# DRAFT



# Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

Contract No: EP-W-11-063

Task Order No: 2

Statistical Support for Technical Directive #5

Data Analysis Support for Avian Tier 2 Test and Generation of Integrated Summary Report

Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

May 20, 2013

BATTELLE

505 King Avenue Columbus, Ohio 43201

# i Table of Contents

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

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

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

4. Inter-laborat ory analyses .................................................................................................. ................ 6

4.1 Inter-laboratory Analy ses of Control Data ........................................................................ 7

4.2 Comparisons of Vinclozolin and the Control for Each Generation .................................. 8

4.3 Comparison of Generations .............................................................................................. 8

5. Results .................................................................................................................... .......................... 9

6. Comparison of Inter-laboratory CVs and W ithin-study Sensitivity across Endpoints ................ 116

6.1 Comparison of Inter-laboratory CVs across Endpoints ................................................ 116

6.2 Comparison of Within-study Power Sensitivity across Endpoints ............................... 117

Appendices

Appendix A – Figures for Avian Control Data
Appendix B - Figures for Avian Inter-Laboratory Anal ysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin vs Control

Tables

Table 1. Variabl es and Description ........................................................................................... ................... 3

Table 2. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means and Standard Errors

with Random Laboratory Eff ect, F0 Generation ........................................................................ 10

Table 3. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory, F0 Generation ................................................ 14

Table 4. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction

Intervals within Laboratory and Between Laboratories, F0 Generation ..................................... 18

Table 5. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means and Standard Errors

with Random Laboratory Eff ect, F1 Generation ........................................................................ 22

Table 6. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory, F1 Generation ................................................ 28

Table 7. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction

Intervals within Laboratory and Between Laboratories, F1 Generation ..................................... 36

Table 8. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means and Standard Errors

with Random Laboratory Eff ect, F2 Generation ........................................................................ 42

# ii Table 9. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance

Component Analysis with Random Laboratory, F2 Generation ................................................ 45

Table 10. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian C ontrol Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction

Intervals within Laboratory and Between Laboratories, F2 Generation ..................................... 48

Table 11. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided)

Significance Level. Avian St udy, F0 Generation. ..................................................................... 51

Table 12. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided)

Significance Level. Avian St udy, F1 Generation. ..................................................................... 54

Table 13. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided)

Significance Level. Avian St udy, F2 Generation. ..................................................................... 59

Table 14. Mean and Standard Errors and Comp arisons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations

to Control across Laboratories, F0 Generation ........................................................................... 61

Table 15. Mean and Standard Errors and Comp arisons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations

to Control across Laboratories, F1 Generation ........................................................................... 76

Table 16. Mean and Standard Errors and Comp arisons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations

to Control across Laboratories, F2 Generation ......................................................................... 100

Table 17. Differences between Generations acr oss Laboratories. Chemical Vincolozolin,

Avian Study. .................................................................................................................. ........... 109

Table 18. CV (%) and Significance Levels across Laboratories.............................................................. 118

Table 19. Ranges of CV% across Laboratories. By Category. ............................................................... 121

Table 20. Percent Deviations from Control Gr oup Means for Detections with 80% Power and

the Ratios Between Gyrations. ................................................................................................. 122

Table 21. Ranges of Percent Deviations fro m Control Group Means for Detections with

80% Power and the Ratios Between Ge nerations. By Category. ............................................ 127

Figures

Figure 1. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corr esponding Parameters. Body Weight. ..................................... 128

Figure 2. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corr esponding Parameters. Body Weight. ..................................... 129

Figure 3. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Correspondi ng Parameters. Feed Consumption. ............................ 130

Figure 4. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corr esponding Parameters. Reproduction. ..................................... 131

Figure 5. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Correspondi ng Parameters. Egg Shell and Weight. ....................... 132

Figure 6. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corres ponding Parameters. Ma ting Behavior. ............................... 133

Figure 7. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corres ponding Parameters. Thyroid Weight. ................................. 134

Figure 8. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corres ponding Parameters. Thyroid Weight. ................................. 135

# iii Figure 9. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Co rresponding Parameters. Sex Ratio. ........................................... 136

Figure 10. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corr esponding Parameters. Bio Chem. ........................................ 137

Figure 11. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Body Weight. ................................................ 138

Figure 12. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Body Weight. ................................................ 139

Figure 13. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Feed Consumption. ....................................... 140

Figure 14. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Reproduction. ............................................... 141

Figure 15. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Egg Shell and Wight. .................................... 142

Figure 16. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Mating Behavior. .......................................... 143

Figure 17. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Thyroid Weight. ............................................ 144

Figure 18. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects with Power 80%. Thyroid Weight. ............................................ 145

Figure 19. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects w ith Power 80%. Sex Ratio. ..................................................... 146

Figure 20. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control Group Means for the Corresponding

Parameters to Detect Effects w ith Power 80%. Bio Chem. ..................................................... 147

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

1 1. Introduction

To evaluate the effects of endocrine disruptin g chemicals, EPA is currently developing and
validating a Tier 2, two-generation avian toxicity test to characterize the adverse consequences of
exposure to putative endocrine active substances. Test s were carried out by EPA in three laboratories:
Smithers Viscient LLC (SV), Bayer CropScience Inc (ST), and Wildlife International (WLI). All three

laboratories carried out tests with vincolozline at 64, 160, 400, and 1000 ppm concentration levels. The
intra-laboratory analyses were performed for each labor atory data by WLI and were presented in the inlaboratory analysis reports. This report presented only the inter-laborator y analysis as carried out at the
three laboratories. Individual summary statistics, su ch as mean and standard errors may be presented in
this report; however, the significant test results for individual laboratories were not presented nor
summarized in this report.

2. Questions to be addressed. Locations of answers.

EPA requested that inter-laboratory analyses be ca rried 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 single laboratory?

Table 2, Table 3, and Table 4 display the c ontrol group mean values (averaged across all
samples) for each laboratory and pooled across laboratories, as well as the CV% across
laboratories. The CV% incorporates laborat ory-to-laboratory variability. These tables
corespond to generation F0, F1, and F2, respectively. The means ± 2standard errors of

means were also displayed in Appendix A

.

Table 5, Table 6, and Table 7 display the w ithin-laboratory variances of the control group
means within each laboratory, the pooled with in-laboratrory varian ce across laboratories,
the random laboratory-to-laboratory variance, and the variance for the averages across
laboratories. One table corresponds to one of the three generations F0, F1, and F2.

Table 8, Table 9, and Table 10 present within -laboratory 95% prediction intervals that
give the anticipated range of control group mean values about the overall mean with 95%
confidence within a single laboratory. One table corresponds to one of the three
generations F0, F1, and F2.

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

Table 8, Table 9, and Table 10 present 95% pred iction intervals that give the anticipated
range of control group mean values about th e overall mean with 95% confidence across
independent laboratories. One table corresponds to one of the three generations F0, F1,

and F2.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

2 o Are there differences in the technical prof iciency (i.e. variability of controls) among

laboratories?

Table 5, Table 6, and Table 7 also display the p-values of tests of homogeneity of withinlaboratory variances. This indicates whether there is evidence of differences in the
within-laboratory variability among laboratori es. One table corresponds to one of the
three generations F0, F1, and F2.

o What is the power for detecting treatment -related effects based on the variability of
endpoints measured in controls?

Table 11, Table 12, and Table 13 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). One table corr esponds to one of the three generations F0,

F1, and F2.

 Are dose-response relationships si milar among labs, in terms of:

o Sensitivity (chemical concentrations that r esults in differences between treatment and
controls):

Table 14, Table 15, and Table 16 display the means and standard errors for each
concentration group, within laboratories and pooled across laboratories, and the
significant differences identified between test group and control group responses for
vinclozolin 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, tests for differences be tween concentration and control groups,
and step-down tests for linear concentration trends. The individual laboratory significant
test results are not presented in this inter-la boratory report, and are presented elsewhere in
the intra-laboratory report. One table corres ponds to one of the three generations F0, F1,

and F2. These tables can be used to dete rmine the lowest effect concentration as the
lowest concentration at which a significan t difference between test group and control
group is observed. The means ± 2 standard errors of means were also displayed in

Appendix B

.

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

Table 14, Table 15, and Table 16 also show significant trends across concentration
groups among all laboratories, when present. Individual slope values were not

determined.

 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 Avian 2-Tier Test

3 Table 17 displays the differences of averages be tween each of pair of generations F0, F1,

and F2 and their standard errors for each con centration group, pooled across laboratories.
This table also displays the summary of the significant differences identified between
each two generations among the three generati ons F0, F1, and F2 for vinclozolin, pooled
across laboratories. Both individual sign ificant groups and significant trends across
concentration groups are indicated. Table 17 can be used to determine the lowest effect

concentration as the lowest concentration at which a significant difference between
generations is observed. The significant r esults between generations for individual
laboratory were not presented in this report.

3. Study data

The study endpoints that are included in the inter-l aboratory analyses are the same as those that
were included in the intra-laboratory analyses.

The test method specifies various endpoints (variabl es) as listed in Table 1. Some endpoints were
recorded for more than one generation, while othe rs were only recorded in one generation. These
endpoints are divided among 9 categories. The study data were provided to Battelle in CVS (comma
separated values) formats by WLI, and the data files names were also listed in Table 1. The data values
for each endpoint can be found in the corresponding data files.

Table 1. Variables and Description

Variable

Name Description of Variable Data Files a 

# Generation

Body Weight

bwm0 Adult body weight - males (g) Day 0 X1_XX_abwm.csv F0, F1

bwm56 Adult body weight - males (g) Final X1_XX_abwm.csv F0, F1

bwF0 Adult body weight - females (g) Day 0 X1_XX_abwF.csv F0, F1

bwF56 Adult body weight - females (g) Final X1_XX_abwF.csv F0, F1

offbw0 Mean offspring (F1 & F2) body weight by pen (g) Day 0 X1_XX_OffBW.csv F1, F2

offbw14 Mean offspring (F1 & F2) body weight by pen (g) Day 14 X1_XX_OffBW.csv F1, F2

Feed Consumption

AdultFC1 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 1 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC2 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 2 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC3 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 3 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC4 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 4 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC5 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 5 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC6 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 6 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC7 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 7 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC8 b 

# Adult feed consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC9 c 

# Adult feed consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9 X2_XX_AdultFC.csv F0, F1

AdultFC10 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 10 X2_SV_AdultFC.csv F1

AdultFC11 Adult feed consumption (g/bird/ day) - Week 11 X2_SV_AdultFC.csv F1

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

4 Reproduction

Laid Eggs Laid X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Crack Eggs Crack X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Abnormal Eggs Abnormal X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGSet FG Eggs Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFGSet EFG Eggs Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGFert FG Eggs Fertile X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFGFert EFG Eggs Fertile X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGViable FG Eggs Viable X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFGVia EFG Eggs Viable X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG2Wk FG 2Wk Via X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFG2Wk EFG 2Wk Via X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGHatch FG Hatch X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG14Day FG 14-Day Survival X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Laid_Hen_Day Laid / Hen / Day (49) X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Crack_Laid Crack / Laid X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Abnorm_Laid Abnormal / Laid X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGFert_Set F&G Fert / F&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFGFert_Set EF&G Fert / EF&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGVia_Set F&G Viable / F&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFGVia_Set EF&G Viable / EF&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG2Wk_Via F&G 2-Wk / F&G Viable X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

EFG2Wk_Via EF&G 2-Wk / EF&G Viable X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGHatch_2Wk F&G Hatch / F&G 2- Wk X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG14Day_Hatch F&G 14-Day / F&G Hatch X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGHatch_Set F&G Hatch / F&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGHatch_Fert F&G Hatch / F&G Fe rt X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG14Day_Set F&G 14-Day / F&G Set X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FGHatch_H_D F&G Hatch / Hen / Day (14) X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

FG14Day_H_D F&G 14-Day / Hen / Day (14) X3_XX_Repro.csv F0, F1

Egg Shell and Weight

EggShellThick Pen mean Egg Shell Thickne ss (mm) X4_XX_EggShell_Wt.csv F0, F1

EggWtAlb Pen mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) X4_XX_EggShell_Wt.csv F0, F1

EggWtYolk Pen mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g) X4_XX_EggShell_Wt.csv F0, F1

EggWtComb Pen mean Egg Contents Weight - Combined (g) X4_XX_EggShell_Wt.csv F0, F1

First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size

AgeFoam Age in days at first foam - males X5_XX_AgeFoamEgg.csv F1

AgeEgg Age in days at first egg - females X5_XX_AgeFoamEgg.csv F1

CloacaM4 d 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 4 weeks - Males X5_XX_CloacaMale.csv F1

CloacaM5 d 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 5 weeks - Males X5_XX_CloacaMale.csv F1

CloacaM6 d 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 6 weeks - Males X5_XX_CloacaMale.csv F1

CloacaM7 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 7 weeks - Males X5_WIL_CloacaMale.csv F1

CloacaM8 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 8 weeks - Males X5_WIL_CloacaMale.csv F1

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

5 CloacaM9 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 9 weeks - Males X5_WIL_CloacaMale.csv F1

CloacaF4 e 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 4 weeks - Females X5_XX_CloacaFemale.csv F1

CloacaF5 e 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 5 weeks - Females X5_XX_CloacaFemale.csv F1

CloacaF6 e 

# Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 6 weeks - Females X5_XX_CloacaFemale.csv F1

CloacaF7 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 7 weeks - Females X5_WIL_CloacaFemale.csv F1

CloacaF8 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at 8 weeks - Females X5_WIL_CloacaFemale.csv F1

CloacaF9 Cloacal area (cm 2 

# ) at9 weeks - Females X5_WIL_CloacaFemale.csv F1

Mating Behavior g



# NeckGrab1 Length of time to first neck grab (sec) - Day 1 X6_XX_Neck_Grab.csv F1, F2

NeckGrab2 Length of time to first neck grab (sec) - Day 2 X6_XX_Neck_Grab.csv F1, F2

NeckGrab3 Length of time to first neck grab (sec) - Day 3 X6_XX_Neck_Grab.csv F1, F2

ChangeNG f 

# Change in length of time to first neck grab (sec) X6_XX_Neck_Grab.csv F1, F2

Mount1 Length of time to first mount (s ec) - Day 1 X6_XX_Mount.csv F1, F2

Mount2 Length of time to first mount (s ec) - Day 2 X6_XX_Mount.csv F1, F2

Mount3 Length of time to first mount (s ec) - Day 3 X6_XX_Mount.csv F1, F2

ChangeMt f 

# Change in length of time to firs t mount (sec) X6_XX_Mount.csv F1, F2

Attempts1 Number of mount attempts (cou nt) - Day 1 X6_XX_NAttempts.csv F1, F2

Attempts2 Number of mount attempts (cou nt) - Day 2 X6_XX_NAttempts.csv F1, F2

Attempts3 Number of mount attempts (cou nt) - Day 3 X6_XX_NAttempts.csv F1, F2

ChangeAt f 

# Change in number of mount attempts (count) X6_XX_NAttempts.csv F1, F2

CloCon1 Number of cloacal contacts (count) - Day 1 X6_XX_CloacalCon.csv F1, F2

CloCon2 Number of cloacal contacts (count) - Day 2 X6_XX_CloacalCon.csv F1, F2

CloCon3 Number of cloacal contacts (count) - Day 3 X6_XX_CloacalCon.csv F1, F2

ChangeCC f 

# Change in number of cloacal contacts (count) X6_XX_CloacalCon.csv F1, F2

CrowFluff1 Number of crows (cock) or fluffs (hen) (count) - Day 1 X6_XX_CrowFluff.csv F1, F2

CrowFluff2 Number of crows (cock) or fluffs (hen) (count) - Day 2 X6_XX_CrowFluff.csv F1, F2

CrowFluff3 Number of crows (cock) or fluffs (hen) (count) - Day 2 X6_XX_CrowFluff.csv F1, F2

ChangeCF f 

# Change in number of crows (cock) or flu ffs (hen) (count) X6_XX_CrowFluff.csv F1, F2

Thyroid Weight

ThyF214DayM 14-Day Old left thyroid weight (mg) – Males X5_WIL_14DayThy.csv X7_SV_14DayThy.csv F2

ThyF214DayF 14-Day Old left thyroid weight (mg) - Females X5_WIL_14DayThy.csv X7_SV_14DayThy.csv F2

ThyF214Day 14-Day Old left thyroid weight (mg) h 

# X5_ST_14DayThy.csv F2

ThyWtED15 15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weights (mg) X7_XX_ED15Thy.csv F1, F2

ThyAdultMale Adult left thyr oid weight (mg) - Males X7_XX_AdultThy.csv F0, F1

ThyAdultFemale Adult left thyr oid weight (mg) - Females X7_XX_AdultThy.csv F0, F1

Sex Ratio

SexRatio Ratio of number of males to total numbe r of offspring (%) X8_XX_SexRatio.csv F1, F2

Bio Chem

YolkE2 Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) X9_XX_YolksE2.csv F0, F1

YolkT Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) X9_XX_YolksT.csv F0, F1

AmT3 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Ma les (ng/mL) X9_XX_AdultMaleT3.csv F0, F1

AfT3 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 -Adult Fema les (ng/mL) X9_XX_AdultFemaleT3.csv F0, F1

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

6 Day14mT3 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 -14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) X9_XX_14DayMaleT3.csv F2

Day14fT3 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 -14-Day Ol d Females (ng/mL) X9_XX _14DayFemaleT3.csv F2

AmT4 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -Adult Ma les (ng/mL) X9_XX_AdultMaleT4.csv F0, F1

AfT4 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -Adult Fema les (ng/mL) X9_XX_AdultFemaleT4.csv F0, F1

Day14mT4 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) X9_XX_14DayMaleT4.csv F2

Day14fT4 Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -14-Day Ol d Females (ng/mL) X9_XX _14DayFemaleT4.csv F2

AmE2 Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) X9_XX_AdultMaleE2.csv F0, F1

AfE2 Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Fe males (pg/mL) X9_XX_AdultFemaleE2.csv F0, F1

Day14mE2 Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Da y Old Males (pg/mL) X9_XX_14DayMaleE2.csv F2

Day14fE2 Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL) X9_ XX_14DayFemaleE2.csv F2

AmT Plasma Sex Hormone Testos terone - Adult Males (pg/mL) X9_XX_AdultMaleT.csv F0, F1

AfT Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Fe males (pg/mL) X9_XX_Adu ltFemaleT.csv F0, F1

Day14mT Plasma Sex Hormone Te stosterone -14-Day Old Males (pg/mL) X9_XX_14DayMaleT.csv F2

Day14fT Plasma Sex Hormone Test osterone -14-Day Old Females ( pg/mL) X9_XX_14DayFemaleT.csv F2

a. XX – Laboratory ID: ST, SV or WIL, unless otherwise noted.

b. Laboratory ST has only generation F1 data for AdultFC8.

c. Laboratory ST has only generation F1 data for Adu ltFC9. Laboratory WIL has no data for AdultFC9.

d. Measurements for CloacaM4, CloacaM5, and CloacaM6 were recorded in mm 2 

# for Laboratory ST. They were

converted to cm 2 

# to be consistent with ot her two laboratories in the inter-laboratory analysis.

e. Measurements for CloacaF4, CloacaF5, and CloacaF6 were recorded in mm 2 

# for Laboratory ST. They were converted

to cm 2 

# to be consistent with other two laborat ories in the inter-laboratory analysis.

f. Variables ChangeNG, ChangeMt, Change At, ChangeCC, and ChangeCF were re named to NeckChange, MountChange, AttChange, CloChange, and CrowChange, respec tively, in the inter-laboratory analysis.

g. Laboratory ST had only generation F1 da ta for mating behavior endpoints, whil e Laboratories SV and WIL had both generations F1 and F2 data for mating behavior endpoints.

h. Laboratories SV and WIL recorded generation F2 14-Day Ol d left thyroid weight (mg) separately for males and females, while Laboratory ST did not separate this measurement by sex.



# These endpoints were analyzed across laboratories and their analysis results were discussed in
this report. This inter-laboratory report did not in volve any data handling, except for unit conversion as

listed in the footnotes under the above table. Data ha nding, such as the handling of data with “N/D” entry
for below detection limits, had been conducted by the individual laboratory or by the WLI, which
performed the intra-laboratory analysis. Any necessary data changes have been included in the CSV data

files that were sent to Battelle. These data files were read into SAS and used in this inter-laboratory
analysis.

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 three laboratori es to assess the range of variation within laboratory
and among laboratories and the power analyses based on th e control groups to detect alternatives from the
control groups within a laboratory that can be detected with high power, based on average withinlaboratory variability. The second part pertains to the comparisons of the treatment group and control
group results across laboratories. The third part pe rtains to the comparisons of generations across
laboratories. For endpoints with only valid data av ailable for a single laboratory, the inter-laboratory
analysis was not performed.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

7 4.1 Inter-laboratory Anal yses of Control Data

Comparisons among control groups were carried out for the F0, F1, and F2 generation results
separately. The variation in control results was compared among laboratories. Heterogeneous variance
random effects analysis of variance models with ra ndom laboratory effects were fitted to the control

results from each of the three laboratories, where hete rogeneous within-laboratory variance were assumed.
The averages across the three laboratories were then computed based on the model fits.

The individual laboratory means, standard errors of means, and within-laboratory variances are
the unweighted results, as calculated across all the samp les within the laboratory, and the averages mean
and standard error are the model-based least square estimates. Variances for the averages were calculated
as the square of the standard error. Degrees of freed om for the average across laboratories were estimated
as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the random laboratory variance, S i 2



# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the total number of labor atories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001 1 

# ). Pooled within-laboratory
variance was determined as the unweighted averages of the individual within-laboratory variances with
degrees of freedom based on Satterthw aite’s approximation. The laborat ory-to-laboratory variation was
estimated by the random effect model.

The average variance, the pooled within-laborat ory variation, and random laboratory variation
were used to construct 95% two-sided prediction in tervals about the average within the control group
mean. Two levels of predicti on intervals were constructed:



#  Within-laboratory variation

wi avg wi 0.975, avg 

# Var Var t ˆ  

 

# 

 Laboratory-to-laboratory variation

lab wi avg tot 0.975, avg 

# Var Var Var t ˆ   

 

# 

Var avg 

# is the variance of the average r esponse pooled across laboratries. Var wi 

# is the withinlaboratory variance. Var lab 

# is the laboratory variance. Degrees of freedom ν wi 

# , ν lab, 

# and ν total 

# were determined by Satterthwaite’s met hod. The prediction intervals estimate the ranges of control group
mean values that may be expected with 95% conf idence: within a laboratory and among laboratories.

Power determinations were carried out for each endpoint based on the control group within run
variance. Alternatives that can be distinguished fro m the control group mean with power 80% with a 5%
(two-sided) significance level within a laboratory we re determined. These alternatives are based on the

non-central t-distribution with noncentrality parameter | δ |/(  2s wi 

# ) where s wi 

# is the pooled within labaratory

standard error, and δ is the deviation from the control, to be determined. Degrees of freedom are twice
that for the control group and vary with endpoint. Table 11, Table 12, and Table 13 display the control
group means, the control group nominal sample sizes, and the generation distances from the control group
mean that can be detected with power 80%; each table presents the results for a generation.

1 

# Hartung, J. and Makambi, K.H. (2001), Simple non- iterative t-distribution based tests for meta-analysis, South African Statist. J., 35, 1-17.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

8 4.2 Comparisons of Vinclozolin and the Control for Each Generation

The inter-laboratory analysis output includes num erous tables and figures that display numerous
summary characteristics for each endpoint. Table 14, Table 15, and Table 16 pertain to comparisons of

vinclozolin and the controls across laboratories. In these tables, the mean and standard error of means of
each concentration groups within each individual labora tory were calculated by averaging all sample data
in the concentration group within the laboratory. The concentration groups means and standard errors

across the three laboratories were the model-based estimates.

To compare the vinclozolin concentration gr oups to the control across laboratories, a
heterogeneous variance random effects analysis of variance model with random laboratory effect and
random group within-laboratory effect were fitted to th e concentration groups mean results from each of
the three laboratories, where heterogeneous within group variances of each laboratory were assumed. The
concentration group was a fixed effect in the model. The average for each con centration group across the
three laboratories was then computed based on the m odel fits. Degrees of freedom for the average across
laboratories were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total
random variance, as the sum of the random laboratory and random laboratory by concentration variances,

S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of fre edom for a combination of laboratory and
concentration group, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of combinations of laboratory
and concentration groups (Hartung a nd Makambi, 2001). The concentra tion trend tests were performed
within the fitted model following a step-down fashion: if the linear concentration trend including all five
concentration groups is significant, then the lin ear concentration trend after excluding the highest
concentration groups is tested; following this procedur e, the linear concentration trend test after excluding
the highest concentration group among the remain gr oups was performed until the linear concentration
trend is first found to be not significant, then stops. Also, if the overall concentration effect is significant,
then concentration groups of vinclozolin were each compared to the control to identify which
concentration groups were significantly different from the control using the Dunnett’s tests. Significant
differences of vinclozolin concentration group from th e control were also indentified using unadjusted ttests.

The comparisons of vinclozolin concentration to the control were performed across the three
laboratories for each generation, and the results we re presented in Table 14, Table 15, and Table 16
separately for each generation.

4.3 Comparison of Generations

The comparisons of the generations were performed for each two generations separately for those
endpoints where data were measured for the two generation to be compared. For each two generations, a
heterogeneous variance random effects analysis of variance model with laboratory, laboratory by
generation effect, and laboratory by generation by con centration groups as random effect was fitted to the
concentration groups mean results from each of the three laboratories for the two generations to be
compared, where heterogeneous within group variance of a laboratory for a generation were assumed.
The generation, group, and group by generation were fixed effect in the model. The average of
differences between the two generations for each c onentration group across the three laboratories was
then computed based on the model fits. Degrees of freedom for the average across laboratories were
estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance,

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test

9 as the sum of all random effects in the model, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom
for a combination of generation, labo ratory, and concentration group, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# and
K is the number of combinations of generation, laboratory, and concentration group (Hartung and
Makambi, 2001). Differences of the means betwee n the two generations along with the associated

standard errors were estimates based on the model fits. The concentration trend tests were performed in
the differences between the two gene rations within the fitted model following a step-down fashion similar

to that described in Section 4.2. Also if the overa ll generation effect or genera tion by concentration group
effect is significant, then comparisons of each two generations at each concentration group were
performed to identify those concentration groups wh ere the two generations were significantly different.

