, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F0)

8

1012141618

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

94 

Figure 8. Control Study, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standa

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average AStudies. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F0) 56789101112131415 SMV Lindane SMV Octylphenol UNT LIndane UNT Vinclozolin ABC Octylphenol WLI Octylphenol ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

95 

Figure 9. Control Study, Number of Offspring per Female per Reproductive Day, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F0) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 SMV Lindane SMV Octylphenol UNT LIndane UNT Vinclozolin ABC Octylphenol WLI Octylphenol ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

96 

Figure 10. Control Study, % of Female Reproductively Active, F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

A

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

97 

Figure 11. Control Study, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Stu

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F0)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

98 

Figure 12. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day0) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study 

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 0 (F0)

0.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.08

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

99 

Figure 13. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day7) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study 

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F0)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

100 

Figure 14. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day14) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Stud

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

101 

Figure 15. Control Study, Dry Weight (Termination) (mg), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eac

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

102 

Figure 16. Control Study, Length (Day 0) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 0 (F0)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

103 

Figure 17. Control Study, Length (Day 7) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F0)

012345678

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

104 

Figure 18. Control Study, Length (Day 14) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study a

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F0)

0123456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

105 

Figure 19. Control Study, Length (Termination) (mm), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each St

and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F0)

0123456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

106 

Figure 20. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Error

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across StudieNote: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

107 

Figure 21. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Erro

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across StudieNote: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

108 

Figure 22. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average AcStudies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F0) 60708090 100 110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

109 

Figure 23. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eac

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100% 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

110 

Figure 24. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Ea

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

111 

Figure 25. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F0 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors f

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studie

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F0)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

A

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

112 

Figure 26. Control Study, First Brood Sizes, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Ac

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F1)

0123456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

113 

Figure 27. Control Study, Second Brood Sizes, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F1)

0123456789

1011121314

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

114 

Figure 28. Control Study, Brood Sizes for First Two Broods, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Ea

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F1)

048

12162024

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

115 

Figure 29. Control Study, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F1)

1015202530

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

116 

Figure 30. Control Study, Days to Second Brood, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F1)

15202530354045

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

117 

Figure 31. Control Study, Days to Between first Two Broods, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for E

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F1)

23456789

101112

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

118 

Figure 32. Control Study, Mature Days, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across 

Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F1)

68

10121416

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

119 

Figure 33. Control Study, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standa

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average AStudies. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F1) 56789101112131415 SMV Lindane SMV Octylphenol UNT LIndane UNT Vinclozolin ABC Octylphenol WLI Octylphenol ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

120 

Figure 34. Control Study, Number of Offspring per Female per Reproductive Day, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 

Standard Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F1) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 SMV Lindane SMV Octylphenol UNT LIndane UNT Vinclozolin ABC Octylphenol WLI Octylphenol ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

121 

Figure 35. Control Study, % of Female Reproductively Active, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F1)

405060708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

122 

Figure 36. Control Study, Sex Ratio, F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study and Across St

The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F1)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

123 

Figure 37. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day0) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study 

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 0 (F1)

0.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

124 

Figure 38. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day7) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study 

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F1)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

125 

Figure 39. Control Study, Dry Weight (Day14) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Stud

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

126 

Figure 40. Control Study, Dry Weight (Termination) (mg), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eac

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

127 

Figure 41. Control Study, Length (Day 0) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 0 (F1)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

128 

Figure 42. Control Study, Length (Day 7) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study an

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F1)

012345678

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

129 

Figure 43. Control Study, Length (Day 14) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each Study a

Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F1)

23456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

130 

Figure 44. Control Study, Length (Termination) (mm), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Each St

and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F1)

23456789

10

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

131 

Figure 45. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Error

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across StudieNote: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F1)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

132 

Figure 46. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Erro

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across StudieNote: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F1)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

133 

Figure 47. Control Study, Reproduction Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard 

Errors for Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average AcStudies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F1) 405060708090 100 110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

134 

Figure 48. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 7) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eac

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F1)

60708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

135 

Figure 49. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Day 14) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Ea

Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studies. Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F1)

5060708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

136 

Figure 50. Control Study, Total Survival Rate (Termination) (%), F1 Generation: Means ± 2 Standard Errors f

Each Study and Across Studies. The Solid Reference Line Corresponds to the Average Across Studie

Note: The upper limits were truncated at 100%. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F1)

5060708090

100110

SMV

Lindane

SMV

Octylphenol

UNT

LIndane

UNT

Vinclozolin

ABC

Octylphenol

WLI

Octylphenol

ALL

Lab & Chemical
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

137 

Figure 51. Mysid, Lindane First Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentr

Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a RandoEffect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F0)

02468

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

138 

Figure 52. Mysid, Lindane, Second Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F0)

0123456789

1011121314

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

139 

Figure 53. Mysid, Lindane, First Two Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F0)

68

1012141618202224

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

140 

Figure 54. Mysid, Lindane, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F0)

1015202530

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

141 

Figure 55. Mysid, Lindane, Days to Second Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F0)

15202530

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

142 

Figure 56. Mysid, Lindane, Days between the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F0)

2468

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

143 

Figure 57. Mysid, Lindane, Mature Days, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentrati

Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a RandoEffect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F0)

8

10121416

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

144 

Figure 58. Mysid, Lindane, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Stand

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F0)

56789

101112131415

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

145 

Figure 59. Mysid, Lindane, Total Reproductive Number of Offspring Per Reproductive Day Per Female for the 

Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F0) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNT 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

146 

Figure 60. Mysid, Lindane, % of Female Reproductively Active, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F0)

60708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

147 

Figure 61. Mysid, Lindane, Sex Ratio (males/females), F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F0)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.5

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

148 

Figure 62. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F0)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

149 

Figure 63. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

150 

Figure 64. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Baa Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

151 

Figure 65. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F0)

012345678

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

152 

Figure 66. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F0)

0123456789

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

153 

Figure 67. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F0)

56789

1011

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

154 

Figure 68. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error B

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

155 

Figure 69. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

156 

Figure 70. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard E

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F0)

30405060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

157 

Figure 71. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

158 

Figure 72. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Baa Random Effect Model). 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

159 

Figure 73. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Ba

Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F0)

5060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

160 

Figure 74. Mysid, Lindane, First Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentr

Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a RandoEffect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F1)

23456789

101112

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

161 

Figure 75. Mysid, Lindane, Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F1)

23456789

10111213141516

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

162 

Figure 76. Mysid, Lindane, First Two Broods Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F1)

48

1216202428

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

163 

Figure 77. Mysid, Lindane, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F1)

1015202530

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

164 

Figure 78. Mysid, Lindane Days to Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F1)

1520253035

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

165 

Figure 79. Mysid, Lindane Days between First Two Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Baa Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F1)

23456789

101112

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

166 

Figure 80. Mysid, Lindane, Mature Day, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentratio

Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a RandoEffect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F1)

68

10121416

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

167 

Figure 81. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard E

Bars for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F1) 56789101112131415 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNT 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

168 

Figure 82. Mysid, Lindane, Number of Offspring Per Day Per Female for First Two Broods, F1 Generation. M

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F1) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNT 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

169 

Figure 83. Mysid, Lindane, % of Females Productively Active, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars f

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F1)

405060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

170 

Figure 84. Mysid, Lindane, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F1)

0123456

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

171 

Figure 85. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 0 (F1)

0.000.010.020.030.040.050.06

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

172 

Figure 86. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F1)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

173 

Figure 87. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

174 

Figure 88. Mysid, Lindane, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Baa Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

175 

Figure 89. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 0 (F1)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

176 

Figure 90. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F1)

012345678

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

177 

Figure 91. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F1)

23456789

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

178 

Figure 92. Mysid, Lindane, Length (mm) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F1)

23456789

10

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

179 

Figure 93. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars f

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F1)

5060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

180 

Figure 94. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F1)

102030405060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

181 

Figure 95. Mysid, Lindane, Reproductive Survival Rate Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error 

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F1)

405060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

182 

Figure 96. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F1)

5060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

183 

Figure 97. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Eac

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F1)

2030405060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

184 

Figure 98. Mysid, Lindane, Total Survival Rate Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars fo

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F1)

5060708090

100110

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

UNT

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab

1-Control 2-32 ng/L3-80 ng/L 4-200 ng/L5-500 ng/L 6-1250 ng/L
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

185 

Figure 99. Mysid, Octylphenol, First Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F0)

0123456789

10 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

186 

Figure 100. Mysid, Octylphenol, Second Brood Size, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F0)

0123456789

10111213 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

187 

Figure 101. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring of the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Stand

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Me

Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F0)

02468

10121416182022 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

188 

Figure 102. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to First Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F0)

101520253035 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

189 

Figure 103. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to the Second Brood, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F0)

15202530354045 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

190 

Figure 104. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days between the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error B

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F0)

2468

10121416 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

191 

Figure 105. Mysid, Octylphenol, Mature Days, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concent

Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a RandoEffect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F0)

8

1012141618 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

192 

Figure 106. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F0) 56789101112131415 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L 3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L 5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 ABC 1 2 3 4 5 6 WLI 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

193 

Figure 107. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring Per Day Per Female, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard 