The differences and their standard errors between each two generations were estimated based on
the model fits and presented in Table 17. The signifi cant results were also presented in the table.

5. Results

Comparisons between the vinclozolin and control showed that:

 A decreasing concentration trend at the hi ghest concentration level (1000 ppm) is
observed for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 in Adult Females of generation F0 (Table 2).

 An increasing concentration trend at the highest concentration level (1000 ppm) is

observed for Plasma Sex Hormone Testoster one in 14-Day Old Females of generation
F2 (Table 8).

The differences between the generations are:

 Adult Body Weight in females on day 0 were significantly lower in F1 generation than in
F0 generation in all four vinclozolin co ncentration groups and control group.

 The differences between generations F1 and F2 in Change in Length of Time to First
Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 have a significant decreasing concentration trend at
the highest concentration level (a significantly negative slope when all five concentration
groups are included).

 The differences between generations F1 and F2 in Change in Length of Time to First
Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 have a significantly decreasing concentration trend at
the highest concentration level (a significantly negative slope when all five concentration
groups are included).

 The differences between generations F0 and F1 in Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 in Adult
Females have a significantly increasing concentration trend at the three highest
concentration levels (a significantly posit ive slope when at least the first three
concentration groups are included). In par ticular, generation F1 is significantly higher
than F0 in concentration groups 3 and 4.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test10Table 2. Inter-laboratory Analysis forAvian Control Data: Means and StandardErrors with Random Laboratory Effect, F0GenerationdParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males190.661 (3.360)202.739 (4.357)113.444 (1.828)168.849 (28.009)28.731 (14.617, 395.887)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males210.625 (3.920)221.482 (3.807)122.059 (1.657)184.637 (31.530)29.578 (15.028, 436.567)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females233.567 (6.594)247.556 (5.955)143.222 (2.529)207.898 (32.810)27.335 (13.936, 340.290)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females249.444 (5.737)276.924 (6.406)157.353 (2.598)227.716 (36.232)27.559 (14.046, 348.404)Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 129.611 (0.600)31.033 (0.722)18.556 (0.706)26.402 (3.941)25.855 (13.211, 293.033)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 229.667 (0.828)28.278 (1.198)20.765 (0.694)26.199 (2.794)18.472 (9.525, 150.570)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 328.944 (0.782)27.556 (1.022)19.235 (0.433)25.203 (3.057)21.011 (10.804, 187.806)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 430.824 (1.340)28.524 (0.693)21.294 (0.452)26.791 (2.883)18.640 (9.612, 152.559)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 533.438 (1.235)31.418 (0.696)22.882 (0.469)29.183 (3.249)19.282 (9.935, 161.507)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 635.750 (1.078)29.382 (0.708)21.941 (0.458)28.979 (3.987)23.831 (12.210, 241.770)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 732.375 (0.758)30.282 (0.674)22.941 (0.650)28.524 (2.862)17.378 (8.970, 137.008)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8NA30.076 (0.625)23.647 (0.477)26.849 (3.215)16.933 (7.501, .)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9NA34.418 (0.838)NANANAa.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number oflaboratories with measurements.d.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test11Table 2. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F0 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cReproductionEggs Laid39.750 (1.445)44.056 (2.509)44.941 (0.949)42.897 (1.756)7.089 (3.748, 40.738)Eggs Crack1.500 (0.532)1.611 (0.776)0.118 (0.118)0.907 (0.540)103.138 (42.997, .)Eggs Abnormal1.938 (0.710)2.444 (1.161)0.235 (0.235)1.269 (0.725)98.889 (42.008, .)Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 810.438 (0.626)11.941 (0.397)12.235 (0.182)11.678 (0.493)7.319 (3.848, 43.808)Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 815.375 (0.957)18.059 (0.532)18.294 (0.306)17.440 (0.830)8.241 (4.317, 50.922)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 89.813 (0.634)11.706 (0.435)11.941 (0.303)11.249 (0.628)9.665 (5.035, 63.004)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 814.375 (0.999)17.824 (0.570)17.941 (0.415)16.867 (1.087)11.157 (5.805, 74.547)Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 89.188 (0.621)11.647 (0.428)11.706 (0.318)10.915 (0.794)12.603 (6.539, 87.663)Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 813.000 (0.979)17.647 (0.555)17.647 (0.461)16.202 (1.494)15.977 (8.264, 120.326)Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation9.188 (0.621)11.529 (0.412)11.588 (0.333)10.841 (0.752)12.020 (6.241, 82.561)Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation13.000 (0.979)17.529 (0.550)17.471 (0.478)16.106 (1.444)15.526 (8.034, 115.491)Eggs Hatched7.750 (0.668)10.882 (0.469)10.941 (0.466)9.907 (1.029)17.983 (9.279, 144.041)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks7.688 (0.663)9.706 (0.400)8.706 (0.835)8.790 (0.639)12.594 (6.581, 82.698)Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.811 (0.029)0.980 (0.033)0.917 (0.019)0.902 (0.048)9.212 (4.787, 61.004)Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.039 (0.013)0.037 (0.019)0.003 (0.003)0.022 (0.013)103.129 (42.964, .)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number oflaboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test12Table 2. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F0 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cReproduction (Continued)Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.055 (0.022)0.056 (0.028)0.005 (0.005)0.032 (0.019)103.321 (43.053, .)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.938 (0.022)0.979 (0.012)0.976 (0.020)0.969 (0.011)2.025 (1.080, 10.761)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.929 (0.022)0.986 (0.008)0.980 (0.014)0.970 (0.015)2.765 (1.460, 15.727)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.883 (0.031)0.975 (0.013)0.957 (0.021)0.944 (0.026)4.756 (2.492, 28.821)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.847 (0.034)0.977 (0.010)0.964 (0.018)0.935 (0.039)7.136 (3.721, 45.294)Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentageof Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 81.000 (0.000)0.991 (0.006)0.990 (0.007)0.995 (0.004)0.653 (0.292, 20.850)Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 81.000 (0.000)0.994 (0.004)0.990 (0.006)0.996 (0.003)0.541 (0.241, 17.252)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8after Two Weeks of Incubation0.834 (0.035)0.942 (0.020)0.940 (0.025)0.910 (0.033)6.318 (3.296, 39.868)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.993 (0.007)0.896 (0.016)0.771 (0.062)0.899 (0.060)11.547 (6.035, 74.777)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.739 (0.042)0.909 (0.020)0.895 (0.037)0.852 (0.053)10.735 (5.578, 72.211)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.785 (0.039)0.929 (0.021)0.916 (0.030)0.881 (0.044)8.615 (4.483, 56.180)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks asA Percentage of Number of Eggs Setfrom Weeks 7 and 80.733 (0.041)0.814 (0.021)0.711 (0.067)0.768 (0.035)7.806 (4.256, 36.721)Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.554 (0.048)0.778 (0.034)0.782 (0.033)0.708 (0.074)18.017 (9.297, 144.476)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.549 (0.047)0.692 (0.029)0.622 (0.060)0.627 (0.045)12.478 (6.523, 81.606)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number oflaboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test13Table 2. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F0 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.206 (0.002)0.205 (0.004)0.234 (0.004)0.215 (0.009)7.610 (3.680, 95.873)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)5.761 (0.192)3.913 (0.178)4.565 (0.112)4.743 (0.537)19.591 (10.090, 165.981)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.660 (0.136)4.065 (0.171)3.257 (0.062)3.640 (0.234)11.142 (5.787, 75.502)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)9.421 (0.287)7.978 (0.316)7.823 (0.148)8.394 (0.507)10.459 (5.431, 70.475)Thyroid WeightAdult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males6.113 (0.830)11.800 (1.407)4.641 (0.407)7.348 (2.114)49.818 (24.298, .)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females10.138 (0.897)11.362 (1.150)6.140 (0.535)9.096 (1.610)30.659 (15.561, 491.097)Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)17.934 (2.934)47.766 (4.137)68.882 (6.611)44.421 (14.757)57.540 (27.491, .)Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)2077.057 (331.443)2685.199 (698.976)1812.517 (393.307)2050.636 (238.269)20.125 (13.239, 42.782)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.497 (0.080)1.016 (0.171)1.131 (0.096)0.871 (0.204)40.598 (20.230, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.658 (0.088)1.030 (0.059)0.869 (0.094)0.860 (0.110)22.221 (11.408, 209.191)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.764 (1.235)3.178 (0.675)3.109 (0.364)3.164 (0.310)16.968 (10.994, 37.602)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)1.910 (0.548)3.328 (1.066)1.138 (0.237)1.763 (0.519)50.953 (25.702, .)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)4.988 (0.531)3.796 (0.605)6.042 (1.501)4.611 (0.540)20.275 (11.418, 85.334)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)12.022 (1.721)18.032 (3.786)25.273 (1.824)18.452 (4.099)38.479 (19.276, 2556.685)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1242.501 (317.745)1151.095 (184.708)2942.393 (518.354)1694.232 (538.020)55.003 (26.510, .)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)327.461 (63.129)317.664 (185.839)606.982 (293.482)337.621 (58.572)30.048 (18.785, 78.781)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number oflaboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test14Table 3. Inter-laboratory Analysis forAvian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Random Laboratory,F0 GenerationfParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males11.288/17.018.986/17.03.341/17.011.205/38.52342.263(<0.001)784.484/2.00.001Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males15.366/15.014.493/16.02.746/16.010.868/36.22971.612(<0.001)994.156/2.0<0.001Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females43.486/17.035.463/17.06.396/17.028.448/38.83201.087(<0.001)1076.486/2.0<0.001Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females32.908/15.041.031/16.06.750/16.026.896/36.13911.403(<0.001)1312.748/2.0<0.001Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10.360/17.00.521/17.00.498/17.00.460/49.846.140(<0.001)15.533/2.00.708Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 20.686/17.01.436/17.00.482/16.00.868/41.522.560(<0.001)7.807/2.00.075Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 30.611/17.01.044/17.00.188/16.00.614/38.527.430(<0.001)9.347/2.00.002Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 41.796/16.00.480/16.00.204/16.00.827/28.124.132(<0.001)8.313/2.0<0.001Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 51.525/15.00.484/16.00.220/16.00.743/28.830.931(<0.001)10.555/2.0<0.001Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 61.163/15.00.501/16.00.209/16.00.624/32.347.072(<0.001)15.898/2.00.003Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 70.574/15.00.454/16.00.423/16.00.483/45.724.088(<0.001)8.190/2.00.818Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8NA0.391/16.00.228/16.00.309/29.920.360(<0.001)10.334/1.00.279Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9NA0.703/16.0NANANANANAa.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).f.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test15Table 3. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F0 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLI Pooled withinbReproductionEggs Laid2.088/15.06.297/17.00.901/16.03.095/32.26.643(0.030)3.083/2.2<0.001Eggs Crack0.283/15.00.602/17.00.014/16.00.300/30.30.637(0.020)0.292/2.2<0.001Eggs Abnormal0.504/15.01.348/17.00.055/16.00.636/29.31.095(0.046)0.525/2.3<0.001Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.391/15.00.158/16.00.033/16.00.194/28.70.564(0.117)0.244/2.1<0.001Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.916/15.00.283/16.00.094/16.00.431/27.21.688(0.105)0.689/2.1<0.001Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 80.402/15.00.189/16.00.092/16.00.228/34.50.968(0.056)0.394/2.00.014Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 80.999/15.00.325/16.00.173/16.00.499/29.93.077(0.028)1.180/2.00.002Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 80.385/15.00.183/16.00.101/16.00.223/35.51.676(0.007)0.631/2.00.030Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 80.958/15.00.308/16.00.213/16.00.493/31.36.223(<0.001)2.233/2.00.008Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation0.385/15.00.170/16.00.111/16.00.222/35.61.484(0.013)0.566/2.00.043Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation0.958/15.00.302/16.00.229/16.00.496/31.65.773(<0.001)2.084/2.00.011Eggs Hatched0.446/15.00.220/16.00.217/16.00.294/40.52.883(<0.001)1.058/2.00.264Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks0.439/15.00.160/16.00.697/16.00.432/37.50.833(0.084)0.409/2.10.012Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.001/15.00.001/17.00.000/16.00.001/42.00.006(0.003)0.002/2.00.073Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.000/15.00.000/17.00.000/16.00.000/30.40.000(0.016)0.000/2.2<0.001a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test16Table 3. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F0 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandomLaboratoyVariances (pvalues)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbReproduction (Continued)Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.000/15.00.001/17.00.000/16.00.000/32.60.001(0.062)0.000/2.2<0.001Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.000/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.000/39.70.000(0.785)0.000/2.20.048Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.000/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.000/30.70.001(0.259)0.000/2.1<0.001Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.001/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.001/32.90.002(0.100)0.001/2.10.002Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.001/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.001/25.70.004(0.010)0.001/2.0<0.001Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation asA Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.000/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.000/38.10.000(0.576)0.000/1.00.003Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubationas A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.000/15.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.000/40.50.000(0.613)0.000/1.00.083Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs fromWeeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation0.001/15.00.000/16.00.001/16.00.001/37.60.003(0.104)0.001/2.00.086Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of EggsHatched0.000/15.00.000/16.00.004/16.00.001/18.50.010(<0.001)0.004/2.1<0.001Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks7 and 80.002/15.00.000/16.00.001/16.00.001/37.30.007(0.007)0.003/2.00.009Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs fromWeeks 7 and 80.002/15.00.000/16.00.001/16.00.001/37.90.005(0.025)0.002/2.00.051Number of 14-Day-Old SurvivingChicks as A Percentage ofNumber of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.002/15.00.000/16.00.005/16.00.002/29.80.002(0.243)0.001/2.5<0.001Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.002/15.00.001/16.00.001/16.00.002/40.70.015(<0.001)0.005/2.00.272Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.002/15.00.001/16.00.004/16.00.002/37.60.004(0.093)0.002/2.10.013a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test17Table 3. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F0 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.000/17.00.000/16.00.000/16.00.000/43.00.000(<0.001)0.000/1.40.116Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)0.037/16.00.032/16.00.012/16.00.027/41.70.837(<0.001)0.288/2.00.063Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)0.019/16.00.029/16.00.004/16.00.017/35.10.148(<0.001)0.055/2.0<0.001Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)0.082/16.00.100/16.00.022/16.00.068/38.70.704(<0.001)0.257/2.00.004Thyroid WeightAdult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males0.689/15.01.979/13.00.166/16.00.945/24.012.499(<0.001)4.467/2.0<0.001Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females0.804/15.01.323/12.00.287/14.00.805/29.96.996(<0.001)2.592/2.00.016Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)8.606/4.017.119/4.043.712/4.023.145/8.5630.494(<0.001)217.767/2.00.264Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)109854.4/4.0488567.5/4.0154690.0/4.0251037.3/8.30.000(1.000)56772.07/8.30.295Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.006/4.00.029/4.00.009/3.00.015/8.00.111(<0.001)0.042/2.00.324Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.008/4.00.003/4.00.009/4.00.007/10.70.030(0.008)0.012/2.00.598Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)1.525/4.00.456/4.00.132/4.00.704/7.00.000(1.000)0.096/7.00.050Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.301/4.01.137/4.00.056/4.00.498/6.40.489(0.270)0.269/2.50.011Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)0.282/4.00.366/4.02.254/4.00.967/6.40.335(0.554)0.291/3.20.077Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)2.962/4.014.337/4.03.327/4.06.875/7.644.047(<0.001)16.804/2.00.213Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)100961.6/4.034117.10/4.0268690.6/4.0134589.8/7.8744365.0(0.034)289465.9/2.00.119Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)3985.248/4.034536.09/4.086131.77/4.041551.04/7.20.000(1.000)3430.641/7.20.007a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test18Table 4. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratory andBetweenLaboratories, F0 GenerationfParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males168.849(28.009)11.205/38.52342.263/2.0(50.675,287.023)(0.000,340.980)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males184.637(31.530)10.868/36.22971.612/2.0(51.007,318.267)(0.000,378.411)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females207.898(32.810)28.448/38.83201.087/2.0(71.621,344.176)(6.261,409.536)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females227.716(36.232)26.896/36.13911.403/2.0(76.083,379.350)(5.048,450.385)Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 126.402(3.941)0.460/49.846.140/2.0(10.097,42.708)(2.181,50.624)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 226.199(2.794)0.868/41.522.560/1.9(15.575,36.823)(9.028,43.369)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 325.203(3.057)0.614/38.527.430/1.9(13.066,37.340)(6.414,43.991)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 426.791(2.883)0.827/28.124.132/1.9(15.719,37.864)(9.075,44.508)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 529.183(3.249)0.743/28.830.931/1.9(16.349,42.016)(9.218,49.147)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 628.979(3.987)0.624/32.347.072/1.9(12.676,45.282)(4.476,53.483)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 728.524(2.862)0.483/45.724.088/1.9(17.080,39.969)(10.936,46.113)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 826.849(3.215)0.309/29.920.360/1.0(0.000,63.096)(0.151,53.547)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9NANANANANAa.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 2).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.f.“NA” indicates that averages across laboratories were not calculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test19Table 4. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F0 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdReproductionEggs Laid42.897(1.756)3.095/32.26.643/1.0(37.182,48.612)(32.236,53.558)Eggs Crack0.907(0.540)0.300/30.30.637/1.0(0.000,2.667)(0.000,4.194)Eggs Abnormal1.269(0.725)0.636/29.31.095/0.9(0.000,3.669)(0.000,5.652)Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 811.678(0.493)0.194/28.70.564/1.2(10.089,13.267)(8.667,14.689)Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 817.440(0.830)0.431/27.21.688/1.3(14.771,20.110)(12.371,22.509)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 811.249(0.628)0.228/34.50.968/1.3(9.217,13.280)(7.399,15.098)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 816.867(1.087)0.499/29.93.077/1.5(13.288,20.446)(10.204,23.531)Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 810.915(0.794)0.223/35.51.676/1.6(8.252,13.578)(6.037,15.793)Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 816.202(1.494)0.493/31.36.223/1.7(10.928,21.476)(7.022,25.382)Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation10.841(0.752)0.222/35.61.484/1.5(8.343,13.340)(6.221,15.461)Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation16.106(1.444)0.496/31.65.773/1.7(11.056,21.157)(7.238,24.975)Eggs Hatched9.907(1.029)0.294/40.52.883/1.6(6.367,13.447)(3.586,16.228)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks8.790(0.639)0.432/37.50.833/0.9(6.689,10.892)(4.875,12.706)Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.902(0.048)0.001/42.00.006/1.6(0.741,1.064)(0.607,1.197)Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.022(0.013)0.000/30.40.000/1.1(0.000,0.065)(0.000,0.103)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test20Table 4. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F0 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdReproduction (Continued)Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.032(0.019)0.000/32.60.001/0.9(0.000,0.095)(0.000,0.149)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.969(0.011)0.000/39.70.000/0.1(0.924,1.014)(0.899,1.040)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.970(0.015)0.000/30.70.001/1.0(0.920,1.021)(0.876,1.065)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.944(0.026)0.001/32.90.002/1.2(0.860,1.027)(0.785,1.102)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.935(0.039)0.001/25.70.004/1.6(0.806,1.064)(0.699,1.171)Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.995(0.004)0.000/38.10.000/0.3(0.980,1.011)(0.971,1.020)Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.996(0.003)0.000/40.50.000/0.3(0.983,1.008)(0.976,1.016)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8after Two Weeks of Incubation0.910(0.033)0.001/37.60.003/1.2(0.803,1.018)(0.707,1.114)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.899(0.060)0.001/18.50.010/1.6(0.701,1.096)(0.533,1.265)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.852(0.053)0.001/37.30.007/1.5(0.677,1.026)(0.527,1.176)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.881(0.044)0.001/37.90.005/1.4(0.738,1.024)(0.612,1.151)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage ofNumber of EggsSet from Weeks 7 and 80.768(0.035)0.002/29.80.002/0.6(0.644,0.892)(0.560,0.976)Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.708(0.074)0.002/40.70.015/1.6(0.455,0.961)(0.255,1.161)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.627(0.045)0.002/37.60.004/0.9(0.478,0.776)(0.351,0.904)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test21Table 4. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F0 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.215(0.009)0.000/43.00.000/1.8(0.168,0.262)(0.156,0.274)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)4.743(0.537)0.027/41.70.837/1.9(2.671,6.815)(1.446,8.040)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.640(0.234)0.017/35.10.148/1.6(2.845,4.434)(2.202,5.078)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)8.394(0.507)0.068/38.70.704/1.7(6.642,10.147)(5.280,11.509)Thyroid WeightAdult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males7.348(2.114)0.945/24.012.499/1.7(0.000,14.842)(0.000,20.330)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females9.096(1.610)0.805/29.96.996/1.6(3.621,14.571)(0.000,18.987)Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)44.421(14.757)23.145/8.5630.494/1.9(0.000,100.852)(0.000,135.114)Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)2050.636(238.269)251037.3/8.30.000/1.0(839.691,3261.582)(839.691,3261.582)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.871(0.204)0.015/8.00.111/1.6(0.180,1.563)(0.000,2.127)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.860(0.110)0.007/10.70.030/1.3(0.496,1.223)(0.180,1.539)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.164(0.310)0.704/7.00.000/1.0(1.136,5.193)(1.136,5.193)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)1.763(0.519)0.498/6.40.489/0.7(0.000,3.753)(0.000,4.939)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)4.611(0.540)0.967/6.40.335/0.3(2.078,7.144)(1.257,7.965)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)18.452(4.099)6.875/7.644.047/1.5(4.722,32.182)(0.000,43.633)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1694.232(538.020)134589.8/7.8744365.0/1.5(0.000,3482.223)(0.000,4999.973)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)337.621(58.572)41551.04/7.20.000/1.0(0.000,822.809)(0.000,822.809)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test22Table 5. Inter-laboratory Analysis forAvian Control Data: Means and StandardErrors with Random Laboratory Effect, F1GenerationdParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males165.311 (1.914)155.483 (3.072)94.063 (2.950)138.313 (22.289)27.911 (14.218, 361.769)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males213.494 (4.988)216.300 (3.746)119.133 (3.027)182.906 (31.969)30.273 (15.363, 475.062)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females184.256 (4.289)168.706 (3.977)96.875 (3.657)149.912 (26.924)31.107 (15.765, 528.884)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females267.650 (6.162)266.482 (7.608)153.313 (2.650)228.910 (38.039)28.782 (14.642, 398.123)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.756 (0.191)9.571 (0.173)6.776 (0.147)8.365 (0.831)17.213 (8.887, 135.041)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1482.688 (0.869)78.929 (1.611)48.529 (0.908)70.035 (10.826)26.774 (13.662, 321.199)Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 131.278 (0.587)30.228 (0.551)20.250 (0.704)27.262 (3.508)22.290 (11.443, 210.349)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 231.444 (0.622)36.561 (0.873)21.250 (0.413)29.728 (4.503)26.236 (13.398, 304.259)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 332.889 (0.911)31.500 (1.156)21.750 (0.413)28.659 (3.535)21.365 (10.981, 193.729)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 432.333 (0.904)25.844 (0.949)22.500 (0.387)26.854 (2.894)18.663 (9.621, 153.127)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 530.222 (0.794)26.678 (1.010)22.438 (0.695)26.431 (2.273)14.896 (7.707, 109.808)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 632.611 (1.039)27.444 (0.902)22.467 (0.506)27.453 (2.934)18.508 (9.543, 151.086)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 732.667 (0.878)30.022 (0.685)22.600 (0.388)28.391 (3.023)18.443 (9.510, 150.272)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 832.556 (1.500)29.117 (0.549)21.600 (0.505)27.657 (3.229)20.224 (10.411, 174.945)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 931.944 (1.259)31.267 (0.622)NA31.400 (0.557)2.510 (1.964, 3.481)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10NA30.978 (0.536)NANANAAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11NA26.756 (1.416)NANANAa.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.d.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test23Table 5. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F1 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cReproductionEggs Laid46.222 (1.086)39.444 (2.211)43.688 (1.036)43.527 (1.786)7.109 (3.731, 42.983)Eggs Crack0.889 (0.342)1.833 (0.480)0.563 (0.302)1.014 (0.346)59.020 (28.225, .)Eggs Abnormal0.722 (0.226)3.389 (0.879)0.375 (0.155)1.304 (0.845)112.195 (45.097, .)Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 810.944 (0.563)10.611 (0.696)12.438 (0.316)11.447 (0.599)9.070 (4.738, 57.600)Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 816.722 (0.646)16.167 (1.058)39.188 (1.188)24.007 (7.573)54.635 (26.304, .)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 810.278 (0.722)10.389 (0.701)12.063 (0.622)10.954 (0.598)9.448 (4.903, 63.370)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 815.667 (0.836)15.611 (1.094)37.875 (1.408)23.020 (7.396)55.649 (26.721, .)Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 810.222 (0.721)10.167 (0.742)17.250 (0.854)12.528 (2.343)32.387 (16.377, 633.546)Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 815.333 (0.856)15.278 (1.157)36.375 (1.502)22.290 (7.003)54.416 (26.214, .)Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation10.222 (0.721)10.056 (0.747)16.938 (0.910)12.377 (2.252)31.518 (15.962, 559.047)Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation15.333 (0.856)15.167 (1.153)16.938 (0.910)15.873 (0.585)6.381 (3.355, 37.985)Eggs Hatched9.333 (0.780)9.389 (0.837)11.438 (0.707)10.100 (0.716)12.270 (6.358, 85.892)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks8.944 (0.769)9.111 (0.808)10.875 (0.724)9.676 (0.635)11.370 (5.890, 78.977)Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.943 (0.022)0.807 (0.045)0.892 (0.021)0.889 (0.036)7.000 (3.677, 42.126)Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.020 (0.008)0.049 (0.014)0.014 (0.008)0.025 (0.009)64.778 (28.626, .)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test24Table 5. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F1 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cReproduction (Continued)Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.017 (0.005)0.092 (0.026)0.009 (0.004)0.033 (0.023)120.762 (47.155, .)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.925 (0.040)0.979 (0.009)0.956 (0.039)0.970 (0.014)2.560 (1.451, 9.542)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.932 (0.028)0.965 (0.017)0.963 (0.017)0.959 (0.011)1.962 (1.150, 6.206)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.920 (0.039)0.956 (0.021)0.935 (0.033)0.945 (0.016)2.965 (2.167, 4.696)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.913 (0.031)0.943 (0.029)0.924 (0.021)0.927 (0.015)2.791 (1.919, 5.102)Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentageof Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 81.000 (0.000)0.989 (0.008)0.981 (0.016)0.995 (0.005)0.920 (0.411, 29.369)Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 81.000 (0.000)0.993 (0.005)0.981 (0.016)0.997 (0.003)0.594 (0.265, 18.953)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8after Two Weeks of Incubation0.905 (0.033)0.917 (0.040)0.983 (0.009)0.944 (0.028)5.124 (2.715, 28.754)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.956 (0.019)0.976 (0.012)0.949 (0.017)0.964 (0.009)1.673 (0.837, 14.542)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.830 (0.047)0.869 (0.045)0.904 (0.050)0.866 (0.027)5.421 (4.338, 7.238)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.901 (0.034)0.888 (0.045)0.936 (0.030)0.913 (0.020)3.800 (2.901, 5.514)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks asA Percentage of Number of Eggs Setfrom Weeks 7 and 80.796 (0.049)0.846 (0.044)0.860 (0.051)0.834 (0.028)5.733 (4.595, 7.637)Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.667 (0.056)0.671 (0.060)0.817 (0.051)0.722 (0.051)12.266 (6.356, 85.826)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.639 (0.055)0.651 (0.058)0.777 (0.052)0.691 (0.045)11.398 (5.904, 79.172)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test25Table 5. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F1 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.204 (0.003)0.207 (0.004)0.229 (0.003)0.213 (0.008)6.688 (2.982, 262.852)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)6.475 (0.131)4.456 (0.208)4.825 (0.103)5.257 (0.621)20.453 (10.524, 178.884)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.821 (0.085)3.784 (0.106)3.275 (0.091)3.626 (0.177)8.447 (4.389, 55.626)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)10.295 (0.193)8.239 (0.297)8.100 (0.133)8.881 (0.713)13.906 (7.201, 100.165)First Foam First Egg Cloacal SizeAge in Days at First Foam - Males34.500 (0.283)42.611 (3.422)37.688 (0.810)37.227 (1.912)8.894 (4.874, 40.733)Age in Days at First Egg - Females42.722 (0.666)48.278 (1.885)45.063 (1.047)44.964 (1.506)5.801 (3.050, 34.416)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males0.292 (0.020)0.222 (0.018)0.253 (0.021)0.255 (0.021)14.097 (7.295, 102.484)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males0.372 (0.030)0.279 (0.029)0.539 (0.073)0.384 (0.070)31.742 (16.154, 510.512)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males0.558 (0.029)0.423 (0.029)0.664 (0.041)0.546 (0.069)21.997 (11.299, 204.551)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - MalesNANA0.593 (0.035)NANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - MalesNANA0.582 (0.025)NANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - MalesNANA0.589 (0.023)NANACloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females0.274 (0.019)0.213 (0.029)0.244 (0.021)0.249 (0.017)11.533 (6.072, 70.587)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females0.402 (0.051)0.111 (0.014)0.524 (0.086)0.336 (0.124)64.012 (30.059, .)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females0.521 (0.040)0.103 (0.010)0.956 (0.120)0.515 (0.244)81.865 (36.366, .)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.652 (0.044)NANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.638 (0.035)NANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.679 (0.033)NANAa.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.d.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test26Table 5. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F1 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cMating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 121.286 (11.720)15.143 (6.780)7.571 (1.571)10.208 (3.500)59.392 (30.582, 16636.83)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 26.571 (2.707)8.286 (1.848)5.286 (1.304)6.393 (1.087)29.454 (15.664, 223.566)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 33.000 (0.309)4.286 (1.063)3.143 (0.340)3.118 (0.223)12.409 (8.327, 24.479)Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-18.286 (11.478)-10.857 (5.881)-4.429 (1.412)-6.676 (3.072)79.706 (38.325, .)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 161.571 (40.199)39.571 (16.959)57.143 (40.865)44.713 (14.595)56.537 (32.788, 227.081)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 213.143 (5.157)15.000 (5.196)51.286 (41.543)14.351 (3.646)44.005 (25.655, 174.931)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 35.714 (1.392)15.714 (11.401)5.000 (0.900)5.256 (0.754)24.847 (15.507, 64.533)Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-55.857 (40.219)-23.857 (14.175)-52.143 (40.716)-29.801 (12.702)73.821 (38.850, 1068.648)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 17.857 (1.262)5.286 (1.040)5.429 (1.088)6.055 (0.761)21.778 (11.103, 220.171)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 28.286 (2.212)12.429 (3.351)3.714 (1.085)7.405 (2.483)58.076 (27.934, .)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 36.000 (1.195)13.429 (3.123)5.286 (1.554)7.425 (2.083)48.592 (24.101, .)Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-1.857 (1.945)8.143 (2.272)-0.143 (1.388)1.896 (2.982)272.469 (66.269, .)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 11.714 (0.565)2.857 (0.595)2.714 (1.017)2.339 (0.439)32.484 (17.095, 302.980)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 22.143 (0.769)5.429 (1.631)3.143 (0.986)3.075 (0.760)42.822 (21.960, 1223.257)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 32.857 (0.769)7.571 (1.462)3.000 (0.488)4.203 (1.391)57.318 (27.502, .)Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.143 (0.508)4.714 (1.459)0.286 (1.085)1.811 (1.178)112.664 (45.208, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 16.429 (0.922)7.714 (1.340)0.857 (0.261)4.859 (2.149)76.604 (34.612, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 23.286 (0.474)5.000 (1.327)1.000 (0.436)2.863 (1.108)67.035 (31.381, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 32.429 (0.429)7.571 (1.212)0.714 (0.286)3.425 (1.994)100.826 (42.043, .)Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1to Day 3-4.000 (1.024)-0.143 (1.779)-0.143 (0.340)-1.460 (1.331)157.952 (54.234, .)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test27Table 5. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F1 GenerationParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cThyroid Weight15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)0.991 (0.143)2.048 (0.146)2.371 (0.208)1.795 (0.417)40.269 (20.059, 1199402)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males10.022 (1.061)6.807 (0.681)5.533 (0.679)7.345 (1.284)30.290 (15.386, 466.481)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females13.322 (1.203)15.460 (1.893)6.275 (0.743)11.506 (2.812)42.334 (21.008, .)Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)48.413 (6.569)54.965 (4.077)52.979 (4.702)53.085 (2.789)9.099 (7.323, 12.055)Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)92.541 (13.371)43.908 (13.558)66.995 (10.430)67.845 (13.405)34.223 (17.221, 913.344)Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)5170.843 (672.003)1971.184 (257.929)2221.775 (372.648)3041.891 (987.311)56.217 (26.966, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.718 (0.075)0.620 (0.044)0.992 (0.129)0.748 (0.099)23.023 (11.910, 202.942)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.761 (0.098)0.755 (0.064)0.927 (0.076)0.815 (0.059)12.462 (6.452, 88.071)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)6.385 (1.309)1.829 (0.517)3.574 (1.131)3.722 (1.322)61.524 (29.116, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)2.843 (0.730)2.590 (0.779)1.930 (0.365)2.195 (0.310)24.484 (12.799, 199.435)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)5.385 (0.764)10.140 (4.754)6.391 (2.691)5.569 (0.727)22.599 (14.297, 55.292)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)22.013 (4.460)14.819 (1.889)17.685 (3.163)16.668 (1.810)18.807 (10.059, 111.448)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)3237.805 (273.449)478.438 (127.383)1596.371 (549.294)1759.598 (688.531)67.775 (33.180, .)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)531.493 (198.570)392.223 (57.767)276.222 (138.471)385.548 (51.490)23.132 (14.996, 51.946)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test28Table 6. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Random Laboratory,F1 GenerationfParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males3.663/17.09.438/17.08.704/15.07.268/42.91483.097(<0.001)496.787/2.00.106Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males24.879/17.014.033/17.09.161/14.016.024/42.83050.007(<0.001)1022.006/2.00.136Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females18.394/17.015.813/17.013.374/15.015.860/48.72158.778(<0.001)724.879/2.00.813Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females37.968/17.057.884/16.07.023/15.034.292/35.64306.620(<0.001)1446.937/2.0<0.001Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 00.036/15.00.030/16.00.022/16.00.029/44.52.044(<0.001)0.691/2.00.577Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 140.755/15.02.595/16.00.824/16.01.392/34.8350.216(<0.001)117.202/2.00.024Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10.345/17.00.304/17.00.496/15.00.382/45.536.545(<0.001)12.309/2.00.592Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 20.387/17.00.762/17.00.171/15.00.440/38.860.393(<0.001)20.277/2.00.010Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 30.829/17.01.337/17.00.171/15.00.779/37.036.719(<0.001)12.497/2.0<0.001Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 40.817/17.00.901/17.00.150/15.00.623/39.424.500(<0.001)8.373/2.0<0.001Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 50.631/17.01.020/17.00.483/15.00.711/45.514.792(<0.001)5.167/2.00.312Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 61.079/17.00.814/17.00.256/14.00.716/41.225.105(<0.001)8.606/2.00.010Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 70.771/17.00.469/17.00.150/14.00.464/39.026.956(<0.001)9.139/2.00.004Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 82.250/17.00.302/17.00.255/14.00.936/25.630.378(<0.001)10.429/2.0<0.001Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 91.585/17.00.386/17.0NA0.986/24.80.000(1.000)0.311/24.80.004Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10NA0.288/17.0NANANANANAAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11NA2.006/17.0NANANANANAa.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).f.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test29Table 6. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F1 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbReproductionEggs Laid1.180/17.04.890/17.01.073/15.02.381/32.67.477(0.085)3.191/2.10.003Eggs Crack0.117/17.00.230/17.00.091/15.00.146/42.90.221(0.337)0.119/2.10.155Eggs Abnormal0.051/17.00.772/17.00.024/15.00.282/20.41.907(0.032)0.713/2.1<0.001Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.317/17.00.485/17.00.100/15.00.300/39.80.801(0.032)0.359/2.10.004Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.417/17.01.119/17.01.410/15.00.982/40.1171.052(<0.001)57.344/2.00.033Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 80.522/17.00.491/17.00.387/15.00.467/48.80.608(0.301)0.357/2.00.817Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 80.699/17.01.197/17.01.982/15.01.293/40.1162.811(<0.001)54.701/2.00.110Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 80.520/17.00.551/17.00.729/15.00.600/46.815.863(<0.001)5.487/2.00.766Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 80.732/17.01.339/17.02.257/15.01.443/39.3145.682(<0.001)49.041/2.00.075Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation0.520/17.00.559/17.00.829/15.00.636/45.414.582(<0.001)5.072/2.00.599Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation0.732/17.01.328/17.00.829/15.00.963/46.10.118(0.896)0.342/2.10.447Eggs Hatched0.608/17.00.700/17.00.500/15.00.603/48.60.938(0.234)0.512/2.00.792Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks0.591/17.00.653/17.00.524/15.00.589/48.90.623(0.389)0.403/2.00.906Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.000/17.00.002/17.00.000/15.00.001/32.60.003(0.092)0.001/2.10.003Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/37.60.000(0.399)0.000/1.40.030Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.000/17.00.001/17.00.000/15.00.000/19.10.001(0.080)0.001/2.1<0.001a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedinTable 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test30Table 6. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F1 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbReproduction (Continued)Fertile Eggs as A Percentageof Eggs Set From Weeks 7and 80.002/17.00.000/17.00.002/15.00.001/33.70.000(0.805)0.000/3.0<0.001Fertile Eggs as A Percentageof Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7and 80.001/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/39.50.000(1.000)0.000/3.60.060Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7and 80.002/17.00.000/17.00.001/15.00.001/40.90.000(1.000)0.000/13.90.033Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7and 80.001/17.00.001/17.00.000/15.00.001/46.20.000(1.000)0.000/9.00.248Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7and 80.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/23.40.000(0.529)0.000/1.0<0.001Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks ofIncubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 67 and 80.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/19.00.000(0.747)0.000/1.0<0.001Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggsfrom Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation0.001/17.00.002/17.00.000/15.00.001/35.00.002(0.067)0.001/2.2<0.001Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentageof Eggs Hatched0.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/43.40.000(0.875)0.000/1.70.137Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Setfrom Weeks 7 and 80.002/17.00.002/17.00.002/15.00.002/47.90.000(1.000)0.001/32.30.905Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggsfrom Weeks 7 and 80.001/17.00.002/17.00.001/15.00.001/44.60.000(1.000)0.000/20.00.255Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentageof Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.002/17.00.002/17.00.003/15.00.002/47.60.000(1.000)0.001/33.10.810Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.003/17.00.004/17.00.003/15.00.003/48.60.005(0.235)0.003/2.00.784Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.003/17.00.003/17.00.003/15.00.003/48.90.003(0.387)0.002/2.00.900a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test31d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratoryvariation. Degrees of freedomfor the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reported variance anddegrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test32Table 6. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F1 GenerationfParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/45.70.000(<0.001)0.000/1.00.314Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)0.017/17.00.043/17.00.011/15.00.024/37.41.133(<0.001)0.385/2.00.015Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)0.007/17.00.011/17.00.008/15.00.009/47.50.085(<0.001)0.031/2.00.662Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)0.037/17.00.088/17.00.018/15.00.048/36.71.478(<0.001)0.508/2.00.005First Foam First Egg Cloacal SizeAge in Days at First Foam - Males0.080/17.011.707/17.00.656/15.04.148/19.18.558(<0.001)3.655/2.6<0.001Age in Days at First Egg - Females0.443/17.03.554/17.01.096/15.01.698/31.15.337(0.036)2.268/2.1<0.001Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males0.000/17.00.000/17.00.000/15.00.000/47.80.001(0.113)0.000/2.00.877Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males0.001/17.00.001/17.00.005/15.00.002/25.20.013(0.011)0.005/2.1<0.001Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males0.001/17.00.001/17.00.002/15.00.001/41.70.013(<0.001)0.005/2.00.276Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - MalesNANA0.001/15.0NANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - MalesNANA0.001/15.0NANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - MalesNANA0.001/15.0NANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females0.000/17.00.001/17.00.000/15.00.001/43.50.000(0.633)0.000/2.10.208Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females0.003/17.00.000/17.00.007/15.00.003/25.50.043(<0.001)0.015/2.0<0.001Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females0.002/17.00.000/17.00.014/15.00.005/18.50.173(<0.001)0.059/2.0<0.001Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.002/15.0NANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.001/15.0NANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - FemalesNANA0.001/15.0NANANANAa.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).f.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test33Table 6. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F1 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandomLaboratoyVariances (pvalues)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLI Pooled withinbMating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1137.367/6.045.973/6.02.469/6.061.937/9.914.616(0.656)12.253/3.6<0.001Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 27.327/6.03.415/6.01.701/6.04.147/13.60.471(0.870)1.182/2.50.202Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 30.095/6.01.129/6.00.116/6.00.447/8.30.000(1.000)0.050/8.30.003Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3131.748/6.034.592/6.01.993/6.056.111/9.210.991(0.677)9.438/4.2<0.001Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 11615.946/6.0287.612/6.01669.925/6.01191.161/14.00.000(1.000)213.012/14.00.048Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 226.592/6.027.000/6.01725.796/6.0593.129/6.40.000(1.000)13.294/6.4<0.001Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 31.939/6.0129.986/6.00.810/6.044.245/6.30.000(1.000)0.569/6.3<0.001Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 31617.544/6.0200.925/6.01657.782/6.01158.751/13.40.000(1.000)161.332/13.40.012Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 11.592/6.01.082/6.01.184/6.01.286/17.50.479(0.764)0.580/1.90.885Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 24.891/6.011.231/6.01.177/6.05.766/11.913.582(0.051)6.166/2.10.020Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 31.429/6.09.755/6.02.415/6.04.533/10.89.331(0.433)4.339/2.20.052Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 33.782/6.05.163/6.01.925/6.03.624/15.923.118(0.010)8.892/2.00.466Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 10.320/6.00.354/6.01.034/6.00.569/13.50.125(0.761)0.192/2.50.281Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 20.592/6.02.660/6.00.973/6.01.408/12.80.644(0.682)0.578/2.40.172Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 30.592/6.02.136/6.00.238/6.00.989/10.64.921(0.081)1.935/2.00.026Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 30.259/6.02.129/6.01.177/6.01.188/12.73.113(0.242)1.388/2.10.029Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 10.850/6.01.796/6.00.068/6.00.905/11.212.987(<0.001)4.619/2.0<0.001Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 20.224/6.01.762/6.00.190/6.00.726/8.93.081(<0.001)1.227/2.10.010Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 30.184/6.01.469/6.00.082/6.00.578/8.211.380(<0.001)3.975/2.00.001Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1to Day 31.048/6.03.163/6.00.116/6.01.442/10.14.142(0.005)1.772/2.1<0.001a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test34d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test35Table 6. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F1 GenerationParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbThyroid Weight15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)0.020/10.00.021/16.00.043/16.00.028/38.60.494(<0.001)0.174/2.00.303Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males1.126/17.00.463/13.00.461/14.00.684/39.64.285(0.011)1.650/2.00.148Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females1.448/17.03.583/14.00.552/15.01.861/29.421.932(<0.001)7.909/2.00.001Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring(%)43.147/15.016.622/16.022.105/16.027.291/39.00.000(1.000)7.777/39.00.153Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)178.782/4.0183.809/4.0108.779/4.0157.123/11.5384.257(0.163)179.705/2.00.840Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)451587.9/3.066527.31/4.0138866.2/4.0218993.8/5.82714558(<0.001)974782.9/2.00.186Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.006/4.00.002/3.00.017/4.00.008/7.50.023(0.102)0.010/2.10.129Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.010/4.00.004/3.00.006/4.00.006/10.30.004(0.521)0.003/2.00.724Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)1.714/4.00.267/4.01.280/4.01.087/9.24.230(0.014)1.748/2.00.135Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.533/4.00.607/4.00.133/4.00.424/9.70.011(0.971)0.096/2.20.243Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)0.584/4.022.605/4.07.244/4.010.144/6.60.000(1.000)0.528/6.6<0.001Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)19.888/4.03.569/4.010.003/4.011.153/8.82.081(0.820)3.276/2.40.224Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)74774.41/4.016226.49/4.0301724.0/4.0130908.3/6.41301403(<0.001)474075.0/3.10.058Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females(pg/mL)39429.91/4.03336.991/4.019174.31/4.020647.07/7.90.000(1.000)2651.214/7.90.040a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test36Table 7. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratory andBetweenLaboratories, F1 GenerationfParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males138.313(22.289)7.268/42.91483.097/2.0(44.316,232.311)(1.335,275.292)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males182.906(31.969)16.024/42.83050.007/2.0(48.272,317.540)(0.000,379.375)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females149.912(26.924)15.860/48.72158.778/2.0(37.435,262.389)(0.000,315.375)Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females228.910(38.039)34.292/35.64306.620/2.0(70.370,387.451)(0.000,462.682)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.365(0.831)0.029/44.52.044/1.9(4.978,11.752)(3.256,13.474)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1470.035(10.826)1.392/34.8350.216/2.0(24.211,115.859)(3.502,136.567)Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 127.262(3.508)0.382/45.536.545/2.0(12.772,41.752)(5.701,48.824)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 229.728(4.503)0.440/38.860.393/2.0(10.912,48.544)(2.054,57.402)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 328.659(3.535)0.779/37.036.719/1.9(14.575,42.744)(6.934,50.385)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 426.854(2.894)0.623/39.424.500/1.9(15.469,38.240)(9.072,44.637)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 526.431(2.273)0.711/45.514.792/1.8(17.969,34.893)(12.462,40.400)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 627.453(2.934)0.716/41.225.105/1.9(16.012,38.895)(9.425,45.481)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 728.391(3.023)0.464/39.026.956/1.9(16.193,40.590)(9.813,46.970)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 827.657(3.229)0.936/25.630.378/1.9(15.146,40.168)(7.814,47.499)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 931.400(0.557)0.986/24.80.000/1.0(29.097,33.702)(29.097,33.702)Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10NANANANANAAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11NANANANANAa.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.f.“NA” denotes that that averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test37Table 7. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals withinLaboratory and Between Laboratories, F1 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdReproductionEggs Laid43.527(1.786)2.381/32.67.477/1.2(37.787,49.267)(32.630,54.424)Eggs Crack1.014(0.346)0.146/42.90.221/0.8(0.000,2.170)(0.000,3.129)Eggs Abnormal1.304(0.845)0.282/20.41.907/1.6(0.000,4.081)(0.000,6.462)Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 811.447(0.599)0.300/39.80.801/1.1(9.508,13.386)(7.772,15.122)Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 824.007(7.573)0.982/40.1171.052/2.0(0.000,55.838)(0.000,70.546)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 810.954(0.598)0.467/48.80.608/0.6(8.930,12.979)(7.270,14.639)Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 823.020(7.396)1.293/40.1162.811/2.0(0.000,53.848)(0.000,68.473)Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 812.528(2.343)0.600/46.815.863/1.9(3.605,21.451)(0.000,26.925)Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 822.290(7.003)1.443/39.3145.682/2.0(0.000,51.269)(0.000,65.327)Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation12.377(2.252)0.636/45.414.582/1.8(3.911,20.842)(0.000,26.218)Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation15.873(0.585)0.963/46.10.118/0.0(13.507,18.239)(12.274,19.473)Eggs Hatched10.100(0.716)0.603/48.60.938/0.7(7.710,12.490)(5.691,14.509)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks9.676(0.635)0.589/48.90.623/0.5(7.485,11.868)(5.754,13.598)Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.889(0.036)0.001/32.60.003/1.2(0.773,1.004)(0.670,1.108)Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.025(0.009)0.000/37.60.000/0.8(0.000,0.057)(0.000,0.082)Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.033(0.023)0.000/19.10.001/1.5(0.000,0.107)(0.000,0.172)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.970(0.014)0.001/33.70.000/0.1(0.898,1.042)(0.864,1.076)Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.959(0.011)0.000/39.50.000/1.0(0.911,1.007)(0.911,1.007)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test38Table 7. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals withinLaboratory and Between Laboratories, F1 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdReproduction (Continued)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.945(0.016)0.001/40.90.000/1.0(0.873,1.017)(0.873,1.017)Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.927(0.015)0.001/46.20.000/1.0(0.864,0.989)(0.864,0.989)Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.995(0.005)0.000/23.40.000/0.3(0.970,1.020)(0.962,1.028)Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as APercentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.997(0.003)0.000/19.00.000/0.1(0.975,1.018)(0.973,1.020)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8after Two Weeks of Incubation0.944(0.028)0.001/35.00.002/0.9(0.852,1.037)(0.773,1.115)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.964(0.009)0.000/43.40.000/0.0(0.925,1.003)(0.905,1.022)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.866(0.027)0.002/47.90.000/1.0(0.758,0.974)(0.758,0.974)Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.913(0.020)0.001/44.60.000/1.0(0.830,0.997)(0.830,0.997)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage ofNumber of EggsSet from Weeks 7 and 80.834(0.028)0.002/47.60.000/1.0(0.723,0.945)(0.723,0.945)Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.722(0.051)0.003/48.60.005/0.7(0.551,0.893)(0.407,1.037)Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.691(0.045)0.003/48.90.003/0.5(0.534,0.848)(0.410,0.972)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncatedat 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test39Table 7. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F1 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.213(0.008)0.000/45.70.000/1.8(0.149,0.277)(0.160,0.267)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)5.257(0.621)0.024/37.41.133/1.9(2.781,7.733)(1.442,9.072)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.626(0.177)0.009/47.50.085/1.6(3.019,4.233)(2.539,4.713)Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)8.881(0.713)0.048/36.71.478/1.9(6.128,11.635)(4.499,13.264)First Foam First Egg Cloacal SizeAge in Days at First Foam - Males37.227(1.912)4.148/19.18.558/1.2(31.006,43.448)(25.948,48.506)Age in Days at First Egg - Females44.964(1.506)1.698/31.15.337/1.2(40.129,49.800)(35.783,54.145)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males0.255(0.021)0.000/47.80.001/1.0(0.187,0.323)(0.127,0.383)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males0.384(0.070)0.002/25.20.013/1.5(0.155,0.613)(0.000,0.814)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males0.546(0.069)0.001/41.70.013/1.7(0.302,0.790)(0.120,0.972)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - MalesNANANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - MalesNANANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - MalesNANANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females0.249(0.017)0.001/43.50.000/0.3(0.187,0.310)(0.148,0.350)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females0.336(0.124)0.003/25.50.043/1.7(0.000,0.773)(0.000,1.097)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females0.515(0.244)0.005/18.50.173/1.9(0.000,1.459)(0.000,2.012)Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - FemalesNANANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - FemalesNANANANANACloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - FemalesNANANANANAa.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test40Table 7. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F1 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdMating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 110.208(3.500)61.937/9.914.616/0.2(0.000,28.847)(0.000,34.826)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 26.393(1.087)4.147/13.60.471/0.0(1.490,11.296)(0.000,13.255)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 33.118(0.223)0.447/8.30.000/1.0(1.551,4.686)(1.551,4.686)Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-6.676(3.072)56.111/9.210.991/0.2(-24.354,11.003)(-28.782,15.431)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 144.713(14.595)1191.161/14.00.000/1.0(0.000,123.195)(0.000,123.195)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 214.351(3.646)593.129/6.40.000/1.0(0.000,73.188)(0.000,73.188)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 35.256(0.754)44.245/6.30.000/1.0(0.000,21.383)(0.000,21.383)Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-29.801(12.702)1158.751/13.40.000/1.0(-106.430,46.827)(-106.430,46.827)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 16.055(0.761)1.286/17.50.479/0.2(3.103,9.007)(1.245,10.865)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 27.405(2.483)5.766/11.913.582/1.1(0.000,15.613)(0.000,22.615)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 37.425(2.083)4.533/10.89.331/1.0(0.470,14.380)(0.000,20.100)Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.896(2.982)3.624/15.923.118/1.5(-8.041,11.832)(-16.441,20.232)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 12.339(0.439)0.569/13.50.125/0.1(0.478,4.201)(0.000,5.025)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 23.075(0.760)1.408/12.80.644/0.3(0.042,6.108)(0.000,7.718)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 34.203(1.391)0.989/10.64.921/1.4(0.000,8.766)(0.000,12.728)Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.811(1.178)1.188/12.73.113/1.1(-2.061,5.683)(-5.424,9.046)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 14.859(2.149)0.905/11.212.987/1.8(0.000,12.567)(0.000,18.063)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 22.863(1.108)0.726/8.93.081/1.4(0.000,6.476)(0.000,9.627)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 33.425(1.994)0.578/8.211.380/1.8(0.000,10.809)(0.000,15.673)Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-1.460(1.331)1.442/10.14.142/1.2(-5.819,2.900)(-9.588,6.669)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’s approximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.For variables other than the change in length or change in number, the lower limits ofthe intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test41Table 7. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratoryand Between Laboratories, F1 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdThyroid Weight15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)1.795(0.417)0.028/38.60.494/1.8(0.269,3.320)(0.000,4.359)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males7.345(1.284)0.684/39.64.285/1.5(3.098,11.592)(0.000,15.234)Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females11.506(2.812)1.861/29.421.932/1.7(1.654,21.358)(0.000,28.780)Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)53.085(2.789)27.291/39.00.000/1.0(41.238,64.933)(41.238,64.933)Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)67.845(13.405)157.123/11.5384.257/1.0(23.204,112.486)(0.000,150.791)Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)3041.891(987.311)218993.8/5.82714558/1.7(0.000,6547.689)(0.000,9110.372)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.748(0.099)0.008/7.50.023/1.2(0.417,1.078)(0.138,1.357)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.815(0.059)0.006/10.30.004/0.3(0.593,1.038)(0.446,1.185)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.722(1.322)1.087/9.24.230/1.3(0.000,8.078)(0.000,11.864)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)2.195(0.310)0.424/9.70.011/0.0(0.621,3.768)(0.000,4.451)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)5.569(0.727)10.144/6.60.000/1.0(0.000,13.240)(0.000,13.240)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)16.668(1.810)11.153/8.82.081/0.1(8.326,25.011)(4.748,28.589)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1759.598(688.531)130908.3/6.41301403/2.5(0.000,3785.229)(0.000,5337.292)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)385.548(51.490)20647.07/7.90.000/1.0(45.184,725.912)(45.184,725.912)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’s approximation (seeTable 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test42Table 8. Inter-laboratory Analysis forAvian Control Data: Means and StandardErrors with Random Laboratory Effect, F2GenerationdParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cBody WeightMean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.494 (0.177)9.150 (0.175)6.544 (0.147)8.060 (0.784)16.846 (8.700, 130.761)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1482.617 (1.543)70.372 (1.357)49.563 (1.045)67.491 (9.653)24.773 (12.677, 264.030)Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1NA52.143 (41.928)48.286 (42.004)50.218 (29.674)83.568 (37.891, .)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2NA44.714 (42.549)33.286 (29.624)37.017 (24.312)92.882 (39.818, .)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3NA44.857 (42.525)46.571 (42.272)45.719 (29.980)92.736 (39.870, .)Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1to Day 3NA-7.286 (7.495)-1.714 (2.427)-2.243 (2.309)145.584 (47.760, .)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1NA57.143 (41.130)54.286 (41.221)55.717 (29.115)73.901 (35.528, .)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2NA45.857 (42.358)89.286 (54.415)62.243 (33.425)75.943 (36.000, .)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3NA45.571 (42.406)48.143 (42.043)46.868 (29.856)90.089 (39.322, .)Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 toDay 3NA-11.571 (7.662)-6.143 (2.807)-6.785 (2.635)54.930 (29.137, 786.059)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1NA9.143 (2.176)3.286 (0.778)5.862 (2.907)70.141 (28.035, .)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2NA11.571 (3.184)4.714 (1.248)7.517 (3.371)63.418 (25.817, .)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3NA8.714 (1.948)5.000 (1.558)6.673 (1.848)39.164 (16.839, .)Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 toDay 3NA-0.429 (2.298)1.714 (1.672)0.972 (1.352)196.641 (52.656, .)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1NA3.143 (0.829)2.000 (0.787)2.542 (0.571)31.752 (13.822, .)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2NA5.143 (1.487)2.429 (0.751)3.482 (1.323)53.720 (22.405, .)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3NA4.429 (0.972)2.286 (0.522)3.200 (1.060)46.839 (19.837, .)Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 toDay 3NA1.286 (0.421)0.286 (0.778)1.000 (0.452)63.888 (25.976, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1NA6.857 (2.262)1.000 (0.309)3.500 (2.897)117.058 (40.241, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2NA6.000 (0.951)0.714 (0.421)3.288 (2.642)113.624 (39.526, .)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3NA4.714 (0.865)1.286 (0.522)2.931 (1.713)82.659 (31.839, .)Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) fromDay 1 to Day 3NA-2.143 (2.632)0.286 (0.360)0.241 (0.356)208.837 (53.451, .)DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test43a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.d.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test44Table 8. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data: Means andStandard Errors withRandom Laboratory Effect,F2 GenerationdParameterIndividual LaboratoryMean (Standard Error)aAverage Across LaboratoriesLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIMean(Standard Error)bCV (95% CI)cThyroid Weight14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg)4.794 (0.239)NANANANA14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - MalesNA4.029 (0.344)1.913 (0.218)2.954 (1.057)50.623 (21.264, .)14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - FemalesNA2.567 (0.370)2.080 (0.248)2.245 (0.231)14.520 (6.444, .)15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)1.106 (0.088)1.869 (0.218)3.286 (0.324)2.057 (0.632)53.230 (25.728, .)Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)51.580 (3.791)53.701 (4.432)41.527 (4.203)48.939 (3.690)13.060 (6.762, 93.013)Bio ChemPlasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0.769 (0.061)0.572 (0.092)1.503 (0.114)0.943 (0.280)51.471 (24.983, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)0.817 (0.241)1.232 (0.159)2.333 (0.551)1.320 (0.364)47.806 (23.669, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)4.082 (0.833)2.989 (1.293)1.215 (0.292)2.597 (0.956)63.781 (30.179, .)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)3.760 (1.076)2.660 (1.029)2.449 (0.845)2.864 (0.558)33.754 (21.849, 77.594)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)2.884 (0.287)5.747 (1.701)4.918 (1.218)4.016 (0.931)40.164 (20.514, 1068.301)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)12.116 (1.552)9.570 (2.030)14.803 (2.333)11.992 (1.250)18.056 (9.262, 153.795)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)46.288 (11.184)6.625 (1.167)24.139 (4.080)23.526 (10.830)79.734 (35.767, .)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females(pg/mL)26.237 (4.314)4.680 (0.780)31.051 (13.215)18.332 (8.628)81.519 (36.759, .)a.Means and their associated standard errorsfor each laboratory were pooled across allsamples within the control groups for thelaboratory.b.Averages and standard errors across laboratories were based on random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect,incorporating heterogeneouswithin-laboratory variances.c.CV = [(std err)K/Average]×100%, K is the number of laboratories with measurements.d.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test45Table 9. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis with Random Laboratory,F2 GenerationfParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandomLaboratoyVariances (pvalues)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbBody WeightMean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 00.031/17.00.031/17.00.022/15.00.028/48.51.816(<0.001)0.615/2.00.698Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 142.382/17.01.841/17.01.091/15.01.772/46.1277.768(<0.001)93.180/2.00.276Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1NA1757.925/6.01764.367/6.01761.146/12.00.000(1.000)880.570/12.00.996Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2NA1810.415/6.0877.558/6.01343.986/10.70.000(1.000)591.057/10.70.375Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3NA1808.401/6.01786.946/6.01797.673/12.00.000(1.000)898.805/12.00.988Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3NA56.177/6.05.891/6.031.034/7.20.000(1.000)5.332/7.20.006Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1NA1691.687/6.01699.177/6.01695.432/12.00.000(1.000)847.712/12.00.996Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2NA1794.163/6.02960.939/6.02377.551/11.30.000(1.000)1117.202/11.30.540Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3NA1798.279/6.01767.592/6.01782.935/12.00.000(1.000)891.402/12.00.983Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3NA58.707/6.07.878/6.033.293/7.60.000(1.000)6.946/7.60.014Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1NA4.735/6.00.605/6.02.670/7.514.483(0.059)8.452/1.00.012Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2NA10.136/6.01.558/6.05.847/7.817.663(0.202)11.364/1.00.022Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3NA3.796/6.02.429/6.03.112/11.43.786(0.517)3.415/1.00.584Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3NA5.279/6.02.796/6.04.037/11.00.000(1.000)1.828/11.00.436Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1NA0.687/6.00.619/6.00.653/12.00.000(1.000)0.326/1.00.898Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2NA2.211/6.00.565/6.01.388/8.92.296(0.410)1.750/1.00.095Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3NA0.946/6.00.272/6.00.609/9.21.687(0.230)1.123/1.00.127Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3NA0.177/6.00.605/6.00.391/9.20.109(0.856)0.204/1.00.132a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).f.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test46Table 9. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: Variance Component Analysis withRandomLaboratory, F2 GenerationfParameterwithin Study Variance/Degree of Freedom (df)aRandom LaboratoyVariances (p-values)cVariance ofAverage/dfdp-Value of Testof Homogeneouswithin StudiesVarianceseLab1_ST Lab2_SV Lab3_WLIPooledwithinbMating Behavior (Continued)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1NA5.116/6.00.095/6.02.605/6.214.548(0.054)8.393/1.0<0.001Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2NA0.905/6.00.177/6.00.541/8.313.429(<0.001)6.980/1.00.046Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3NA0.748/6.00.272/6.00.510/9.95.367(0.004)2.934/1.00.215Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count)from Day 1 to Day 3NA6.925/6.00.129/6.03.527/6.20.000(1.000)0.127/6.2<0.001Thyroid Weight14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg)0.057/16.0NANANANANANA14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - MalesNA0.118/13.00.048/14.00.083/22.22.154(<0.001)1.118/1.00.09414-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - FemalesNA0.137/14.00.061/14.00.099/24.40.019(0.898)0.053/1.00.13315 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)0.008/17.00.047/12.00.105/13.00.053/24.61.150(<0.001)0.401/2.0<0.001Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)14.370/17.019.646/17.017.666/15.017.227/48.023.741(0.323)13.617/2.00.814Bio ChemPlasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0.004/4.00.008/4.00.013/4.00.008/10.00.227(<0.001)0.079/2.00.449Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)0.058/4.00.025/4.00.304/2.00.129/3.20.300(0.248)0.133/2.10.092Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0.694/4.01.671/4.00.085/4.00.817/7.32.070(0.007)0.915/2.10.009Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)1.157/4.01.058/4.00.714/4.00.976/11.60.000(1.000)0.312/11.60.877Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)0.082/4.02.895/4.01.482/4.01.487/7.51.577(0.184)0.867/2.3<0.001Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)2.408/4.04.122/4.05.443/4.03.991/10.91.027(0.843)1.563/1.90.709Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)125.088/3.01.361/4.016.646/4.047.698/3.9311.835(<0.001)117.289/2.1<0.001Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females(pg/mL)18.609/4.00.608/4.0174.635/4.064.617/4.9179.356(<0.001)74.443/2.3<0.001a.The within study variance for each laboratoryis the square of the standard error associated with the means, which was reportedin Table 2.b.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the laboratories. Associated degrees of freedom is based on Satterthwaite’s approximationc.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with laboratory treated as a random effect, incorporatingheterogeneous within-laboratory variances. The p-values arebased on likelihood ratio test.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test47d.Variances for the averages were calculated asthe square of the standard error of thepooled weighted averages value. It includes both within and among laboratory variation. Degrees offreedom for the (mean) overall effect variance were estimated as 2*((1/K)*∑(SR2+ Si2))2/(var(SR2)+(2/K2)*∑(Si4/dfi)), where SR2is the random laboratory variance, Si2and dfiare the reportedvariance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(SR2) is the variance of SR2,and K is the number of laboratories (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)e.P-value of the test of homogeneity of the within-laboratory variances based on an ANOVA model, applied to the log (within-laboratory variance).f.“NA” denotes that endpoint is not includedin the study dataset for a laboratory, orthat averages across laboratories were notcalculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test48Table 10. Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals within Laboratory andBetweenLaboratories, F2 GenerationParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandom Laboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdBody WeightMean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.060(0.784)0.028/48.51.816/1.9(4.877,11.243)(3.242,12.878)Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1467.491(9.653)1.772/46.1277.768/2.0(27.015,107.967)(8.168,126.815)Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 150.218(29.674)1761.146/12.00.000/1.0(0.000,156.925)(0.000,156.925)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 237.017(24.312)1343.986/10.70.000/1.0(0.000,129.220)(0.000,129.220)Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 345.719(29.980)1797.673/12.00.000/1.0(0.000,153.527)(0.000,153.527)Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-2.243(2.309)31.034/7.20.000/1.0(-15.744,11.257)(-15.744,11.257)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 155.717(29.115)1695.432/12.00.000/1.0(0.000,160.414)(0.000,160.414)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 262.243(33.425)2377.551/11.30.000/1.0(0.000,185.546)(0.000,185.546)Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 346.868(29.856)1782.935/12.00.000/1.0(0.000,154.232)(0.000,154.232)Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-6.785(2.635)33.293/7.60.000/1.0(-20.809,7.239)(-20.809,7.239)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 15.862(2.907)2.670/7.514.483/0.7(0.000,22.828)(0.000,30.300)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 27.517(3.371)5.847/7.817.663/0.6(0.000,23.784)(0.000,36.327)Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 36.673(1.848)3.112/11.43.786/0.3(0.000,14.282)(0.000,22.363)Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 30.972(1.352)4.037/11.00.000/1.0(-4.093,6.038)(-4.093,6.038)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 12.542(0.571)0.653/12.00.000/0.0(0.185,4.898)(0.000,7.656)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 23.482(1.323)1.388/8.92.296/0.4(0.000,9.117)(0.000,15.001)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 33.200(1.060)0.609/9.21.687/0.5(0.000,8.203)(0.000,12.185)Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.000(0.452)0.391/9.20.109/0.0(-0.881,2.881)(-3.599,5.599)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 13.500(2.897)2.605/6.214.548/0.7(0.000,20.583)(0.000,27.972)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 23.288(2.642)0.541/8.313.429/0.9(0.000,28.592)(0.000,25.243)Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 32.931(1.713)0.510/9.95.367/0.8(0.000,15.652)(0.000,17.180)Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 30.241(0.356)3.527/6.20.000/1.0(-4.324,4.807)(-4.324,4.807)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test49c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.For variables other than the change in length or change in number, the lower limits ofthe intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test50Table 10. (Continued). Inter-laboratory Analysis for Avian Control Data across All Studies: 95% Prediction Intervals withinLaboratory and Between Laboratories, F2 GenerationfParameterAverageMean (Std. Error)Variance (Degree of Freedom)95 % Prediction IntervalsePooled withinaRandomLaboratorybwithin LaboratoryeBetween LaboratoriesdThyroid Weight14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg)NANANANANA14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males2.954(1.057)0.083/22.22.154/0.9(0.000,13.179)(0.000,11.738)14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females2.245(0.231)0.099/24.40.019/0.0(1.327,3.164)(0.134,4.357)15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)2.051(0.633)0.053/24.61.150/1.8(0.000,4.414)(0.000,5.939)Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)48.939(3.690)17.227/48.023.741/0.7(36.493,61.386)(26.189,71.690)Bio ChemPlasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0.943(0.280)0.008/10.00.227/1.9(0.000,2.015)(0.000,2.666)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)1.320(0.364)0.129/3.20.300/1.1(0.011,2.630)(0.000,3.574)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)2.597(0.956)0.817/7.32.070/1.1(0.000,5.799)(0.000,8.472)Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)2.864(0.558)0.976/11.60.000/1.0(0.482,5.246)(0.482,5.246)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)4.016(0.931)1.487/7.51.577/0.7(0.540,7.491)(0.000,9.843)Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)11.992(1.250)3.991/10.91.027/0.1(6.826,17.158)(3.906,20.078)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)23.526(10.830)47.698/3.9311.835/1.6(0.000,60.213)(0.000,89.957)Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone- 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)18.332(8.628)64.617/4.9179.356/1.3(0.000,47.375)(0.000,70.645)a.Pooled within is the unweighted average ofthe within-laboratory variances among the studies. Associated degrees of freedom isbased on Satterthwaite’sapproximation (see Table 3).b.Random laboratory variance is estimated using a random effects model with study and laboratory treated as random effects, incorporating heterogeneous within-laboratory variances. Themodel is applied to all six studies. Degree of freedom is calculated based on chi-square distribution. If random lab+study issmaller than random study, thenrandom study is used in its place.c.The prediction intervalfor within-laboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within )), whereυis degree of freedom as calculated using Satterthwaite’sapproximation.d.The prediction interval for betweenlaboratory is (average mean) ± t0.975,υ√((standard error of mean)^2 + (pooled within ) + random laboratory), whereυis degree of freedom as calculatedusing Satterthwaite’s approximation.e.The lower limits of the intervals are truncated at 0 since no measurement could be negative.f.“NA” denotes that averages across laboratories were not calculated because data were available for only one laboratory.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test51Table 11. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power atthe 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F0 Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males168.8493.3471813.652155.197182.501Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males184.6373.2971813.445171.192198.083Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females207.8985.3341821.753186.145229.652Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females227.7165.1861821.151206.565248.868Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 126.4020.678182.76623.63629.169Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 226.1990.932183.80022.39929.998Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 325.2030.784183.19722.00628.399Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 426.7910.909183.70823.08330.500Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 529.1830.862183.51525.66732.698Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 628.9790.790183.22225.75732.202Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 728.5240.695182.83625.68931.360Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 826.8490.556182.26824.58129.117ReproductionEggs Laid42.8971.759187.17535.72250.072Eggs Crack0.9070.548182.233-1.3263.140Eggs Abnormal1.2690.797183.252-1.9824.521Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 811.6780.441181.7979.88113.475Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 817.4400.656182.67714.76320.117Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 811.2490.477181.9469.30313.195Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 816.8670.706182.88113.98719.748Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 810.9150.472181.9278.98812.842Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 816.2020.702182.86413.33819.066a.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 ontrol groupas presented in the inter-labanalysis of control data.c.Control group sample size and projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test52Table 11. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F0Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteReproduction (Continued)Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation10.8410.471181.9218.92012.763Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation16.1060.705182.87413.23318.980Eggs Hatched9.9070.542182.2127.69512.119Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks8.7900.657182.6816.11011.471Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.9020.028180.1150.7881.017Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0220.013180.054-0.0310.076Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0320.021180.085-0.0530.117Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9690.018180.0750.8941.044Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9700.016180.0640.9071.034Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9440.023180.0930.8511.036Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9350.023180.0930.8421.028Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after TwoWeeks of Incubation as A Percentage ofViable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.9950.006180.0230.9721.019Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage ofViable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9960.004180.0180.9771.014Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 afterTwo Weeks of Incubation0.9100.027180.1110.7991.022Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.8990.037180.1520.7471.051Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.8520.034180.1400.7120.992Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.8810.031180.1260.7551.008Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as APercentage of Numberof Eggs Set fromWeeks 7 and 80.7680.047180.1920.5760.961Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.7080.039180.1580.5500.866Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.6270.047180.1920.4360.819a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test53Table 11. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F0Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteEgg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.2150.003180.0140.2010.229Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)4.7430.164180.6704.0735.414Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.6400.131180.5353.1054.175Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)8.3940.261181.0657.3299.460Thyroid WeightAdult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) – Males7.3480.972183.9643.38411.312Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) – Females9.0960.897183.6585.43812.754Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)44.4214.811521.77822.64366.199Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)2050.636501.03652268.085-217.4484318.721Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.8710.12250.5540.3181.425Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.8600.08250.3700.4891.230Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.1640.83953.799-0.6356.964Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)1.7630.70653.194-1.4314.958Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)4.6110.98454.4520.1599.063Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)18.4522.622511.8706.58330.322Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1694.232366.86551660.71933.5133354.951Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)337.621203.8415922.744-585.1221260.365a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test54Table 12. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power atthe 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F1 Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteBody WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males138.3132.6961810.995127.318149.309Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males182.9064.0031816.326166.580199.232Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females149.9123.9821816.242133.670166.154Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females228.9105.8561823.883205.027252.793Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.3650.171180.6987.6679.063Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1470.0351.180184.81165.22474.846Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 127.2620.618182.52024.74329.782Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 229.7280.663182.70627.02232.433Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 328.6590.883183.60025.06032.259Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 426.8540.789183.21823.63730.072Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 526.4310.843183.44022.99129.870Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 627.4530.846183.45224.00130.906Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 728.3910.681182.77725.61431.168Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 827.6570.967183.94523.71231.602Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 931.4000.993184.04927.35135.448a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test55Table 12. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F1Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteReproductionEggs Laid43.5271.543186.29337.23449.820Eggs Crack1.0140.382181.560-0.5462.574Eggs Abnormal1.3040.531182.167-0.8633.471Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 811.4470.548182.2359.21213.682Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 824.0070.991184.04219.96528.049Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 810.9540.683182.7868.16813.740Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 823.0201.137184.63718.38227.657Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 812.5280.775183.1599.36915.687Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 822.2901.201184.89917.39127.189Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation12.3770.797183.2529.12415.629Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation15.8730.981184.00311.87119.876Eggs Hatched10.1000.776183.1666.93413.266Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks9.6760.768183.1316.54512.807Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.8890.031180.1280.7611.017Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0250.010180.041-0.0160.065Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0330.015180.063-0.0300.096Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9700.033180.1330.8371.103Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9590.021180.0860.8731.045Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9450.032180.1310.8141.075Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9270.027180.1120.8151.038a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test56Table 12. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F1Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteReproduction (Continued)Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after TwoWeeks of Incubation as A Percentage ofViable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.9950.010180.0420.9531.037Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage ofViable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9970.010180.0390.9571.036Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 afterTwo Weeks of Incubation0.9440.030180.1240.8201.068Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicksas A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.9640.016180.0660.8981.029Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.8660.047180.1920.6741.058Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Numberof Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.9130.037180.1500.7641.063Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as APercentage of Numberof Eggs Set fromWeeks 7 and 80.8340.048180.1970.6371.031Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.7220.056180.2270.4950.948Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.6910.055180.2240.4670.915Egg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.2130.003180.0130.2000.226Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)5.2570.154180.6264.6315.883Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.6260.094180.3853.2414.011Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)8.8810.218180.8907.9919.772a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test57Table 12. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F1Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteFirst Foam First Egg Cloacal SizeAge in Days at First Foam - Males37.2272.037188.30628.92145.533Age in Days at First Egg - Females44.9641.303185.31439.65050.278Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males0.2550.020180.0800.1750.335Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males0.3840.049180.1980.1860.582Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males0.5460.033180.1350.4110.682Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females0.2490.024180.0970.1520.346Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females0.3360.058180.2370.0980.573Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females0.5150.073180.2990.2170.814Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 110.2087.870733.976-23.76744.184Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 26.3932.03778.792-2.39915.185Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 33.1180.66872.8850.2336.004Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-6.6767.491732.338-39.01425.663Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 144.71334.5137148.997-104.285193.710Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 214.35124.3547105.140-90.789119.491Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 35.2566.652728.716-23.46033.972Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-29.80134.0407146.956-176.758117.155Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 16.0551.13474.8951.16010.950Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 27.4052.401710.367-2.96117.772Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 37.4252.12979.191-1.76616.616Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.8961.90478.218-6.32210.113Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 12.3390.75473.257-0.9185.596Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 23.0751.18775.123-2.0488.198a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test58Table 12. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F1Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteMating Behavior (Continued)Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 34.2030.99474.293-0.0908.496Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.8111.09074.706-2.8956.517Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 14.8590.95174.1060.7538.966Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 22.8630.85273.677-0.8156.540Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 33.4250.76073.2830.1426.708Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-1.4601.20175.184-6.6443.725Thyroid Weight15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)1.7950.168180.6871.1082.482Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males7.3450.827183.3723.97310.717Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females11.5061.364185.5645.94217.070Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)53.0855.2241821.30631.77974.391Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)67.84512.535556.74311.102124.588Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)3041.891467.96852118.391923.5015160.282Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.7480.09050.4070.3411.154Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.8150.08050.3640.4521.179Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.7221.04354.720-0.9978.442Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)2.1950.65252.949-0.7555.144Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)5.5693.185514.418-8.84919.987Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)16.6683.340515.1181.55031.786Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1759.598361.81351637.848121.7503397.447Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)385.548143.6915650.458-264.9101036.006a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test59Table 13. Alternatives that can be Detected with 80% Power atthe 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F2 Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteBody WeightMean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 08.0600.167180.6817.3798.741Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 1467.4911.331185.42862.06372.920Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 150.21841.9667181.172-130.954231.390Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 237.01736.6607158.267-121.250195.284Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 345.71942.3997183.041-137.322228.761Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-2.2435.571724.050-26.29321.807Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 155.71741.1767177.760-122.042233.477Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 262.24348.7607210.503-148.260272.746Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 346.86842.2257182.289-135.421229.158Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-6.7855.770724.910-31.69518.125Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 15.8621.63477.054-1.19312.916Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 27.5172.418710.439-2.92217.956Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 36.6731.76477.616-0.94314.289Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 30.9722.00978.675-7.7029.647Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 12.5420.80873.489-0.9476.030Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 23.4821.17875.086-1.6038.568Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 33.2000.78073.369-0.1696.569Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 31.0000.62572.700-1.7003.700Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 13.5001.61476.968-3.46810.468Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 23.2880.73573.1750.1136.463Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 32.9310.71473.084-0.1536.014Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 30.2411.87878.108-7.8678.349a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test60Table 13. (Continued). Alternatives that can be Detected with80% Power at the 5% (Two-Sided) Significance Level. Avian Study, F2Generation.ParameterMean(Control)aStandard Error(Control)bSample SizePer GroupcDetectionDistancedLowerLimiteUpperLimiteThyroid Weight14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males2.9540.288181.1751.7794.12914-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females2.2450.315181.2850.9603.53115 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)2.0510.231180.9411.1102.991Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%)48.9394.1511816.92832.01265.867Bio ChemPlasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0.9430.09150.4130.5301.356Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)1.3200.35951.626-0.3062.947Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)2.5970.90454.091-1.4946.688Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)2.8640.98854.473-1.6097.337Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)4.0161.21955.519-1.5049.535Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)11.9921.99859.0442.94921.036Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)23.5266.906531.264-7.73854.790Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone- 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)18.3328.038536.389-18.05654.721a.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 projectedsample sizes per concentration group.d.Detection distance for declaring a significant difference from the control group at the 5% level of sgnioficance with 80% power.e.A concentration group mean valuebelow the lower limit or above the upper limit will be declared to be significantly differentfrom control group at the 5% level with 80% power.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 61 Table 14. Mean and Standard Errors and Compar isons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations to