Bars for Each Concentration Group. 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F0) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L 3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L 5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 ABC 1 2 3 4 5 6 WLI 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

194 

Figure 108. Mysid, Octylphenol, % of Females Productively Active, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Ba

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F0)

2030405060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

195 

Figure 109. Mysid, Octylphenol, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F0)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.5 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

196 

Figure 110. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Eac

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F0)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

197 

Figure 111. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Ea

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.4 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

198 

Figure 112. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars f

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F0)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

199 

Figure 113. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F0)

012345678 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

200 

Figure 114. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F0)

0123456789

10 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

201 

Figure 115. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F0)

56789

1011121314 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

202 

Figure 116. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Err

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

203 

Figure 117. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Er

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

204 

Figure 118. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standa

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square MeEstimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F0)

405060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

205 

Figure 119. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F0)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

206 

Figure 120. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F0)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

207 

Figure 121. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Termination, F0 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Erro

for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F0)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

208 

Figure 122. Mysid, Octylphenol, First Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First Brood Size (F1)

23456789

101112 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

209 

Figure 123. Mysid, Octylphenol, Second Brood Size, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Second Brood Size (F1)

23456789

10111213141516 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

210 

Figure 124. Mysid, Octylphenol, # of Offspring for the First Two Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Err

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for First & Secon Brood Size (F1)

48

1216202428 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

211 

Figure 125. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to First Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to First Brood (F1)

1015202530 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

212 

Figure 126. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days to Second Brood, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days to Second Brood (F1)

152025303540 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

213 

Figure 127. Mysid, Octylphenol, Days between the First Two Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error B

for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Days between Two Broods (F1)

23456789

101112 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

214 

Figure 128. Mysid, Octylphenol, Mature Days, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concent

Group 

Parameter Estimate for Mature Day (F1)

68

10121416 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

215 

Figure 129. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 

Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for Total Reproductive Days for the First Two Broods (F1)

56789

101112131415 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

216 

Figure 130. Mysid, Octylphenol, Numbers of Offspring Per Day Per Female for the First Two Brood, F1 Genera

Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each Concentration Group 

Parameter Estimate for # of Offspring Per Day for the First Two Broods (F1) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L 3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L 5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L 1 2 3 4 5 6 SMV 1 2 3 4 5 6 ABC 1 2 3 4 5 6 WLI 1 2 3 4 5 6 Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

217 

Figure 131. Mysid, Octylphenol, % of Females Productively Active, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Ba

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for % of Fmales Productively Active (F1)

405060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

218 

Figure 132. Mysid, Octylphenol, Sex Ratio (Males/Females), F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Sex Ratio (F1)

0123456789

10 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

219 

Figure 133. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Eac

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 0 (F1)

0.000.010.020.030.040.050.06 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

220 

Figure 134. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Eac

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 7 (F1)

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

221 

Figure 135. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Ea

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Day 14 (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

222 

Figure 136. Mysid, Octylphenol, Dry Weight (mg) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars f

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Dry Weight Termination (F1)

0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21.41.61.82.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

223 

Figure 137. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 0, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 0 (F1)

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.0 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

224 

Figure 138. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 7 (F1)

012345678 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

225 

Figure 139. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for Each 

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Day 14 (F1)

23456789

10 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

226 

Figure 140. Mysid, Octylphenol, Length (mm) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars for E

Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Ba

a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Length Termination (F1)

23456789

10 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

227 

Figure 141. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Err

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 7 (F1)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

228 

Figure 142. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Er

Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as Estimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate day 14 (F1)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

229 

Figure 143. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standa

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square MeEstimated Based on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Reproduction Survival rate Termination (F1)

405060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

230 

Figure 144. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 7, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 7 (F1)

60708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

231 

Figure 145. Mysid, Octylphenol, Total Survival Rate (%) Day 14, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standard Error Bars 

Each Concentration Group (the Average across Laboratories Were Least Square Means, as EstimatBased on a Random Effect Model) 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate day 14 (F1)

5060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab
DRAFT 

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Mysid 2-Generation Data 

232 

Figure 146. Mysid, Octylphenol, Reproductive Survival Rate (%) Termination, F1 Generation. Mean ± 2 Standa

Error Bars for Each Concentration Group. 

Parameter Estimate for Total Survival rate Termination (F1)

5060708090

100110 1-Control 2-0.26 ug/L

3-0.64 ug/L 4-1.6 ug/L

5-4.0 ug/L 6-10 ug/L

1 2 3 4 5 6

SMV

1 2 3 4 5 6

ABC

1 2 3 4 5 6

WLI

1 2 3 4 5 6

Average

Group & Lab