Control across Laborato ries, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Body Weight

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males Lab1_ST 190.661 (3.360) 188.739 (3.562) 185.778 (3.460) 185.978 (4.310) 188.839 (3.113)

Lab2_SV 202.739 (4.357) 216.361 (4.995) 207.539 (5.094) 213.744 (4.201) 210.300 (4.679)

Lab3_WLI 113.444 (1.828) 112.889 (1.569) 112.389 (1.966) 111.944 (1.850) 113.000 (1.768)

Average 170.418 (29.524) 170.995 (29.520) 169.294 (29.530) 169.966 (29.528) 170.660 (29.522)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males Lab1_ST 210.625 (3.920) 211.728 (4.982) 198.656 (5.079) 200.324 (4.438) 208.712 (4.390)

Lab2_SV 221.482 (3.807) 230.844 (4.685) 229.672 (4.657) 227.856 (4.939) 227.583 (3.917)

Lab3_WLI 122.059 (1.657) 118.000 (2.121) 120.059 (3.239) 116.824 (2.187) 118.667 (2.071)

Average 185.552 (33.100) 185.168 (33.121) 183.514 (33.145) 181.587 (33.120) 184.483 (33.110)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females Lab1_ST 233.567 (6.594) 234.439 (5.726) 240.533 (4.037) 227.017 (3.876) 224.583 (3.003)

Lab2_SV 247.556 (5.955) 243.661 (3.550) 239.289 (5.168) 248.828 (3.597) 247.478 (4.699)

Lab3_WLI 143.222 (2.529) 140.611 (2.493) 138.611 (2.193) 144.222 (2.495) 139.222 (2.385)

Average 208.083 (32.851) 205.676 (32.815) 206.070 (32.812) 207.094 (32.800) 203.177 (32.799)

Adult Body Weight (g)

Day 56 - Females Lab1_ST 249.444 (5.737) 265.483 (6.425) 256.788 (6.023) 260.335 (4.804) 258.141 (5.463)

Lab2_SV 276.924 (6.406) 266.183 (5.181) 270.422 (5.779) 274.394 (4.995) 277.317 (6.331)

Lab3_WLI 157.353 (2.598) 154.000 (1.843) 154.176 (1.770) 159.471 (5.204) 153.278 (3.481)

Average 229.101 (36.786) 227.055 (36.764) 227.067 (36.763) 231.372 (36.822) 228.150 (36.810)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 62 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Feed Consumption

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 1 Lab1_ST 29.611 (0.600) 29.111 (0.804) 28.778 (1.119) 29.000 (0.820) 26.389 (1.088)

Lab2_SV 31.033 (0.722) 32.144 (1.014) 32.661 (1.042) 31.978 (0.734) 30.706 (0.953)

Lab3_WLI 18.556 (0.706) 19.529 (0.576) 17.944 (0.574) 18.056 (0.375) 17.667 (0.388)

Average 26.482 (4.052) 27.066 (4.057) 26.199 (4.062) 26.155 (4.048) 25.343 (4.052)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 2 Lab1_ST 29.667 (0.828) 31.611 (1.004) 30.824 (0.744) 29.056 (0.898) 27.941 (1.016)

Lab2_SV 28.278 (1.198) 30.800 (0.761) 30.594 (1.062) 30.128 (0.716) 29.161 (1.141)

Lab3_WLI 20.765 (0.694) 20.765 (0.407) 19.611 (0.662) 19.611 (0.421) 19.944 (0.347)

Average 26.558 (3.300) 27.506 (3.284) 26.896 (3.294) 26.255 (3.283) 26.088 (3.287)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 3 Lab1_ST 28.944 (0.782) 30.667 (0.929) 28.059 (1.005) 29.056 (0.850) 27.118 (0.624)

Lab2_SV 27.556 (1.022) 28.256 (0.538) 29.550 (1.358) 28.906 (0.689) 27.239 (0.756)

Lab3_WLI 19.235 (0.433) 19.294 (0.444) 19.111 (0.599) 19.389 (0.293) 19.778 (0.367)

Average 25.278 (3.058) 25.798 (3.051) 25.323 (3.076) 25.690 (3.050) 24.880 (3.048)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 4 Lab1_ST 30.824 (1.340) 33.667 (0.953) 29.176 (1.207) 30.111 (1.029) 30.765 (0.603)

Lab2_SV 28.524 (0.693) 30.739 (0.645) 31.044 (0.632) 31.978 (0.745) 29.861 (1.017)

Lab3_WLI 21.294 (0.452) 20.588 (0.462) 20.056 (0.563) 20.944 (0.408) 21.500 (0.326)

Average 26.868 (3.350) 28.116 (3.341) 26.913 (3.349) 27.729 (3.344) 27.471 (3.339)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 63 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Feed Consumption (Continued)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 5 Lab1_ST 33.438 (1.235) 32.944 (0.998) 29.375 (1.500) 30.722 (1.047) 29.706 (0.690)

Lab2_SV 31.418 (0.696) 31.406 (0.578) 32.328 (0.504) 32.922 (0.585) 31.611 (0.940)

Lab3_WLI 22.882 (0.469) 22.412 (0.454) 22.444 (0.633) 22.056 (0.439) 22.500 (0.373)

Average 28.928 (3.098) 28.670 (3.091) 28.463 (3.101) 28.613 (3.092) 28.009 (3.090)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 6 Lab1_ST 35.750 (1.078) 34.833 (1.167) 32.375 (1.036) 30.000 (1.512) 30.765 (0.902)

Lab2_SV 29.382 (0.708) 30.139 (0.891) 29.844 (1.004) 31.344 (0.424) 30.522 (0.760)

Lab3_WLI 21.941 (0.458) 22.176 (0.564) 21.882 (0.629) 21.471 (0.333) 21.944 (0.818)

Average 28.782 (3.401) 28.918 (3.411) 28.061 (3.412) 28.079 (3.402) 27.787 (3.407)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 7 Lab1_ST 32.375 (0.758) 33.778 (1.330) 33.063 (0.964) 32.471 (1.237) 29.647 (0.849)

Lab2_SV 30.282 (0.674) 32.511 (0.692) 32.072 (0.557) 32.533 (0.583) 31.511 (0.681)

Lab3_WLI 22.941 (0.650) 22.647 (0.514) 22.941 (0.689) 22.176 (0.637) 22.500 (0.466)

Average 28.516 (3.147) 29.366 (3.154) 29.292 (3.150) 29.045 (3.154) 28.084 (3.145)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 8 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 30.076 (0.625) 31.494 (0.541) 32.400 (0.594) 32.111 (0.747) 30.261 (0.634)

Lab3_WLI 23.647 (0.477) 22.647 (0.581) 23.059 (0.745) 22.938 (0.744) 23.833 (0.622)

Average 26.922 (4.043) 27.081 (4.044) 27.790 (4.052) 27.523 (4.059) 27.052 (4.049)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 64 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Feed Consumption (Continued)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 9 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 34.418 (0.838) 36.428 (1.137) 38.467 (0.753) 35.833 (0.760) 27.822 (0.754)

Lab3_WLI NA NA NA NA NA

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Reproduction

Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 39.750 (1.445) 34.722 (3.342) 36.813 (2.608) 36.333 (2.882) 39.588 (1.018)

Lab2_SV 44.056 (2.509) 44.000 (1.328) 42.444 (2.610) 46.111 (0.565) 40.667 (2.926)

Lab3_WLI 44.941 (0.949) 44.765 (1.146) 41.294 (1.497) 43.824 (1.079) 43.333 (1.207)

Average 43.294 (1.954) 42.445 (1.991) 40.111 (2.139) 43.395 (1.900) 42.225 (1.956)

Eggs Crack Lab1_ST 1.500 (0.532) 0.529 (0.259) 0.438 (0.223) 1.000 (0.256) 1.824 (0.660)

Lab2_SV 1.611 (0.776) 1.778 (0.693) 1.222 (0.552) 0.722 (0.351) 1.111 (0.361)

Lab3_WLI 0.118 (0.118) 0.000 (0.000) 0.118 (0.081) 0.412 (0.354) 0.111 (0.076)

Average 0.701 (0.324) 0.503 (0.303) 0.552 (0.305) 0.739 (0.333) 0.665 (0.310)

Eggs Abnormal Lab1_ST 1.938 (0.710) 0.765 (0.219) 2.125 (1.136) 1.167 (0.422) 0.647 (0.191)

Lab2_SV 2.444 (1.161) 2.000 (0.681) 1.778 (0.684) 0.889 (0.395) 2.333 (0.754)

Lab3_WLI 0.235 (0.235) 0.529 (0.529) 0.176 (0.128) 0.059 (0.059) 0.111 (0.076)

Average 1.005 (0.445) 0.854 (0.433) 0.839 (0.408) 0.694 (0.394) 0.739 (0.394)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 65 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Set From Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 10.438 (0.626) 10.118 (1.011) 9.438 (0.940) 10.941 (0.740) 10.471 (0.550)

Lab2_SV 11.941 (0.397) 11.167 (0.628) 11.882 (0.208) 12.056 (0.221) 11.375 (0.523)

Lab3_WLI 12.235 (0.182) 12.059 (0.518) 11.824 (0.246) 11.412 (0.486) 11.722 (0.477)

Average 11.702 (0.495) 11.219 (0.592) 11.393 (0.492) 11.543 (0.507) 11.189 (0.544)

Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 15.375 (0.957) 15.294 (1.414) 14.188 (1.339) 16.118 (1.218) 15.706 (0.780)

Lab2_SV 18.059 (0.532) 16.556 (0.933) 17.059 (0.539) 17.889 (0.312) 16.235 (1.139)

Lab3_WLI 18.294 (0.306) 18.294 (0.721) 17.353 (0.500) 17.294 (0.513) 17.611 (0.572)

Average 17.472 (0.742) 16.915 (0.868) 16.483 (0.778) 17.135 (0.748) 16.739 (0.808)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks

7 and 8 Lab1_ST 9.813 (0.634) 11.133 (0.477) 9.133 (0.960) 10.938 (0.413) 10.118 (0.618)

Lab2_SV 11.706 (0.435) 10.722 (0.690) 11.353 (0.428) 11.389 (0.506) 11.188 (0.647)

Lab3_WLI 11.941 (0.303) 11.353 (0.878) 11.294 (0.520) 10.529 (0.777) 11.333 (0.505)

Average 11.423 (0.366) 11.218 (0.456) 10.942 (0.421) 11.161 (0.407) 10.900 (0.432)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks

6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 14.375 (0.999) 14.588 (1.458) 13.400 (1.290) 16.063 (0.824) 14.824 (0.904)

Lab2_SV 17.824 (0.570) 16.056 (0.958) 16.471 (0.796) 17.000 (0.686) 16.059 (1.220)

Lab3_WLI 17.941 (0.415) 17.588 (1.036) 16.529 (0.883) 16.294 (0.911) 17.111 (0.582)

Average 17.055 (0.761) 16.083 (0.932) 15.665 (0.871) 16.512 (0.820) 16.162 (0.825)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 66 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Viable From Weeks

7 and 8 Lab1_ST 9.188 (0.621) 10.733 (0.521) 9.286 (0.835) 10.188 (0.493) 9.706 (0.652)

Lab2_SV 11.647 (0.428) 10.389 (0.647) 11.059 (0.433) 11.167 (0.606) 10.938 (0.642)

Lab3_WLI 11.706 (0.318) 11.176 (0.863) 10.529 (0.718) 9.941 (0.872) 10.278 (0.709)

Average 11.068 (0.463) 10.801 (0.540) 10.428 (0.529) 10.569 (0.530) 10.318 (0.545)

Eggs Viable From Weeks

6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 13.000 (0.979) 14.813 (1.177) 13.643 (0.947) 15.063 (0.920) 14.118 (0.996)

Lab2_SV 17.647 (0.555) 15.500 (0.923) 16.059 (0.783) 16.500 (0.829) 15.706 (1.233)

Lab3_WLI 17.647 (0.461) 17.294 (1.017) 15.529 (1.029) 15.471 (1.154) 17.111 (0.582)

Average 16.520 (0.907) 15.766 (1.023) 15.142 (0.984) 15.826 (0.997) 15.879 (0.969)

Viable Eggs From Weeks

7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation Lab1_ST 9.188 (0.621) 10.733 (0.521) 9.286 (0.835) 10.188 (0.493) 9.706 (0.652)

Lab2_SV 11.529 (0.412) 10.389 (0.647) 10.765 (0.518) 10.833 (0.617) 10.875 (0.638)

Lab3_WLI 11.588 (0.333) 11.000 (0.853) 10.294 (0.736) 9.941 (0.872) 10.278 (0.709)

Average 11.011 (0.411) 10.754 (0.495) 10.215 (0.505) 10.445 (0.487) 10.298 (0.502)

Viable Eggs From Weeks

6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation Lab1_ST 13.000 (0.979) 14.813 (1.177) 13.643 (0.947) 15.063 (0.920) 14.118 (0.996)

Lab2_SV 17.529 (0.550) 15.500 (0.923) 15.765 (0.860) 16.167 (0.849) 15.647 (1.231)

Lab3_WLI 17.471 (0.478) 16.941 (1.005) 15.294 (1.049) 15.471 (1.154) 15.611 (0.922)

Average 16.492 (0.781) 15.673 (0.911) 14.933 (0.882) 15.660 (0.886) 15.124 (0.914)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 67 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Hatched Lab1_ST 7.750 (0.668) 10.067 (0.589) 8.429 (0.837) 8.938 (0.470) 9.059 (0.704)

Lab2_SV 10.882 (0.469) 9.722 (0.779) 9.824 (0.768) 9.889 (0.820) 10.313 (0.669)

Lab3_WLI 10.941 (0.466) 10.471 (0.900) 10.176 (0.739) 9.765 (0.902) 10.111 (0.732)

Average 10.054 (0.568) 10.208 (0.642) 9.494 (0.658) 9.589 (0.624) 9.835 (0.628)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Lab1_ST 7.688 (0.663) 9.800 (0.595) 7.143 (0.748) 8.438 (0.547) 8.941 (0.694)

Lab2_SV 9.706 (0.400) 9.500 (0.764) 10.125 (0.515) 10.353 (0.630) 10.000 (0.695)

Lab3_WLI 8.706 (0.835) 8.294 (0.882) 7.824 (0.754) 7.647 (0.870) 7.667 (0.691)

Average 8.613 (0.693) 9.363 (0.736) 8.514 (0.712) 8.877 (0.714) 8.868 (0.724)

Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.811 (0.029) 0.750 (0.057) 0.751 (0.053) 0.742 (0.059) 0.808 (0.021)

Lab2_SV 0.980 (0.033) 0.899 (0.027) 0.868 (0.053) 0.942 (0.011) 0.831 (0.060)

Lab3_WLI 0.917 (0.019) 0.914 (0.023) 0.843 (0.031) 0.894 (0.022) 0.884 (0.025)

Average 0.899 (0.042) 0.869 (0.043) 0.821 (0.046) 0.884 (0.041) 0.868 (0.042)

Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 0.039 (0.013) 0.018 (0.008) 0.014 (0.008) 0.046 (0.019) 0.045 (0.015)

Lab2_SV 0.037 (0.019) 0.040 (0.015) 0.028 (0.013) 0.016 (0.008) 0.029 (0.009)

Lab3_WLI 0.003 (0.003) 0.000 (0.000) 0.004 (0.002) 0.010 (0.008) 0.002 (0.002)

Average 0.019 (0.009) 0.015 (0.009) 0.016 (0.009) 0.019 (0.010) 0.019 (0.009)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 68 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 0.055 (0.022) 0.024 (0.008) 0.069 (0.043) 0.036 (0.014) 0.017 (0.005)

Lab2_SV 0.056 (0.028) 0.046 (0.015) 0.041 (0.016) 0.020 (0.009) 0.062 (0.020)

Lab3_WLI 0.005 (0.005) 0.018 (0.018) 0.004 (0.003) 0.001 (0.001) 0.003 (0.002)

Average 0.023 (0.010) 0.026 (0.011) 0.020 (0.009) 0.016 (0.009) 0.018 (0.009)

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.938 (0.022) 0.972 (0.013) 0.898 (0.066) 0.943 (0.028) 0.958 (0.017)

Lab2_SV 0.979 (0.012) 0.960 (0.026) 0.952 (0.027) 0.944 (0.036) 0.970 (0.022)

Lab3_WLI 0.976 (0.020) 0.902 (0.069) 0.956 (0.039) 0.921 (0.052) 0.968 (0.017)

Average 0.971 (0.009) 0.967 (0.012) 0.948 (0.021) 0.940 (0.020) 0.965 (0.011)

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.929 (0.022) 0.878 (0.063) 0.865 (0.069) 0.937 (0.024) 0.935 (0.023)

Lab2_SV 0.986 (0.008) 0.971 (0.017) 0.956 (0.024) 0.949 (0.033) 0.978 (0.017)

Lab3_WLI 0.980 (0.014) 0.942 (0.040) 0.951 (0.041) 0.939 (0.041) 0.973 (0.015)

Average 0.969 (0.015) 0.949 (0.021) 0.937 (0.024) 0.947 (0.022) 0.963 (0.016)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.883 (0.031) 0.933 (0.019) 0.898 (0.036) 0.880 (0.039) 0.915 (0.024)

Lab2_SV 0.975 (0.013) 0.933 (0.025) 0.928 (0.028) 0.924 (0.044) 0.949 (0.022)

Lab3_WLI 0.957 (0.021) 0.888 (0.068) 0.888 (0.054) 0.865 (0.062) 0.881 (0.049)

Average 0.953 (0.015) 0.932 (0.018) 0.908 (0.023) 0.893 (0.028) 0.925 (0.019)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 69 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.847 (0.034) 0.891 (0.033) 0.880 (0.037) 0.883 (0.039) 0.882 (0.031)

Lab2_SV 0.977 (0.010) 0.939 (0.020) 0.933 (0.024) 0.921 (0.041) 0.952 (0.026)

Lab3_WLI 0.964 (0.018) 0.926 (0.040) 0.893 (0.052) 0.885 (0.056) 0.973 (0.015)

Average 0.947 (0.025) 0.918 (0.028) 0.908 (0.030) 0.903 (0.034) 0.945 (0.026)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 after Two Weeks of

Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab2_SV 0.991 (0.006) 1.000 (0.000) 0.965 (0.020) 0.969 (0.011) 0.995 (0.005)

Lab3_WLI 0.990 (0.007) 0.985 (0.008) 0.977 (0.013) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Average 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 6

7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab2_SV 0.994 (0.004) 1.000 (0.000) 0.975 (0.015) 0.978 (0.008) 0.997 (0.003)

Lab3_WLI 0.990 (0.006) 0.981 (0.008) 0.984 (0.009) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Average 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 after Two Weeks of

Incubation Lab1_ST 0.834 (0.035) 0.935 (0.022) 0.913 (0.034) 0.884 (0.029) 0.935 (0.036)

Lab2_SV 0.942 (0.020) 0.905 (0.043) 0.874 (0.060) 0.895 (0.054) 0.946 (0.021)

Lab3_WLI 0.940 (0.025) 0.952 (0.032) 0.988 (0.008) 0.969 (0.021) 0.972 (0.019)

Average 0.917 (0.024) 0.941 (0.025) 0.954 (0.023) 0.926 (0.025) 0.949 (0.023)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 70 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A

Percentage of Eggs

Hatched Lab1_ST 0.993 (0.007) 0.974 (0.012) 0.864 (0.038) 0.944 (0.033) 0.989 (0.008)

Lab2_SV 0.896 (0.016) 0.978 (0.011) 0.967 (0.013) 0.988 (0.012) 0.968 (0.015)

Lab3_WLI 0.771 (0.062) 0.777 (0.041) 0.736 (0.066) 0.769 (0.049) 0.765 (0.041)

Average 0.886 (0.070) 0.911 (0.069) 0.867 (0.071) 0.906 (0.070) 0.911 (0.069)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.739 (0.042) 0.873 (0.030) 0.824 (0.049) 0.772 (0.038) 0.853 (0.037)

Lab2_SV 0.909 (0.020) 0.840 (0.044) 0.821 (0.061) 0.817 (0.064) 0.892 (0.028)

Lab3_WLI 0.895 (0.037) 0.833 (0.071) 0.858 (0.056) 0.848 (0.066) 0.867 (0.052)

Average 0.862 (0.028) 0.859 (0.033) 0.835 (0.038) 0.805 (0.037) 0.874 (0.030)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.785 (0.039) 0.898 (0.027) 0.850 (0.041) 0.824 (0.037) 0.891 (0.036)

Lab2_SV 0.929 (0.021) 0.879 (0.041) 0.839 (0.061) 0.842 (0.056) 0.921 (0.021)

Lab3_WLI 0.916 (0.030) 0.927 (0.037) 0.872 (0.048) 0.927 (0.047) 0.889 (0.048)

Average 0.892 (0.024) 0.906 (0.026) 0.858 (0.033) 0.864 (0.031) 0.906 (0.025)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.733 (0.041) 0.851 (0.032) 0.712 (0.054) 0.725 (0.041) 0.842 (0.035)

Lab2_SV 0.814 (0.021) 0.822 (0.044) 0.798 (0.062) 0.855 (0.046) 0.865 (0.032)

Lab3_WLI 0.711 (0.067) 0.659 (0.069) 0.662 (0.061) 0.650 (0.064) 0.655 (0.050)

Average 0.744 (0.052) 0.796 (0.054) 0.721 (0.058) 0.741 (0.055) 0.797 (0.052)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 71 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.554 (0.048) 0.719 (0.042) 0.602 (0.060) 0.638 (0.034) 0.647 (0.050)

Lab2_SV 0.778 (0.034) 0.696 (0.056) 0.702 (0.055) 0.707 (0.059) 0.738 (0.048)

Lab3_WLI 0.782 (0.033) 0.748 (0.064) 0.727 (0.053) 0.698 (0.064) 0.722 (0.052)

Average 0.718 (0.041) 0.730 (0.046) 0.678 (0.047) 0.685 (0.045) 0.703 (0.045)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.549 (0.047) 0.700 (0.043) 0.510 (0.053) 0.603 (0.039) 0.639 (0.050)

Lab2_SV 0.692 (0.029) 0.680 (0.055) 0.724 (0.037) 0.740 (0.045) 0.715 (0.050)

Lab3_WLI 0.622 (0.060) 0.592 (0.063) 0.559 (0.054) 0.546 (0.062) 0.575 (0.053)

Average 0.615 (0.048) 0.670 (0.051) 0.609 (0.050) 0.635 (0.050) 0.644 (0.051)

Egg Shell and Weight

Pen Mean Egg Shell

Thickness (mm) Lab1_ST 0.206 (0.002) 0.203 (0.004) 0.204 (0.004) 0.215 (0.003) 0.209 (0.003)

Lab2_SV 0.205 (0.004) 0.205 (0.004) 0.207 (0.003) 0.210 (0.004) 0.209 (0.005)

Lab3_WLI 0.234 (0.004) 0.231 (0.004) 0.229 (0.003) 0.234 (0.004) 0.225 (0.002)

Average 0.215 (0.008) 0.213 (0.008) 0.213 (0.008) 0.220 (0.008) 0.213 (0.008)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) Lab1_ST 5.761 (0.192) 6.091 (0.185) 5.988 (0.150) 5.834 (0.134) 5.807 (0.125)

Lab2_SV 3.913 (0.178) 3.589 (0.166) 3.637 (0.173) 3.729 (0.150) 3.861 (0.144)

Lab3_WLI 4.565 (0.112) 4.401 (0.153) 4.430 (0.148) 4.809 (0.094) 4.564 (0.102)

Average 4.744 (0.628) 4.673 (0.629) 4.689 (0.628) 4.824 (0.625) 4.736 (0.625)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 72 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Egg Shell and Weight (Continued)

Pen Mean Egg Content

Weight - Yolk (g) Lab1_ST 3.660 (0.136) 3.787 (0.146) 3.779 (0.160) 3.593 (0.078) 3.616 (0.107)

Lab2_SV 4.065 (0.171) 4.140 (0.112) 4.149 (0.153) 4.341 (0.113) 3.850 (0.144)

Lab3_WLI 3.257 (0.062) 3.279 (0.082) 3.348 (0.088) 3.357 (0.086) 3.415 (0.052)

Average 3.646 (0.239) 3.712 (0.239) 3.744 (0.242) 3.742 (0.236) 3.684 (0.237)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g) Lab1_ST 9.421 (0.287) 9.878 (0.295) 9.768 (0.281) 9.427 (0.181) 9.422 (0.185)

Lab2_SV 7.978 (0.316) 7.729 (0.213) 7.786 (0.288) 8.069 (0.182) 7.711 (0.231)

Lab3_WLI 7.823 (0.148) 7.679 (0.204) 7.778 (0.121) 8.165 (0.154) 7.980 (0.108)

Average 8.365 (0.551) 8.350 (0.552) 8.350 (0.548) 8.567 (0.545) 8.427 (0.544)

Thyroid Weight

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males Lab1_ST 6.113 (0.830) 6.672 (0.778) 7.125 (1.017) 7.238 (0.804) 8.029 (0.851)

Lab2_SV 11.800 (1.407) 7.581 (0.996) 8.140 (0.915) 9.463 (1.093) 12.189 (0.908)

Lab3_WLI 4.641 (0.407) 5.000 (0.573) 4.271 (0.380) 4.419 (0.579) 5.094 (0.434)

Average 7.089 (1.537) 6.655 (1.533) 6.533 (1.528) 7.011 (1.539) 8.178 (1.524)

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females Lab1_ST 10.138 (0.897) 9.500 (0.996) 10.473 (1.809) 12.688 (1.739) 9.029 (1.610)

Lab2_SV 11.362 (1.150) 13.925 (1.682) 12.900 (1.542) 13.671 (1.442) 15.712 (2.854)

Lab3_WLI 6.140 (0.535) 5.756 (0.850) 6.094 (0.663) 6.344 (0.630) 5.950 (0.760)

Average 9.495 (2.004) 9.397 (2.048) 9.718 (2.047) 10.238 (2.039) 9.516 (2.077)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 73 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Bio Chem

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) Lab1_ST 17.934 (2.934) 27.555 (5.623) 30.087 (5.188) 28.998 (4.149) 29.763 (4.936)

Lab2_SV 47.766 (4.137) 25.508 (4.735) 28.615 (8.578) 44.578 (3.635) 39.612 (5.175)

Lab3_WLI 68.882 (6.611) 73.986 (8.941) 69.490 (6.517) 67.517 (6.010) 56.762 (6.516)

Average 44.119 (12.664) 40.465 (12.909) 43.806 (12.970) 47.218 (12.668) 42.546 (12.791)

Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) Lab1_ST 2077.06 (331.443) 1254.92 (245.148) 2192.58 (774.189) 2122.04 (480.240) 2620.50 (474.135)

Lab2_SV 2685.20 (698.976) 4019.44 (1028.19) 2573.83 (785.922) 2209.49 (357.412) 3580.22 (830.427)

Lab3_WLI 1812.52 (393.307) 1848.09 (432.038) 2371.93 (569.978) 1827.49 (419.938) 1917.52 (320.586)

Average 2135.41 (310.518) 1653.72 (301.007) 2411.59 (440.480) 2028.82 (303.960) 2397.62 (325.947)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.497 (0.080) 0.404 (0.032) 0.512 (0.034) 0.882 (0.169) 0.595 (0.063)

Lab2_SV 1.016 (0.171) 0.833 (0.076) 1.266 (0.136) 0.658 (0.066) 0.765 (0.047)

Lab3_WLI 1.131 (0.096) 1.202 (0.224) 1.191 (0.137) 1.161 (0.115) 1.160 (0.108)

Average 0.862 (0.204) 0.778 (0.203) 0.955 (0.202) 0.845 (0.204) 0.834 (0.198)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.658 (0.088) 0.782 (0.158) 0.460 (0.064) 0.598 (0.076) 0.650 (0.080)

Lab2_SV 1.030 (0.059) 0.800 (0.158) 0.753 (0.134) 0.819 (0.166) 0.639 (0.029)

Lab3_WLI 0.869 (0.094) 1.113 (0.129) 0.816 (0.101) 0.791 (0.074) 0.870 (0.099)

Average 0.872 (0.096) 0.911 (0.120) 0.656 (0.101) 0.722 (0.102) 0.695 (0.094) A decreasing trend for the highest

concentration

group

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 74 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Bio Chem(Continued)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 3.764 (1.235) 5.202 (1.244) 10.035 (2.213) 1.528 (0.469) 6.236 (0.881)

Lab2_SV 3.178 (0.675) 6.699 (2.655) 7.479 (2.647) 6.300 (1.521) 1.736 (0.972)

Lab3_WLI 3.109 (0.364) 3.686 (0.571) 3.391 (0.333) 1.657 (0.322) 2.329 (0.818)

Average 3.367 (1.178) 4.827 (1.344) 5.876 (1.423) 2.698 (1.184) 3.458 (1.202)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 1.910 (0.548) 6.584 (2.193) 4.904 (1.183) 2.709 (0.767) 4.014 (1.347)

Lab2_SV 3.328 (1.066) 4.029 (2.084) 5.860 (1.724) 3.347 (0.739) 2.903 (0.577)

Lab3_WLI 1.138 (0.237) 3.744 (1.891) 1.011 (0.247) 0.951 (0.188) 1.176 (0.413)

Average 2.125 (0.786) 4.761 (1.384) 2.728 (0.835) 2.284 (0.782) 2.429 (0.814)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 4.988 (0.531) 3.017 (0.631) 3.518 (0.461) 2.245 (0.435) 3.574 (0.761)

Lab2_SV 3.796 (0.605) 4.267 (0.781) 8.597 (2.143) 3.295 (0.378) 3.793 (0.813)

Lab3_WLI 6.042 (1.501) 4.789 (1.089) 5.129 (1.429) 4.763 (1.063) 3.700 (0.000)

Average 4.696 (0.551) 3.870 (0.582) 4.307 (0.643) 3.117 (0.476) 3.574 (0.459)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 12.022 (1.721) 11.564 (2.567) 11.192 (1.118) 16.401 (6.849) 14.881 (1.881)

Lab2_SV 18.032 (3.786) 19.829 (3.172) 14.759 (3.100) 15.458 (3.013) 16.190 (1.949)

Lab3_WLI 25.273 (1.824) 23.267 (3.785) 41.560 (4.172) 24.490 (6.174) 18.445 (3.907)

Average 18.306 (4.850) 18.234 (4.983) 20.986 (4.920) 18.226 (5.489) 17.101 (4.871)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 75 Table 14. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F0 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b


# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e 

# Control (Group 1) 64 ppm (Group 2) 160 ppm (Group 3) 400 ppm (Group 4) 1000 ppm (Group 5)

Bio Chem (Continued)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Testosterone - Adult

Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 1242.50 (317.745) 2340.42 (1121.13) 2097.28 (717.514) 1488.41 (685.518) 1887.61 (1161.72)

Lab2_SV 1151.09 (184.708) 2715.29 (938.163) 1820.51 (883.029) 1512.84 (376.464) 1683.99 (440.844)

Lab3_WLI 2942.39 (518.354) 3124.31 (696.018) 3266.85 (963.748) 3455.77 (1885.67) 4156.95 (505.914)

Average 1751.80 (580.835) 2565.78 (747.736) 2429.24 (733.765) 2084.97 (651.233) 2612.47 (641.765)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Testosterone - Adult

Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 327.461 (63.129) 542.563 (168.052) 87.385 (14.683) 229.229 (147.465) 594.631 (218.672)

Lab2_SV 317.664 (185.839) 478.192 (77.943) 73.609 (21.750) 324.969 (96.703) 265.242 (128.318)

Lab3_WLI 606.982 (293.482) 573.873 (184.964) 1286.95 (279.762) 595.393 (316.128) 525.616 (331.143)

Average 337.621 (58.572) 500.335 (66.046) 85.346 (12.158) 314.555 (78.343) 367.295 (104.964) Yes

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 76 Table 15. Mean and Standard Errors and Compar isons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations to

Control across Laborato ries, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Body Weight

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males Lab1_ST 165.311 (1.914) 171.300 (3.439) 162.367 (2.235) 161.639 (2.530) 176.533 (3.118)

Lab2_SV 155.483 (3.072) 157.772 (2.491) 159.933 (2.465) 161.000 (2.108) 155.354 (2.979)

Lab3_WLI 94.063 (2.950) 99.200 (2.375) 87.765 (3.061) 90.824 (4.031) 88.833 (3.107)

Average 138.237 (23.735) 142.741 (23.739) 136.742 (23.732) 137.980 (23.743) 140.198 (23.751)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males Lab1_ST 213.494 (4.988) 212.100 (6.693) 205.522 (5.603) 208.213 (4.286) 208.835 (4.649)

Lab2_SV 216.300 (3.746) 231.678 (3.588) 225.556 (4.680) 228.206 (4.736) 222.067 (4.758)

Lab3_WLI 119.133 (3.027) 120.733 (3.841) 119.875 (1.925) 118.412 (3.127) 120.000 (1.728)

Average 182.342 (32.711) 188.680 (32.735) 184.363 (32.695) 184.331 (32.717) 184.355 (32.687)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females Lab1_ST 184.256 (4.289) 181.289 (3.634) 171.406 (3.899) 164.861 (2.242) 176.306 (3.375)

Lab2_SV 168.706 (3.977) 168.717 (2.228) 171.450 (3.497) 173.228 (2.795) 172.961 (3.017)

Lab3_WLI 96.875 (3.657) 94.333 (3.266) 92.706 (2.839) 96.529 (4.823) 97.500 (3.252)

Average 149.750 (26.095) 147.703 (26.053) 145.187 (26.068) 144.064 (26.061) 148.928 (26.060)

Adult Body Weight (g)

Day 56 - Females Lab1_ST 267.650 (6.162) 271.063 (5.602) 258.422 (5.386) 262.194 (4.650) 259.429 (7.210)

Lab2_SV 266.482 (7.608) 274.182 (5.622) 280.128 (5.377) 279.867 (5.831) 280.994 (5.957)

Lab3_WLI 153.313 (2.650) 152.067 (2.285) 146.250 (2.877) 156.176 (3.508) 154.056 (2.272)

Average 231.461 (39.720) 231.487 (39.701) 226.828 (39.713) 233.160 (39.723) 232.632 (39.706)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 77 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Body Weight (Continued)

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0 Lab1_ST 8.756 (0.191) 9.213 (0.211) 9.036 (0.210) 8.819 (0.167) 8.841 (0.183)

Lab2_SV 9.571 (0.173) 9.444 (0.153) 9.575 (0.195) 9.600 (0.139) 9.388 (0.176)

Lab3_WLI 6.776 (0.147) 6.975 (0.104) 6.778 (0.146) 7.061 (0.096) 6.922 (0.145)

Average 8.364 (0.788) 8.503 (0.786) 8.424 (0.789) 8.531 (0.786) 8.392 (0.788)

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14 Lab1_ST 82.688 (0.869) 85.233 (1.033) 82.571 (1.729) 80.275 (0.724) 80.924 (1.234)

Lab2_SV 78.929 (1.611) 76.150 (1.258) 82.069 (1.278) 81.476 (0.863) 83.088 (0.856)

Lab3_WLI 48.529 (0.908) 47.375 (1.004) 48.706 (0.731) 49.111 (1.120) 48.111 (1.081)

Average 70.161 (11.104) 69.689 (11.103) 71.112 (11.109) 70.233 (11.097) 70.807 (11.102)

Feed Consumption

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 1 Lab1_ST 31.278 (0.587) 32.222 (0.838) 30.222 (0.765) 28.667 (0.616) 30.222 (0.608)

Lab2_SV 30.228 (0.551) 32.061 (0.951) 33.456 (1.316) 32.233 (1.159) 31.078 (0.708)

Lab3_WLI 20.250 (0.704) 21.533 (0.559) 22.412 (0.845) 21.471 (0.723) 20.833 (0.513)

Average 27.264 (3.317) 28.546 (3.328) 28.494 (3.343) 27.231 (3.331) 27.377 (3.317)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 2 Lab1_ST 31.444 (0.622) 30.389 (1.545) 31.222 (0.756) 33.889 (0.620) 30.667 (1.245)

Lab2_SV 36.561 (0.873) 38.711 (0.983) 42.278 (1.109) 39.256 (1.187) 37.378 (1.108)

Lab3_WLI 21.250 (0.413) 20.200 (0.685) 21.438 (0.447) 21.176 (0.666) 21.889 (0.504)

Average 29.863 (5.152) 29.801 (5.173) 31.381 (5.158) 31.502 (5.160) 30.182 (5.167)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 78 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Feed Consumption (Continued)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 3 Lab1_ST 32.889 (0.911) 30.353 (1.257) 31.222 (0.603) 30.611 (0.776) 30.111 (2.010)

Lab2_SV 31.500 (1.156) 33.511 (0.560) 33.822 (0.756) 34.450 (0.785) 33.150 (1.001)

Lab3_WLI 21.750 (0.413) 21.067 (0.727) 21.250 (0.512) 21.294 (0.561) 22.167 (0.567)

Average 29.026 (3.733) 28.492 (3.738) 28.707 (3.729) 28.733 (3.734) 29.095 (3.746)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 4 Lab1_ST 32.333 (0.904) 30.059 (1.202) 28.556 (0.612) 29.556 (0.785) 29.529 (0.924)

Lab2_SV 25.844 (0.949) 26.483 (0.920) 27.100 (1.005) 29.239 (0.783) 28.444 (1.078)

Lab3_WLI 22.500 (0.387) 22.267 (0.483) 22.125 (0.562) 22.294 (0.574) 23.167 (0.584)

Average 26.856 (2.274) 26.239 (2.286) 25.888 (2.272) 26.978 (2.271) 27.047 (2.287)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 5 Lab1_ST 30.222 (0.794) 31.125 (1.048) 29.278 (0.671) 29.056 (0.439) 28.647 (0.757)

Lab2_SV 26.678 (1.010) 30.000 (0.697) 27.817 (0.783) 32.711 (0.539) 30.061 (0.709)

Lab3_WLI 22.438 (0.695) 22.867 (0.646) 22.750 (0.574) 22.706 (0.635) 24.111 (0.704)

Average 26.534 (2.364) 27.919 (2.360) 26.641 (2.348) 28.158 (2.336) 27.617 (2.352)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 6 Lab1_ST 32.611 (1.039) 32.625 (1.143) 30.833 (0.622) 31.222 (0.952) 30.412 (0.970)

Lab2_SV 27.444 (0.902) 31.411 (0.629) 29.367 (1.093) 33.950 (0.550) 32.789 (0.769)

Lab3_WLI 22.467 (0.506) 21.867 (0.798) 22.438 (0.316) 21.765 (0.774) 23.000 (0.667)

Average 27.510 (3.130) 28.584 (3.133) 27.639 (3.121) 29.081 (3.125) 28.783 (3.128)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 79 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Feed Consumption (Continued)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 7 Lab1_ST 32.667 (0.878) 31.875 (0.779) 30.278 (0.847) 29.000 (0.700) 29.353 (0.931)

Lab2_SV 30.022 (0.685) 32.356 (1.456) 32.433 (1.465) 38.194 (1.039) 36.150 (0.997)

Lab3_WLI 22.600 (0.388) 23.000 (0.586) 21.500 (0.398) 21.588 (0.670) 22.778 (0.527)

Average 28.398 (3.654) 29.186 (3.677) 28.089 (3.675) 29.469 (3.663) 29.406 (3.665)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 8 Lab1_ST 32.556 (1.500) 33.125 (1.463) 31.222 (0.989) 31.500 (0.974) 30.706 (1.067)

Lab2_SV 29.117 (0.549) 30.911 (0.602) 30.433 (0.611) 33.000 (0.506) 31.411 (0.827)

Lab3_WLI 21.600 (0.505) 22.200 (0.745) 21.438 (0.645) 20.882 (0.831) 22.500 (0.595)

Average 27.399 (3.232) 28.511 (3.241) 27.686 (3.228) 28.692 (3.230) 28.330 (3.235)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 9 Lab1_ST 31.944 (1.259) 31.250 (1.063) 31.444 (0.653) 32.167 (0.841) 30.824 (0.682)

Lab2_SV 31.267 (0.622) 33.967 (0.528) 32.678 (0.870) 36.222 (0.973) 33.261 (0.647)

Lab3_WLI NA NA NA NA NA

Average 31.113 (1.246) 32.770 (1.205) 32.103 (1.203) 34.094 (1.253) 32.050 (1.176)

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 30.978 (0.536) 34.789 (1.128) 34.172 (1.078) 35.639 (1.022) 34.567 (1.173)

Lab3_WLI NA NA NA NA NA

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 26.756 (1.416) 29.428 (1.365) 29.367 (1.272) 30.406 (1.798) 30.411 (1.379)

Lab3_WLI NA NA NA NA NA

Average NA NA NA NA NA

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 80 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction

Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 46.222 (1.086) 44.250 (1.743) 45.444 (1.663) 44.875 (1.390) 45.625 (1.429)

Lab2_SV 39.444 (2.211) 42.389 (1.708) 37.611 (2.640) 43.000 (1.755) 42.889 (1.252)

Lab3_WLI 43.688 (1.036) 39.800 (2.864) 40.938 (2.378) 42.059 (1.686) 45.222 (0.920)

Average 43.854 (1.249) 42.732 (1.515) 42.087 (1.584) 43.262 (1.364) 44.824 (1.212)

Eggs Crack Lab1_ST 0.889 (0.342) 0.938 (0.433) 1.222 (0.454) 1.375 (0.491) 0.875 (0.352)

Lab2_SV 1.833 (0.480) 1.833 (0.550) 1.778 (0.619) 2.333 (1.007) 2.056 (0.439)

Lab3_WLI 0.563 (0.302) 0.333 (0.126) 0.125 (0.085) 0.059 (0.059) 0.111 (0.076)

Average 1.139 (0.528) 1.129 (0.508) 0.952 (0.503) 0.885 (0.501) 0.935 (0.501)

Eggs Abnormal Lab1_ST 0.722 (0.226) 0.563 (0.203) 0.500 (0.202) 0.750 (0.281) 2.250 (1.109)

Lab2_SV 3.389 (0.879) 2.944 (0.920) 3.556 (1.216) 3.556 (1.269) 3.167 (0.653)

Lab3_WLI 0.375 (0.155) 0.267 (0.153) 0.313 (0.151) 0.059 (0.059) 0.389 (0.244)

Average 1.431 (0.907) 1.296 (0.907) 1.310 (0.907) 1.136 (0.902) 1.509 (0.922)

Eggs Set From Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 10.944 (0.563) 11.188 (0.510) 11.056 (0.688) 11.375 (0.455) 10.813 (0.726)

Lab2_SV 10.611 (0.696) 11.235 (0.315) 11.294 (0.580) 11.056 (0.482) 11.000 (0.618)

Lab3_WLI 12.438 (0.316) 11.733 (0.802) 11.188 (0.833) 12.118 (0.410) 12.056 (0.400)

Average 11.600 (0.414) 11.477 (0.413) 11.291 (0.503) 11.524 (0.407) 11.366 (0.443)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 81 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction(Continued)

Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 16.722 (0.646) 17.000 (0.707) 16.500 (1.061) 16.938 (0.642) 16.000 (1.190)

Lab2_SV 16.167 (1.058) 16.824 (0.487) 16.471 (0.823) 16.222 (0.794) 16.333 (0.967)

Lab3_WLI 39.188 (1.188) 35.867 (2.724) 37.063 (2.285) 38.706 (1.578) 40.833 (0.908)

Average 24.080 (7.618) 24.448 (7.614) 23.946 (7.628) 24.154 (7.617) 24.564 (7.622)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks

7 and 8 Lab1_ST 10.278 (0.722) 9.938 (0.733) 10.667 (0.691) 9.688 (0.845) 9.625 (0.851)

Lab2_SV 10.389 (0.701) 10.941 (0.337) 11.000 (0.549) 10.444 (0.584) 10.941 (0.609)

Lab3_WLI 12.063 (0.622) 11.533 (0.792) 11.063 (0.844) 11.588 (0.613) 12.000 (0.420)

Average 10.941 (0.598) 10.930 (0.548) 11.004 (0.594) 10.608 (0.591) 11.043 (0.561)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks

6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 15.667 (0.836) 15.375 (0.921) 15.889 (1.084) 14.125 (1.255) 14.188 (1.262)

Lab2_SV 15.611 (1.094) 16.471 (0.486) 15.941 (0.816) 15.111 (0.996) 16.167 (0.954)

Lab3_WLI 37.875 (1.408) 34.867 (2.777) 35.438 (2.497) 37.118 (1.894) 38.667 (1.319)

Average 23.096 (7.345) 23.239 (7.337) 22.971 (7.350) 22.026 (7.356) 22.996 (7.349)

Eggs Viable From Weeks

7 and 8 Lab1_ST 10.222 (0.721) 9.438 (0.730) 10.667 (0.691) 9.188 (0.927) 9.313 (0.934)

Lab2_SV 10.167 (0.742) 10.765 (0.359) 10.765 (0.532) 10.056 (0.712) 10.706 (0.652)

Lab3_WLI 17.250 (0.854) 16.867 (1.041) 15.938 (1.199) 16.529 (1.105) 16.889 (0.536)

Average 12.522 (2.249) 12.475 (2.231) 12.684 (2.243) 11.895 (2.262) 12.414 (2.239)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 82 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Viable From Weeks

6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 15.333 (0.856) 14.563 (0.992) 16.706 (0.611) 13.563 (1.332) 13.688 (1.405)

Lab2_SV 15.278 (1.157) 16.294 (0.498) 15.529 (0.800) 14.611 (1.112) 15.833 (0.968)

Lab3_WLI 36.375 (1.502) 32.800 (2.797) 34.125 (2.553) 34.412 (2.853) 36.500 (1.543)

Average 22.244 (6.734) 22.207 (6.730) 22.814 (6.729) 20.829 (6.759) 22.014 (6.742)

Viable Eggs From Weeks

7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation Lab1_ST 10.222 (0.721) 9.438 (0.730) 10.667 (0.691) 9.188 (0.927) 9.313 (0.934)

Lab2_SV 10.056 (0.747) 10.059 (0.511) 10.235 (0.566) 9.944 (0.702) 10.706 (0.652)

Lab3_WLI 16.938 (0.910) 16.667 (1.094) 15.750 (1.233) 16.412 (1.075) 16.722 (0.565)

Average 12.382 (2.212) 12.002 (2.203) 12.407 (2.207) 11.846 (2.222) 12.378 (2.201)

Viable Eggs From Weeks

6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation Lab1_ST 15.333 (0.856) 14.563 (0.992) 15.778 (1.092) 13.563 (1.332) 13.688 (1.405)

Lab2_SV 15.167 (1.153) 15.588 (0.613) 15.000 (0.767) 14.500 (1.100) 15.833 (0.968)

Lab3_WLI 16.938 (0.910) 16.667 (1.094) 15.750 (1.233) 16.353 (1.095) 16.722 (0.565)

Average 15.877 (0.723) 15.665 (0.674) 15.459 (0.735) 14.886 (0.819) 15.776 (0.677)

Eggs Hatched Lab1_ST 9.333 (0.780) 8.438 (0.837) 10.000 (0.705) 8.500 (0.940) 8.438 (1.053)

Lab2_SV 9.389 (0.837) 9.176 (0.649) 9.059 (0.672) 9.333 (0.754) 10.059 (0.672)

Lab3_WLI 11.438 (0.707) 10.733 (0.790) 10.688 (0.820) 10.824 (0.734) 11.056 (0.569)

Average 10.093 (0.700) 9.474 (0.692) 9.920 (0.685) 9.612 (0.711) 10.042 (0.679)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 83 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Lab1_ST 8.944 (0.769) 8.313 (0.835) 10.000 (0.705) 8.188 (0.905) 8.733 (0.968)

Lab2_SV 9.111 (0.808) 8.824 (0.666) 8.529 (0.665) 9.056 (0.721) 9.706 (0.674)

Lab3_WLI 10.875 (0.724) 10.600 (0.767) 9.938 (0.772) 10.235 (0.725) 10.667 (0.657)

Average 9.665 (0.631) 9.266 (0.624) 9.486 (0.610) 9.233 (0.635) 9.812 (0.621)

Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.943 (0.022) 0.903 (0.036) 0.928 (0.034) 0.916 (0.028) 0.931 (0.029)

Lab2_SV 0.807 (0.045) 0.879 (0.025) 0.828 (0.075) 0.879 (0.036) 0.888 (0.025)

Lab3_WLI 0.892 (0.021) 0.812 (0.058) 0.836 (0.049) 0.858 (0.034) 0.923 (0.019)

Average 0.899 (0.022) 0.883 (0.025) 0.878 (0.031) 0.885 (0.024) 0.919 (0.021)

Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 0.020 (0.008) 0.021 (0.009) 0.026 (0.009) 0.031 (0.012) 0.021 (0.008)

Lab2_SV 0.049 (0.014) 0.042 (0.013) 0.039 (0.010) 0.055 (0.023) 0.047 (0.010)

Lab3_WLI 0.014 (0.008) 0.017 (0.010) 0.004 (0.002) 0.001 (0.001) 0.002 (0.002)

Average 0.027 (0.012) 0.027 (0.013) 0.022 (0.012) 0.020 (0.012) 0.021 (0.012)

Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid Lab1_ST 0.017 (0.005) 0.014 (0.006) 0.012 (0.005) 0.018 (0.007) 0.054 (0.028)

Lab2_SV 0.092 (0.026) 0.069 (0.024) 0.105 (0.054) 0.085 (0.029) 0.073 (0.016)

Lab3_WLI 0.009 (0.004) 0.006 (0.003) 0.007 (0.003) 0.001 (0.001) 0.009 (0.005)

Average 0.034 (0.022) 0.031 (0.022) 0.031 (0.022) 0.027 (0.022) 0.035 (0.022)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 84 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.925 (0.040) 0.876 (0.043) 0.964 (0.015) 0.839 (0.060) 0.889 (0.045)

Lab2_SV 0.979 (0.009) 0.974 (0.012) 0.977 (0.009) 0.945 (0.032) 0.995 (0.005)

Lab3_WLI 0.956 (0.039) 0.984 (0.008) 0.988 (0.012) 0.943 (0.036) 0.994 (0.006)

Average 0.967 (0.015) 0.968 (0.014) 0.973 (0.013) 0.924 (0.025) 0.984 (0.012) Yes

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.932 (0.028) 0.896 (0.029) 0.960 (0.015) 0.823 (0.061) 0.894 (0.041)

Lab2_SV 0.965 (0.017) 0.980 (0.010) 0.968 (0.012) 0.932 (0.038) 0.991 (0.005)

Lab3_WLI 0.963 (0.017) 0.971 (0.017) 0.941 (0.022) 0.956 (0.024) 0.943 (0.018)

Average 0.954 (0.019) 0.958 (0.018) 0.958 (0.017) 0.930 (0.025) 0.959 (0.018)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.920 (0.039) 0.832 (0.043) 0.964 (0.015) 0.792 (0.066) 0.832 (0.055)

Lab2_SV 0.956 (0.021) 0.958 (0.015) 0.957 (0.012) 0.912 (0.047) 0.972 (0.016)

Lab3_WLI 0.935 (0.033) 0.949 (0.026) 0.903 (0.061) 0.892 (0.059) 0.934 (0.018)

Average 0.938 (0.023) 0.931 (0.021) 0.956 (0.020) 0.874 (0.036) 0.937 (0.021)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 0.913 (0.031) 0.846 (0.036) 0.954 (0.018) 0.788 (0.065) 0.833 (0.055)

Lab2_SV 0.943 (0.029) 0.969 (0.011) 0.944 (0.014) 0.904 (0.048) 0.971 (0.012)

Lab3_WLI 0.924 (0.021) 0.914 (0.033) 0.900 (0.031) 0.875 (0.061) 0.889 (0.026)

Average 0.927 (0.027) 0.921 (0.027) 0.935 (0.025) 0.860 (0.040) 0.918 (0.027)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 85 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 after Two Weeks of

Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs

From Weeks 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab2_SV 0.989 (0.008) 0.932 (0.031) 0.955 (0.026) 0.990 (0.007) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab3_WLI 0.981 (0.016) 0.979 (0.014) 0.984 (0.008) 0.990 (0.007) 0.989 (0.006)

Average 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 6

7 and 8 after Two Weeks

of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs

From Weeks 6 7 and 8 Lab1_ST 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab2_SV 0.993 (0.005) 0.956 (0.020) 0.970 (0.017) 0.993 (0.005) 1.000 (0.000)

Lab3_WLI 0.981 (0.016) 0.979 (0.014) 0.984 (0.008) 0.990 (0.007) 0.989 (0.006)

Average 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000) 1.000 (0.000)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 after Two Weeks of

Incubation Lab1_ST 0.905 (0.033) 0.877 (0.046) 0.935 (0.020) 0.909 (0.028) 0.814 (0.076)

Lab2_SV 0.917 (0.040) 0.904 (0.037) 0.874 (0.036) 0.932 (0.025) 0.929 (0.023)

Lab3_WLI 0.983 (0.009) 0.979 (0.009) 0.989 (0.007) 0.968 (0.013) 0.975 (0.012)

Average 0.941 (0.024) 0.936 (0.024) 0.948 (0.023) 0.932 (0.024) 0.935 (0.024)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A

Percentage of Eggs

Hatched Lab1_ST 0.956 (0.019) 0.986 (0.010) 1.000 (0.000) 0.963 (0.019) 0.970 (0.022)

Lab2_SV 0.976 (0.012) 0.960 (0.016) 0.937 (0.017) 0.975 (0.010) 0.966 (0.014)

Lab3_WLI 0.949 (0.017) 0.990 (0.007) 0.933 (0.022) 0.950 (0.023) 0.957 (0.022)

Average 0.962 (0.014) 0.981 (0.012) 0.969 (0.013) 0.966 (0.014) 0.965 (0.015)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 86 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.830 (0.047) 0.739 (0.058) 0.903 (0.027) 0.734 (0.070) 0.724 (0.083)

Lab2_SV 0.869 (0.045) 0.811 (0.046) 0.793 (0.037) 0.842 (0.051) 0.903 (0.028)

Lab3_WLI 0.904 (0.050) 0.920 (0.027) 0.956 (0.019) 0.872 (0.054) 0.908 (0.029)

Average 0.868 (0.045) 0.836 (0.043) 0.891 (0.039) 0.822 (0.049) 0.872 (0.043)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.901 (0.034) 0.835 (0.048) 0.935 (0.020) 0.854 (0.042) 0.802 (0.079)

Lab2_SV 0.888 (0.045) 0.827 (0.043) 0.812 (0.036) 0.872 (0.041) 0.906 (0.027)

Lab3_WLI 0.936 (0.030) 0.934 (0.024) 0.967 (0.011) 0.903 (0.039) 0.913 (0.028)

Average 0.907 (0.031) 0.877 (0.032) 0.919 (0.027) 0.876 (0.033) 0.897 (0.032)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7

and 8 Lab1_ST 0.796 (0.049) 0.729 (0.058) 0.903 (0.027) 0.708 (0.069) 0.749 (0.074)

Lab2_SV 0.846 (0.044) 0.778 (0.048) 0.743 (0.037) 0.818 (0.049) 0.871 (0.029)

Lab3_WLI 0.860 (0.051) 0.910 (0.025) 0.891 (0.025) 0.826 (0.054) 0.873 (0.038)

Average 0.835 (0.045) 0.821 (0.043) 0.851 (0.039) 0.791 (0.048) 0.846 (0.043)

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.667 (0.056) 0.603 (0.060) 0.756 (0.029) 0.607 (0.067) 0.603 (0.075)

Lab2_SV 0.671 (0.060) 0.655 (0.046) 0.669 (0.049) 0.667 (0.054) 0.719 (0.048)

Lab3_WLI 0.817 (0.051) 0.767 (0.056) 0.763 (0.059) 0.773 (0.052) 0.790 (0.041)

Average 0.722 (0.047) 0.678 (0.046) 0.752 (0.042) 0.688 (0.048) 0.721 (0.045)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 87 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Reproduction (Continued)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day Lab1_ST 0.639 (0.055) 0.594 (0.060) 0.756 (0.029) 0.585 (0.065) 0.624 (0.069)

Lab2_SV 0.651 (0.058) 0.630 (0.047) 0.631 (0.050) 0.647 (0.052) 0.694 (0.049)

Lab3_WLI 0.777 (0.052) 0.757 (0.055) 0.710 (0.055) 0.731 (0.052) 0.762 (0.047)

Average 0.690 (0.045) 0.662 (0.045) 0.718 (0.041) 0.660 (0.045) 0.702 (0.045)

Egg Shell and Weight

Pen Mean Egg Shell

Thickness (mm) Lab1_ST 0.204 (0.003) 0.201 (0.004) 0.206 (0.004) 0.212 (0.003) 0.202 (0.004)

Lab2_SV 0.207 (0.004) 0.203 (0.004) 0.201 (0.004) 0.201 (0.004) 0.206 (0.003)

Lab3_WLI 0.229 (0.003) 0.236 (0.004) 0.237 (0.006) 0.239 (0.003) 0.237 (0.003)

Average 0.212 (0.010) 0.213 (0.010) 0.214 (0.011) 0.218 (0.010) 0.216 (0.010)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) Lab1_ST 6.475 (0.131) 6.743 (0.266) 6.848 (0.153) 6.801 (0.134) 6.789 (0.133)

Lab2_SV 4.456 (0.208) 5.067 (0.108) 4.781 (0.135) 4.857 (0.191) 5.210 (0.125)

Lab3_WLI 4.825 (0.103) 4.820 (0.140) 4.794 (0.109) 4.846 (0.107) 4.885 (0.076)

Average 5.324 (0.624) 5.566 (0.626) 5.464 (0.624) 5.512 (0.624) 5.612 (0.623)

Pen Mean Egg Content

Weight - Yolk (g) Lab1_ST 3.821 (0.085) 3.834 (0.121) 3.902 (0.080) 3.873 (0.066) 3.825 (0.093)

Lab2_SV 3.784 (0.106) 3.941 (0.103) 3.905 (0.073) 4.274 (0.136) 4.005 (0.116)

Lab3_WLI 3.275 (0.091) 3.190 (0.062) 3.256 (0.085) 3.347 (0.059) 3.179 (0.067)

Average 3.638 (0.226) 3.641 (0.225) 3.684 (0.224) 3.773 (0.223) 3.647 (0.225)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 88 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Egg Shell and Weight (Continued)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g) Lab1_ST 10.295 (0.193) 10.575 (0.366) 10.748 (0.222) 10.674 (0.173) 10.613 (0.193)

Lab2_SV 8.239 (0.297) 9.009 (0.174) 8.686 (0.182) 9.131 (0.272) 9.214 (0.232)

Lab3_WLI 8.100 (0.133) 8.011 (0.156) 8.049 (0.173) 8.193 (0.126) 8.064 (0.123)

Average 9.016 (0.741) 9.193 (0.742) 9.140 (0.741) 9.306 (0.740) 9.241 (0.739)

First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size

Age in Days at First Foam

- Males Lab1_ST 34.500 (0.283) 34.611 (0.405) 35.389 (0.657) 33.944 (0.318) 33.944 (0.308)

Lab2_SV 42.611 (3.422) 38.278 (0.709) 38.500 (0.506) 37.722 (0.547) 37.889 (0.788)

Lab3_WLI 37.688 (0.810) 37.200 (1.787) 35.765 (1.006) 36.765 (0.991) 36.667 (0.900)

Average 36.677 (1.161) 36.669 (1.178) 36.829 (1.182) 36.049 (1.155) 36.064 (1.159)

Age in Days at First Egg -

Females Lab1_ST 42.722 (0.666) 42.611 (0.789) 43.556 (0.841) 44.556 (0.841) 42.588 (0.840)

Lab2_SV 48.278 (1.885) 46.111 (1.093) 51.889 (2.737) 45.500 (1.764) 46.000 (1.360)

Lab3_WLI 45.063 (1.047) 44.333 (2.294) 43.625 (1.291) 46.765 (1.773) 43.889 (0.840)

Average 44.743 (1.177) 44.273 (1.210) 45.086 (1.251) 45.898 (1.257) 44.142 (1.169)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST 0.292 (0.020) 0.267 (0.015) 0.278 (0.016) 0.299 (0.023) 0.274 (0.016)

Lab2_SV 0.222 (0.018) 0.238 (0.026) 0.282 (0.024) 0.220 (0.035) 0.238 (0.034)

Lab3_WLI 0.253 (0.021) 0.393 (0.054) 0.363 (0.044) 0.391 (0.043) 0.428 (0.045)

Average 0.256 (0.036) 0.287 (0.038) 0.305 (0.037) 0.301 (0.039) 0.302 (0.038)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 89 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size (Continued)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST 0.372 (0.030) 0.351 (0.019) 0.378 (0.021) 0.398 (0.019) 0.385 (0.020)

Lab2_SV 0.279 (0.029) 0.302 (0.027) 0.328 (0.037) 0.298 (0.037) 0.318 (0.031)

Lab3_WLI 0.539 (0.073) 0.568 (0.075) 0.499 (0.059) 0.483 (0.055) 0.381 (0.035)

Average 0.369 (0.047) 0.365 (0.045) 0.388 (0.046) 0.393 (0.045) 0.371 (0.045)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST 0.558 (0.029) 0.499 (0.031) 0.544 (0.029) 0.574 (0.032) 0.579 (0.035)

Lab2_SV 0.423 (0.029) 0.447 (0.033) 0.434 (0.041) 0.433 (0.041) 0.421 (0.040)

Lab3_WLI 0.664 (0.041) 0.736 (0.048) 0.848 (0.054) 0.636 (0.049) 0.551 (0.042)

Average 0.549 (0.079) 0.555 (0.079) 0.595 (0.080) 0.551 (0.080) 0.520 (0.080)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.593 (0.035) 0.601 (0.035) 0.509 (0.033) 0.474 (0.028) 0.564 (0.030)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.582 (0.025) 0.562 (0.027) 0.567 (0.025) 0.511 (0.023) 0.522 (0.013)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9

Weeks - Males Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.589 (0.023) 0.564 (0.024) 0.581 (0.021) 0.532 (0.014) 0.526 (0.012)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 90 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size (Continued)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST 0.274 (0.019) 0.313 (0.020) 0.288 (0.021) 0.275 (0.016) 0.289 (0.024)

Lab2_SV 0.213 (0.029) 0.311 (0.037) 0.268 (0.028) 0.312 (0.030) 0.286 (0.032)

Lab3_WLI 0.244 (0.021) 0.294 (0.031) 0.270 (0.015) 0.304 (0.044) 0.292 (0.031)

Average 0.251 (0.013) 0.308 (0.015) 0.275 (0.011) 0.285 (0.013) 0.289 (0.016)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST 0.402 (0.051) 0.534 (0.056) 0.509 (0.046) 0.423 (0.032) 0.499 (0.039)

Lab2_SV 0.111 (0.014) 0.144 (0.019) 0.164 (0.027) 0.157 (0.018) 0.163 (0.031)

Lab3_WLI 0.524 (0.086) 0.590 (0.064) 0.453 (0.045) 0.631 (0.148) 0.546 (0.088)

Average 0.336 (0.117) 0.392 (0.117) 0.379 (0.117) 0.368 (0.117) 0.398 (0.118)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST 0.521 (0.040) 0.702 (0.042) 0.676 (0.041) 0.765 (0.054) 0.626 (0.052)

Lab2_SV 0.103 (0.010) 0.123 (0.014) 0.119 (0.015) 0.134 (0.017) 0.102 (0.011)

Lab3_WLI 0.956 (0.120) 0.763 (0.082) 0.771 (0.054) 0.803 (0.086) 0.654 (0.065)

Average 0.470 (0.202) 0.528 (0.201) 0.519 (0.201) 0.554 (0.202) 0.476 (0.201)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.652 (0.044) 0.634 (0.048) 0.691 (0.051) 0.689 (0.035) 0.597 (0.031)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.638 (0.035) 0.606 (0.035) 0.739 (0.029) 0.675 (0.028) 0.623 (0.041)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 91 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size (Continued)

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9

Weeks - Females Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI 0.679 (0.033) 0.607 (0.030) 0.734 (0.028) 0.656 (0.022) 0.639 (0.025)

Average NA NA NA NA NA

Mating Behavior

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1 Lab1_ST 21.286 (11.720) 21.714 (18.064) 75.286 (42.417) 63.143 (40.678) 50.429 (41.689)

Lab2_SV 15.143 (6.780) 4.143 (1.223) 14.857 (7.799) 6.571 (1.251) 29.714 (15.240)

Lab3_WLI 7.571 (1.571) 50.714 (41.590) 9.857 (1.471) 59.667 (48.168) 5.833 (1.302)

Average 14.017 (5.629) 4.897 (5.765) 16.239 (5.682) 7.321 (5.785) 12.340 (5.689)

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2 Lab1_ST 6.571 (2.707) 2.000 (0.535) 45.143 (27.424) 27.286 (24.790) 9.857 (4.356)

Lab2_SV 8.286 (1.848) 9.143 (4.496) 6.429 (2.467) 5.143 (1.056) 17.714 (12.453)

Lab3_WLI 5.286 (1.304) 45.714 (42.384) 4.429 (0.751) 57.000 (48.716) 6.833 (2.428)

Average 6.516 (1.279) 2.273 (1.242) 5.247 (1.226) 4.261 (1.494) 8.420 (2.266)

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3 Lab1_ST 3.000 (0.309) 2.857 (0.829) 4.429 (1.307) 1.857 (0.404) 5.571 (1.270)

Lab2_SV 4.286 (1.063) 5.429 (3.116) 7.143 (3.832) 3.143 (0.705) 3.000 (0.488)

Lab3_WLI 3.143 (0.340) 45.857 (42.364) 3.143 (0.340) 52.833 (49.434) 3.333 (0.558)

Average 3.118 (0.223) 3.042 (0.801) 3.253 (0.328) 2.178 (0.351) 3.332 (0.353)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 92 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST -18.286 (11.478) -18.857 (17.872) -70.857 (42.509) -61.286 (40.360) -44.857 (40.635)

Lab2_SV -10.857 (5.881) 1.286 (3.257) -7.714 (5.809) -3.429 (1.412) -26.714 (14.885)

Lab3_WLI -4.429 (1.412) -4.857 (1.779) -6.714 (1.700) -6.833 (3.219) -2.500 (1.628)

Average -5.887 (2.346) -3.025 (2.264) -7.103 (2.516) -4.638 (2.152) -3.442 (2.666)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 1 Lab1_ST 61.571 (40.199) 25.857 (17.686) 76.571 (42.061) 65.714 (40.132) 54.286 (41.126)

Lab2_SV 39.571 (16.959) 5.143 (1.164) 20.286 (8.190) 27.143 (6.745) 46.571 (16.569)

Lab3_WLI 57.143 (40.865) 56.714 (40.766) 18.143 (5.986) 61.833 (47.724) 11.500 (3.990)

Average 45.740 (16.504) 11.620 (9.090) 21.427 (8.700) 32.059 (11.529) 21.765 (9.427)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 2 Lab1_ST 13.143 (5.157) 3.714 (1.128) 47.286 (27.736) 30.143 (24.656) 11.000 (4.326)

Lab2_SV 15.000 (5.196) 47.714 (42.058) 9.286 (2.652) 11.286 (2.688) 21.429 (11.864)

Lab3_WLI 51.286 (41.543) 47.000 (42.171) 8.714 (1.822) 58.167 (48.492) 11.333 (2.275)

Average 14.351 (3.646) 3.777 (1.127) 9.010 (1.500) 11.648 (2.668) 11.546 (1.985) Yes

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 3 Lab1_ST 5.714 (1.392) 3.857 (0.911) 5.143 (1.299) 2.429 (0.612) 6.571 (1.152)

Lab2_SV 15.714 (11.401) 49.429 (41.783) 49.286 (41.856) 8.571 (2.991) 8.000 (3.132)

Lab3_WLI 5.000 (0.900) 46.571 (42.245) 4.714 (0.421) 54.000 (49.205) 5.667 (0.211)

Average 5.256 (0.754) 3.899 (0.911) 4.759 (0.400) 2.683 (0.599) 5.706 (0.207) Yes

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 93 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST -55.857 (40.219) -22.000 (17.502) -71.429 (42.223) -63.286 (39.763) -47.714 (40.255)

Lab2_SV -23.857 (14.175) 44.286 (41.986) 29.000 (38.414) -18.571 (7.690) -38.571 (17.735)

Lab3_WLI -52.143 (40.716) -10.143 (4.044) -13.429 (6.019) -7.833 (2.868) -5.833 (4.094)

Average -29.125 (14.009) -16.550 (7.297) -20.132 (8.585) -15.379 (6.658) -14.369 (7.384)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST 7.857 (1.262) 9.286 (2.212) 8.286 (1.924) 8.143 (2.604) 11.143 (2.595)

Lab2_SV 5.286 (1.040) 5.857 (0.800) 5.857 (1.779) 6.571 (1.445) 5.571 (1.288)

Lab3_WLI 5.429 (1.088) 5.000 (1.113) 5.714 (0.918) 3.167 (0.792) 7.833 (1.869)

Average 6.185 (1.149) 6.430 (1.160) 6.749 (1.231) 5.076 (1.196) 7.394 (1.379)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST 8.286 (2.212) 9.286 (1.584) 5.857 (1.610) 7.714 (2.598) 9.143 (1.857)

Lab2_SV 12.429 (3.351) 6.143 (1.487) 7.714 (1.911) 11.143 (2.219) 4.571 (0.948)

Lab3_WLI 3.714 (1.085) 4.000 (1.175) 5.286 (1.017) 3.000 (0.856) 5.833 (1.249)

Average 6.997 (1.864) 6.403 (1.666) 6.330 (1.691) 6.612 (1.785) 6.219 (1.646)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST 6.000 (1.195) 8.714 (2.286) 6.571 (2.487) 5.429 (1.494) 6.143 (1.184)

Lab2_SV 13.429 (3.123) 6.571 (1.525) 11.714 (2.909) 14.143 (2.262) 9.286 (1.886)

Lab3_WLI 5.286 (1.554) 4.429 (1.172) 5.000 (0.724) 3.000 (0.894) 5.667 (1.406)

Average 7.448 (1.987) 6.159 (1.942) 7.429 (1.978) 6.520 (1.908) 7.078 (1.911)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 94 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST -1.857 (1.945) -0.571 (2.298) -1.714 (1.769) -2.714 (3.393) -5.000 (2.093)

Lab2_SV 8.143 (2.272) 0.714 (1.040) 5.857 (2.064) 7.571 (2.644) 3.714 (0.892)

Lab3_WLI -0.143 (1.388) -0.571 (0.782) -0.714 (0.993) -0.167 (0.654) -2.167 (2.701)

Average 1.749 (2.379) -0.576 (2.260) 0.941 (2.315) 1.364 (2.386) -0.775 (2.358)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST 1.714 (0.565) 0.857 (0.404) 2.143 (0.508) 1.714 (0.565) 2.000 (0.845)

Lab2_SV 2.857 (0.595) 3.286 (0.522) 3.857 (0.738) 3.571 (1.043) 3.143 (0.911)

Lab3_WLI 2.714 (1.017) 2.571 (0.528) 2.286 (0.360) 2.167 (0.601) 4.000 (1.183)

Average 2.355 (0.617) 2.137 (0.555) 2.596 (0.561) 2.401 (0.620) 2.893 (0.731)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST 2.143 (0.769) 3.857 (0.634) 3.714 (0.837) 2.714 (0.837) 3.714 (0.644)

Lab2_SV 5.429 (1.631) 3.571 (1.110) 4.000 (0.756) 3.714 (0.865) 3.000 (0.309)

Lab3_WLI 3.143 (0.986) 3.571 (0.922) 3.000 (0.488) 2.333 (0.667) 3.333 (0.760)

Average 2.874 (0.569) 3.730 (0.472) 3.375 (0.368) 2.810 (0.447) 3.157 (0.261)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST 2.857 (0.769) 3.714 (0.969) 3.286 (0.522) 3.286 (1.017) 3.429 (0.528)

Lab2_SV 7.571 (1.462) 3.714 (0.747) 4.286 (1.358) 5.143 (0.705) 6.714 (1.375)

Lab3_WLI 3.000 (0.488) 2.857 (0.769) 3.714 (0.421) 2.500 (0.671) 3.333 (0.558)

Average 3.757 (0.739) 3.294 (0.769) 4.072 (0.699) 3.582 (0.751) 4.074 (0.722)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 95 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST 1.143 (0.508) 2.857 (0.911) 1.143 (0.508) 1.571 (0.751) 1.429 (0.528)

Lab2_SV 4.714 (1.459) 0.429 (0.429) 0.429 (0.896) 1.571 (1.556) 3.571 (1.395)

Lab3_WLI 0.286 (1.085) 0.286 (0.808) 1.429 (0.612) 0.333 (0.422) -0.667 (1.256)

Average 1.498 (0.698) 0.979 (0.608) 1.075 (0.594) 0.965 (0.643) 1.334 (0.715)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST 6.429 (0.922) 4.000 (1.215) 3.286 (0.606) 4.143 (1.143) 5.571 (0.841)

Lab2_SV 7.714 (1.340) 3.571 (1.043) 7.429 (1.541) 3.429 (0.571) 3.000 (0.724)

Lab3_WLI 0.857 (0.261) 1.571 (0.922) 1.714 (1.128) 1.833 (0.749) 1.667 (0.760)

Average 4.545 (1.359) 3.057 (1.403) 3.710 (1.407) 3.103 (1.350) 3.381 (1.340)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST 3.286 (0.474) 4.857 (0.962) 5.143 (0.800) 2.714 (0.606) 4.714 (0.993)

Lab2_SV 5.000 (1.327) 5.000 (0.816) 4.000 (0.900) 4.286 (0.714) 4.286 (0.714)

Lab3_WLI 1.000 (0.436) 0.429 (0.202) 1.857 (0.738) 0.833 (0.654) 0.833 (0.543)

Average 2.903 (1.178) 2.940 (1.170) 3.742 (1.216) 2.571 (1.185) 3.141 (1.196)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST 2.429 (0.429) 2.857 (0.705) 4.429 (0.369) 2.714 (0.565) 3.857 (0.459)

Lab2_SV 7.571 (1.212) 8.429 (1.172) 9.143 (1.487) 6.857 (1.223) 8.714 (0.644)

Lab3_WLI 0.714 (0.286) 2.000 (1.091) 1.143 (0.261) 1.333 (0.615) 2.167 (0.792)

Average 3.523 (2.044) 4.241 (2.092) 4.655 (2.043) 3.790 (2.064) 4.869 (2.050)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 96 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST -4.000 (1.024) -1.143 (1.033) 1.143 (0.553) -1.429 (1.110) -1.714 (1.149)

Lab2_SV -0.143 (1.779) 4.857 (1.565) 1.714 (1.629) 3.429 (0.922) 5.714 (0.865)

Lab3_WLI -0.143 (0.340) 0.429 (0.369) -0.571 (1.020) -0.500 (0.428) 0.500 (0.806)

Average -0.960 (1.625) 1.215 (1.617) 1.201 (1.630) 0.464 (1.588) 1.589 (1.608)

Thyroid Weight

15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg) Lab1_ST 0.991 (0.143) 1.323 (0.091) 1.269 (0.160) 1.200 (0.111) 1.162 (0.124)

Lab2_SV 2.048 (0.146) 2.198 (0.163) 2.173 (0.363) 1.868 (0.139) 1.750 (0.159)

Lab3_WLI 2.371 (0.208) 2.850 (0.132) 2.560 (0.182) 2.912 (0.169) 3.000 (0.268)

Average 1.839 (0.450) 2.109 (0.446) 1.960 (0.456) 1.972 (0.448) 1.902 (0.451)

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males Lab1_ST 10.022 (1.061) 9.531 (1.054) 10.178 (1.372) 11.150 (1.100) 9.969 (1.020)

Lab2_SV 6.807 (0.681) 8.647 (1.373) 8.873 (1.162) 11.922 (1.539) 9.636 (1.496)

Lab3_WLI 5.533 (0.679) 6.800 (1.138) 6.394 (0.738) 6.535 (0.700) 7.011 (0.712)

Average 7.234 (1.161) 8.292 (1.267) 8.418 (1.219) 9.124 (1.214) 8.810 (1.209)

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females Lab1_ST 13.322 (1.203) 12.294 (0.761) 10.239 (1.133) 14.556 (1.851) 19.425 (2.853)

Lab2_SV 15.460 (1.893) 12.057 (1.415) 12.836 (1.639) 14.317 (2.054) 13.425 (1.705)

Lab3_WLI 6.275 (0.743) 6.219 (0.471) 6.094 (0.887) 7.982 (1.013) 7.344 (0.794)

Average 11.003 (2.239) 10.389 (2.193) 9.720 (2.246) 12.266 (2.304) 11.850 (2.270)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 97 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Sex Ratio

Ratio of Number of Males

to Total Number of

Offspring (%) Lab1_ST 48.413 (6.569) 45.563 (5.276) 47.676 (3.915) 39.459 (3.860) 51.565 (5.165)

Lab2_SV 54.965 (4.077) 48.276 (4.481) 54.199 (5.063) 48.718 (4.736) 46.915 (3.838)

Lab3_WLI 52.979 (4.702) 51.256 (5.317) 51.615 (3.597) 49.144 (6.827) 48.169 (2.598)

Average 53.026 (2.819) 48.325 (2.900) 50.769 (2.381) 44.179 (2.772) 48.273 (2.034)

Bio Chem

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) Lab1_ST 92.541 (13.371) 84.648 (8.491) 69.838 (10.750) 80.260 (5.120) 84.588 (7.629)

Lab2_SV 43.908 (13.558) 43.095 (7.906) 25.923 (5.182) 23.293 (3.758) 24.767 (6.483)

Lab3_WLI 66.995 (10.430) 81.308 (12.985) 86.645 (4.554) 79.186 (8.847) 58.943 (7.847)

Average 65.941 (18.336) 70.123 (17.768) 63.395 (17.319) 59.769 (17.232) 56.251 (17.421)

Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) Lab1_ST 5.171 (0.672) 2.990 (0.511) 5.720 (1.494) 3.809 (0.439) 5.277 (0.914)

Lab2_SV 1.971 (0.258) 2.728 (0.691) 1.754 (0.378) 1.856 (0.280) 1.652 (0.261)

Lab3_WLI 2.222 (0.373) 2.071 (0.211) 2.053 (0.388) 1.932 (0.376) 2.068 (0.289)

Average 2.858 (0.708) 2.538 (0.706) 2.621 (0.730) 2.562 (0.704) 2.574 (0.705)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.718 (0.075) 0.706 (0.074) 0.533 (0.096) 0.844 (0.173) 0.689 (0.093)

Lab2_SV 0.620 (0.044) 0.528 (0.261) 0.873 (0.102) 0.844 (0.225) 1.230 (0.176)

Lab3_WLI 0.992 (0.129) 1.106 (0.180) 1.027 (0.065) 1.056 (0.134) 1.029 (0.098)

Average 0.755 (0.120) 0.827 (0.139) 0.816 (0.121) 0.917 (0.148) 0.924 (0.129)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 98 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Bio Chem (Continued)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.761 (0.098) 0.885 (0.081) 0.673 (0.149) 0.805 (0.124) 0.814 (0.137)

Lab2_SV 0.755 (0.064) 0.710 (0.131) 1.180 (0.110) 1.193 (0.077) 0.981 (0.108)

Lab3_WLI 0.927 (0.076) 0.864 (0.102) 0.963 (0.057) 1.067 (0.092) 0.744 (0.098)

Average 0.813 (0.077) 0.837 (0.086) 0.965 (0.085) 1.048 (0.083) 0.844 (0.090)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 6.385 (1.309) 5.159 (1.136) 4.267 (1.632) 8.721 (1.753) 3.298 (0.861)

Lab2_SV 1.829 (0.517) 0.916 (0.153) 3.340 (1.290) 3.973 (1.073) 3.155 (0.699)

Lab3_WLI 3.574 (1.131) 3.759 (1.078) 2.516 (0.595) 3.159 (0.873) 1.830 (0.452)

Average 3.636 (1.149) 2.894 (1.109) 3.337 (1.193) 4.829 (1.215) 2.775 (1.078)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 2.843 (0.730) 4.620 (0.730) 3.353 (1.041) 7.286 (2.537) 4.429 (0.775)

Lab2_SV 2.590 (0.779) 1.437 (0.674) 4.914 (1.351) 4.454 (1.243) 5.688 (1.380)

Lab3_WLI 1.930 (0.365) 1.890 (0.300) 2.620 (1.475) 1.974 (0.581) 0.763 (0.000)

Average 2.510 (0.965) 2.662 (0.954) 3.515 (1.158) 3.793 (1.138) 3.079 (0.997)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 5.385 (0.764) 3.676 (0.963) 2.474 (0.512) 4.187 (0.839) 6.609 (1.177)

Lab2_SV 10.140 (4.754) 3.743 (1.038) 3.802 (1.293) 6.841 (1.093) 3.934 (0.842)

Lab3_WLI 6.391 (2.691) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000)

Average 5.704 (0.977) 3.703 (0.570) 3.281 (0.538) 4.390 (0.563) 4.243 (0.568)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 99 Table 15. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F1 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Bio Chem (Continued)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 22.013 (4.460) 18.173 (4.878) 22.329 (5.155) 15.928 (2.876) 21.871 (6.048)

Lab2_SV 14.819 (1.889) 10.840 (3.598) 16.369 (0.765) 15.642 (4.653) 15.312 (1.236)

Lab3_WLI 17.685 (3.163) 20.042 (3.955) 20.266 (2.126) 30.026 (5.899) 24.402 (3.788)

Average 17.593 (2.309) 16.026 (2.875) 19.128 (1.970) 17.839 (2.862) 18.637 (2.165)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Testosterone - Adult

Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 3237.80 (273.449) 2503.84 (991.019) 2018.28 (674.302) 2030.23 (656.375) 2717.24 (845.548)

Lab2_SV 478.438 (127.383) 625.846 (117.731) 1004.41 (242.910) 888.730 (406.711) 2574.34 (751.450)

Lab3_WLI 1596.37 (549.294) 3253.82 (679.184) 2786.43 (953.096) 959.411 (316.315) 3435.18 (872.284)

Average 1788.25 (508.925) 1859.29 (557.788) 1847.21 (570.363) 1239.73 (540.443) 2937.72 (670.774)

Plasma Sex Hormone

Testosterone - Adult

Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 531.493 (198.570) 462.757 (172.478) 958.046 (333.005) 315.118 (82.894) 541.602 (187.127)

Lab2_SV 392.223 (57.767) 382.268 (214.027) 369.583 (153.880) 336.661 (163.380) 199.550 (44.787)

Lab3_WLI 276.222 (138.471) 957.498 (381.354) 796.197 (293.006) 1157.08 (330.153) 991.428 (322.689)

Average 403.421 (143.290) 530.824 (182.568) 625.543 (185.290) 453.014 (157.036) 444.834 (154.746)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 100 Table 16. Mean and Standard Errors and Compar isons of Avian Vinclozolin Concentrations to

Control across Laborato ries, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Body Weight

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0 Lab1_ST 8.494 (0.177) 8.806 (0.210) 8.524 (0.169) 8.453 (0.128) 8.440 (0.200)

Lab2_SV 9.150 (0.175) 9.524 (0.191) 9.006 (0.124) 9.578 (0.208) 9.565 (0.160)

Lab3_WLI 6.544 (0.147) 6.687 (0.095) 6.340 (0.137) 6.571 (0.144) 6.389 (0.081)

Average 8.074 (0.855) 8.328 (0.854) 7.931 (0.854) 8.162 (0.854) 8.096 (0.853)

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14 Lab1_ST 82.617 (1.543) 83.763 (1.354) 83.276 (1.059) 83.418 (0.922) 80.387 (1.761)

Lab2_SV 70.372 (1.357) 71.165 (2.071) 72.447 (1.052) 72.217 (1.179) 72.482 (1.285)

Lab3_WLI 49.563 (1.045) 50.400 (0.786) 49.200 (0.932) 50.412 (1.225) 49.056 (0.760)

Average 67.592 (9.789) 68.771 (9.785) 68.253 (9.779) 68.686 (9.782) 67.571 (9.782)

Mating Behavior

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 52.143 (41.928) NA NA NA 50.429 (41.836)

Lab3_WLI 48.286 (42.004) 17.286 (10.146) 18.429 (8.693) 90.143 (54.217) 93.286 (53.616)

Average 50.218 (29.674) 17.286 (10.146) 18.429 (8.693) 90.143 (54.217) 66.648 (32.983)

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 44.714 (42.549) NA NA NA 5.429 (2.975)

Lab3_WLI 33.286 (29.624) 5.429 (1.088) 4.143 (1.610) 16.286 (9.257) 57.571 (41.961)

Average 37.017 (24.312) 5.429 (1.088) 4.143 (1.610) 16.286 (9.257) 5.689 (2.968)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 101 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 44.857 (42.525) NA NA NA 5.000 (2.854)

Lab3_WLI 46.571 (42.272) 3.143 (0.911) 3.000 (0.535) 6.571 (3.337) 47.429 (42.179)

Average 45.719 (29.980) 3.143 (0.911) 3.000 (0.535) 6.571 (3.337) 5.193 (2.847)

Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV -7.286 (7.495) NA NA NA -45.429 (39.031)

Lab3_WLI -1.714 (2.427) -14.143 (9.400) -15.429 (8.476) -83.571 (51.946) -45.857 (39.189)

Average -2.243 (2.309) -14.143 (9.400) -15.429 (8.476) -83.571 (51.946) -45.642 (27.655)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 1 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 57.143 (41.130) NA NA NA 85.857 (46.810)

Lab3_WLI 54.286 (41.221) 31.286 (18.026) 20.429 (8.488) 90.857 (54.030) 94.143 (53.377)

Average 55.717 (29.115) 31.286 (18.026) 20.429 (8.488) 90.857 (54.030) 89.459 (35.194)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 2 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 45.857 (42.358) NA NA NA 59.429 (42.150)

Lab3_WLI 89.286 (54.415) 7.857 (1.805) 8.286 (1.539) 18.571 (9.021) 60.857 (42.040)

Average 62.243 (33.425) 7.857 (1.805) 8.286 (1.539) 18.571 (9.021) 60.145 (29.766)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 102 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 45.571 (42.406) NA NA NA 10.143 (4.228)

Lab3_WLI 48.143 (42.043) 4.143 (0.911) 5.000 (0.951) 8.000 (3.754) 48.429 (42.012)

Average 46.868 (29.856) 4.143 (0.911) 5.000 (0.951) 8.000 (3.754) 10.527 (4.207)

Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV -11.571 (7.662) NA NA NA -75.714 (46.082)

Lab3_WLI -6.143 (2.807) -27.143 (17.305) -15.429 (8.363) -82.857 (51.499) -45.714 (39.005)

Average -6.785 (2.635) -27.143 (17.305) -15.429 (8.363) -82.857 (51.499) -58.236 (29.772)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 9.143 (2.176) NA NA NA 10.714 (3.137)

Lab3_WLI 3.286 (0.778) 4.143 (0.911) 6.857 (1.682) 5.429 (1.478) 3.286 (1.107)

Average 6.193 (3.204) 7.044 (3.300) 9.759 (3.590) 8.330 (3.499) 6.367 (3.290)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 11.571 (3.184) NA NA NA 6.286 (2.135)

Lab3_WLI 4.714 (1.248) 4.286 (0.474) 6.429 (1.429) 6.286 (1.248) 4.429 (1.360)

Average 6.540 (1.997) 5.529 (1.785) 7.672 (2.237) 7.529 (2.126) 5.490 (1.923)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 103 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 8.714 (1.948) NA NA NA 7.857 (1.625)

Lab3_WLI 5.000 (1.558) 3.429 (0.481) 5.714 (1.475) 5.143 (0.595) 3.857 (0.857)

Average 6.816 (2.181) 5.098 (1.989) 7.384 (2.429) 6.812 (2.019) 5.670 (1.995)

Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV -0.429 (2.298) NA NA NA -2.857 (2.632)

Lab3_WLI 1.714 (1.672) -0.714 (1.017) -1.143 (1.765) -0.286 (1.714) 0.571 (0.812)

Average 0.755 (1.693) -1.420 (1.586) -1.849 (2.144) -0.992 (2.103) -0.310 (1.389)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 3.143 (0.829) NA NA NA 2.571 (0.649)

Lab3_WLI 2.000 (0.787) 2.857 (0.911) 3.429 (0.922) 2.143 (0.800) 2.143 (0.670)

Average 2.542 (0.571) 2.857 (0.911) 3.429 (0.922) 2.143 (0.800) 2.364 (0.466)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 5.143 (1.487) NA NA NA 2.857 (0.670)

Lab3_WLI 2.429 (0.751) 2.429 (0.481) 3.000 (0.488) 2.429 (0.429) 1.571 (0.571)

Average 3.342 (0.988) 3.038 (0.913) 3.609 (0.917) 3.038 (0.886) 2.209 (0.824)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 104 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 4.429 (0.972) NA NA NA 4.571 (0.782)

Lab3_WLI 2.286 (0.522) 2.714 (0.522) 2.286 (0.286) 2.143 (0.705) 2.000 (0.436)

Average 3.373 (1.251) 3.814 (1.305) 3.386 (1.230) 3.243 (1.388) 3.188 (1.223)

Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count)

from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 1.286 (0.421) NA NA NA 2.000 (0.690)

Lab3_WLI 0.286 (0.778) -0.143 (1.100) -1.143 (0.829) 0.000 (1.175) -0.143 (0.800)

Average 0.742 (0.768) 0.436 (1.314) -0.564 (1.097) 0.579 (1.378) 1.001 (0.837)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 6.857 (2.262) NA NA NA 5.857 (1.534)

Lab3_WLI 1.000 (0.309) 0.714 (0.360) 0.857 (0.459) 0.714 (0.360) 0.571 (0.202)

Average 3.595 (2.741) 3.297 (2.752) 3.440 (2.767) 3.297 (2.752) 3.156 (2.731)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 6.000 (0.951) NA NA NA 4.143 (1.100)

Lab3_WLI 0.714 (0.421) 1.286 (0.421) 2.000 (1.024) 0.143 (0.143) 0.286 (0.286)

Average 3.095 (2.332) 3.540 (2.354) 4.254 (2.533) 2.397 (2.321) 2.499 (2.326)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 105 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Mating Behavior (Continued)

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 4.714 (0.865) NA NA NA 6.857 (1.654)

Lab3_WLI 1.286 (0.522) 1.286 (0.474) 1.714 (0.522) 0.857 (0.459) 1.000 (0.488)

Average 3.081 (2.093) 3.239 (2.166) 3.667 (2.177) 2.810 (2.163) 3.202 (2.133)

Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV -2.143 (2.632) NA NA NA 1.000 (2.289)

Lab3_WLI 0.286 (0.360) 0.571 (0.612) 0.857 (0.459) 0.143 (0.508) 0.429 (0.481)

Average 0.241 (0.356) 0.571 (0.612) 0.857 (0.459) 0.143 (0.508) 0.453 (0.471)

Thyroid Weight

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) Lab1_ST 4.794 (0.239) 4.427 (0.333) 4.494 (0.338) 4.571 (0.349) 5.164 (0.497)

Lab2_SV NA NA NA NA NA

Lab3_WLI NA NA NA NA NA

Average NA NA NA NA NA

14-Day Old Left Thyroid

Weight (mg) - Males Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 4.029 (0.344) 3.242 (0.365) 2.379 (0.310) 3.610 (0.414) 2.893 (0.355)

Lab3_WLI 1.913 (0.218) 2.800 (0.506) 3.347 (0.278) 2.706 (0.272) 2.333 (0.245)

Average 2.917 (0.587) 3.032 (0.631) 2.871 (0.589) 3.132 (0.603) 2.604 (0.591)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 106 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Thyroid Weight (Continued)

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females Lab1_ST NA NA NA NA NA

Lab2_SV 2.567 (0.370) 3.207 (0.436) 5.231 (0.561) 3.529 (0.406) 3.383 (0.647)

Lab3_WLI 2.080 (0.248) 2.327 (0.342) 2.907 (0.348) 2.688 (0.391) 2.217 (0.287)

Average 2.384 (0.557) 2.773 (0.582) 3.814 (0.599) 3.110 (0.587) 2.737 (0.590)

15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg) Lab1_ST 1.106 (0.088) 1.147 (0.076) 1.169 (0.069) 1.350 (0.112) 1.271 (0.128)

Lab2_SV 1.850 (0.216) 1.927 (0.161) 2.092 (0.194) 2.096 (0.229) 2.142 (0.211)

Lab3_WLI 3.286 (0.324) 3.300 (0.168) 3.479 (0.187) 3.538 (0.164) 3.606 (0.162)

Average 2.108 (0.658) 2.145 (0.656) 2.203 (0.656) 2.343 (0.658) 2.329 (0.659)

Sex Ratio

Ratio of Number of Males

to Total Number of

Offspring (%) Lab1_ST 51.580 (3.791) 45.399 (4.353) 50.768 (4.339) 48.791 (4.954) 42.099 (4.724)

Lab2_SV 53.701 (4.432) 52.017 (4.270) 45.566 (4.030) 53.537 (4.257) 52.948 (2.906)

Lab3_WLI 41.527 (4.203) 43.655 (4.523) 49.628 (4.908) 42.121 (4.285) 52.789 (4.093)

Average 49.000 (2.973) 47.104 (3.091) 48.354 (3.100) 48.102 (3.137) 50.085 (2.819)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 107 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Bio Chem

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.769 (0.061) 0.648 (0.063) 0.736 (0.095) 0.969 (0.203) 0.521 (0.107)

Lab2_SV 0.572 (0.092) 1.545 (0.173) 0.990 (0.320) 1.389 (0.279) 1.005 (0.286)

Lab3_WLI 1.503 (0.114) 1.775 (0.224) 1.570 (0.242) 1.594 (0.173) 1.972 (0.141)

Average 0.952 (0.315) 1.293 (0.323) 1.111 (0.334) 1.295 (0.335) 1.170 (0.327)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 0.817 (0.241) 0.869 (0.223) 0.757 (0.094) 0.756 (0.087) 0.585 (0.018)

Lab2_SV 1.232 (0.159) 1.026 (0.169) 1.151 (0.309) 1.673 (0.253) 1.185 (0.252)

Lab3_WLI 2.333 (0.551) 2.155 (0.195) 1.657 (0.249) 2.051 (0.185) 1.970 (0.231)

Average 1.371 (0.397) 1.321 (0.388) 1.276 (0.385) 1.390 (0.382) 1.175 (0.379)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone

T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 4.082 (0.833) 5.387 (1.570) 3.642 (1.370) 3.238 (1.402) 2.111 (0.383)

Lab2_SV 2.989 (1.293) 1.721 (0.597) 5.640 (1.424) 1.734 (0.794) 3.352 (1.503)

Lab3_WLI 1.215 (0.292) 3.036 (0.842) 1.251 (0.283) 2.743 (0.920) 1.330 (0.348)

Average 2.563 (0.840) 2.949 (0.892) 2.872 (0.899) 2.506 (0.917) 1.977 (0.813)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL) Lab1_ST 3.760 (1.076) 5.013 (1.038) 5.022 (1.694) 4.427 (0.933) 2.305 (0.697)

Lab2_SV 2.660 (1.029) 2.782 (0.764) 2.300 (1.354) 1.429 (0.497) 3.422 (0.861)

Lab3_WLI 2.449 (0.845) 1.231 (0.296) 1.041 (0.278) 0.896 (0.133) 1.775 (0.488)

Average 3.016 (0.910) 2.670 (0.806) 2.270 (0.858) 1.986 (0.771) 2.470 (0.812)

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 108 Table 16. (Continued). Mean and Standard Errors and Comparisons of Avian Vinclozolin

Concentrations to Control acro ss Laboratories, F2 Generation f



# Parameter Laboratory Mean Standard Error a,b



# Concentration

Trend Tests c 

# Overall

Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5) Significant

Concentration

Effect d,e



# Bio Chem (Continued)

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 2.884 (0.287) 2.153 (0.432) 2.522 (0.528) 3.573 (1.216) 1.588 (0.338)

Lab2_SV 5.747 (1.701) 7.748 (1.842) 6.110 (1.220) 9.061 (3.703) 6.298 (1.498)

Lab3_WLI 4.918 (1.218) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000) 3.700 (0.000)

Average 4.724 (1.242) 3.969 (1.211) 3.989 (1.210) 3.986 (1.216) 3.858 (1.209)

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old

Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 12.116 (1.552) 8.990 (1.180) 11.509 (1.465) 7.871 (0.835) 3.273 (0.874)

Lab2_SV 9.570 (2.030) 8.584 (2.945) 14.955 (3.556) 21.943 (4.226) 10.732 (1.834)

Lab3_WLI 14.803 (2.333) 9.955 (1.868) 12.423 (3.203) 10.396 (1.730) 11.789 (2.277)

Average 12.165 (2.033) 9.427 (2.030) 12.869 (2.262) 11.094 (2.060) 7.998 (1.943)

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 46.288 (11.184) 23.588 (11.528) 37.586 (10.607) 23.477 (5.454) 26.986 (8.186)

Lab2_SV 6.625 (1.167) 3.900 (0.000) 9.161 (3.077) 6.878 (1.941) 6.702 (1.859)

Lab3_WLI 24.139 (4.080) 27.230 (7.393) 27.104 (2.268) 28.495 (9.851) 35.290 (12.830)

Average 8.331 (1.116) 3.900 (0.000) 21.273 (1.799) 9.402 (1.798) 8.237 (1.795) Yes

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL) Lab1_ST 26.237 (4.314) 20.436 (6.196) 32.224 (2.784) 26.117 (2.732) 24.556 (3.530)

Lab2_SV 4.680 (0.780) 3.900 (0.000) 4.965 (1.065) 8.351 (3.310) 6.195 (2.295)

Lab3_WLI 31.051 (13.215) 38.684 (14.877) 33.448 (3.541) 29.657 (5.000) 23.100 (2.804)

Average 5.449 (0.766) 3.900 (0.000) 10.269 (0.957) 20.537 (1.942) 15.315 (1.587) An increasing trend for the highest three

concentration

groups Yes

a. Means and their associated standard erro rs for each concentration group within each laboratory were pooled across all samples w ithin the concentration group within the laboratory.

b. Averages and standard errors across laborat ory for each concentration group were base d on random effects model with concentrati on group treated as a fixed effect and laboratory a nd interaction of laboratory and concentra tion group treated as random effects, incor porating heterogeneous variances of group within laboratory.

c. Step-down trend tests were performed.

d. The overall concentration effects were determined by the above ra ndom effect model. The degrees of freedom for the fixed conce ntration effect were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom for laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is the variance of S R 2

, 

# 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 bo th unadjusted two-sample t-tests and the Dunnett’s tests. Concentration groups with significant difference from the controls were listed and marked with “*”if detected using the unadjusted t-tests and w ith “**” if detected using the Dunnett’s tests.

f. “NA” indicates that data were not available.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 109 Table 17. Differences between Generations across Laboratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Body Weight

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 -

Males F1-F0 -31.514
(10.793) -28.926
(10.814) -32.090
(10.814) -32.218
(10.833) -30.462
(10.829)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 -

Males F1-F0 -3.652
(2.730) 3.492
(3.206) 0.699
(3.068) 2.985
(3.024) 0.049
(2.494)

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 -

Females F1-F0 -58.260
(9.394) -58.115
(9.139) -60.846
(9.171) -63.089
(9.099) -54.244
(9.099) All 5 Groups (  )

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 -

Females F1-F0 1.534
(4.392) 3.506
(4.000) -1.073
(4.119) 1.652
(4.745) 3.770
(4.474)

Mean Offspring Body Weight by
Pen (g) Day 0 F2-F1 -0.293
(0.151) -0.193
(0.133) -0.499
(0.146) -0.385
(0.132) -0.320
(0.137)

Mean Offspring Body Weight by
Pen (g) Day 14 F2-F1 -2.683
(3.503) -1.104
(3.507) -2.812
(3.483) -1.498
(3.460) -3.414
(3.490)

Feed Consumption

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 1 F1-F0 0.810
(1.087) 1.563
(1.140) 2.211
(1.203) 0.963
(1.117) 2.251
(1.102)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 2 F1-F0 3.466
(2.614) 2.201
(2.636) 4.303
(2.616) 5.241
(2.608) 4.411
(2.633)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 3 F1-F0 3.627
(1.216) 2.715
(1.207) 3.373
(1.235) 3.053
(1.184) 4.019
(1.240)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 4 F1-F0 0.026
(1.630) -1.820
(1.630) -1.015
(1.624) -0.726
(1.614) -0.393
(1.626)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 5 F1-F0 -2.413
(1.358) -0.843
(1.330) -1.672
(1.341) -0.442
(1.290) -0.316
(1.316)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 6 F1-F0 -1.227
(1.355) -0.263
(1.386) -0.391
(1.360) 1.271
(1.347) 1.062
(1.365)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 110 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Feed Consumption (Continued)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 7 F1-F0 -0.135
(1.660) -0.290
(1.730) -1.251
(1.708) 0.341
(1.701) 1.450
(1.681)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 8 F1-F0 -1.253
(1.055) -0.266
(1.087) -1.789
(1.094) -0.508
(1.125) -0.445
(1.100)

Adult Feed Consumption

(g/bird/day) - Week 9 F1-F0 -2.857
(1.853) -3.211
(1.982) -5.917
(1.803) -1.293
(1.838) 4.675
(1.780)

Reproduction

Eggs Laid F1-F0 0.442
(2.296) 0.182
(2.479) 1.892
(2.642) -0.328
(2.312) 2.552
(2.277)

Eggs Crack F1-F0 0.392
(0.295) 0.520
(0.227) 0.255
(0.223) 0.070
(0.266) 0.200
(0.220)

Eggs Abnormal F1-F0 0.317
(0.557) 0.336
(0.547) 0.360
(0.528) 0.331
(0.509) 0.677
(0.545)

Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 F1-F0 -0.129
(0.496) 0.241
(0.593) -0.126
(0.571) -0.051
(0.503) 0.156
(0.568)

Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 F1-F0 6.664
(7.231) 7.566
(7.241) 7.517
(7.246) 7.081
(7.231) 7.835
(7.243)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and

8 F1-F0 -0.402
(0.478) -0.421
(0.493) 0.048
(0.517) -0.618
(0.505) 0.225
(0.487)

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7

and 8 F1-F0 6.089
(6.902) 7.172
(6.915) 7.328
(6.920) 5.507
(6.921) 6.851
(6.914)

Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and

8 F1-F0 1.405
(2.091) 1.583
(2.091) 2.235
(2.099) 1.237
(2.121) 2.096
(2.100)

Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7

and 8 F1-F0 5.785
(6.239) 6.484
(6.251) 7.693
(6.244) 4.988
(6.278) 6.179
(6.257)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 111 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8

after Two Weeks of Incubation F1-F0 1.339
(2.074) 1.164
(2.083) 2.188
(2.089) 1.313
(2.101) 2.082
(2.083)

Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and

8 after Two Weeks of Incubati F1-F0 -0.644
(0.746) -0.075
(0.841) 0.470
(0.863) -0.829
(0.939) 0.596
(0.846)

Eggs Hatched F1-F0 -0.013
(0.630) -0.826
(0.688) 0.422
(0.698) -0.051
(0.686) 0.190
(0.664)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving

Chicks F1-F0 1.059
(0.928) -0.126
(0.958) 0.944
(0.930) 0.348
(0.948) 0.940
(0.948)

Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day F1-F0 -0.001
(0.047) 0.014
(0.049) 0.054
(0.055) -0.002
(0.047) 0.053
(0.047)

Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Laid F1-F0 0.007
(0.007) 0.011
(0.008) 0.004
(0.006) 0.002
(0.007) 0.002
(0.006)

Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Laid F1-F0 0.008
(0.014) 0.004
(0.015) 0.009
(0.014) 0.008
(0.013) 0.016
(0.014)

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 F1-F0 0.002
(0.013) -0.003
(0.015) 0.031
(0.022) -0.017
(0.030) 0.023
(0.012)

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and F1-F0 -0.015
(0.015) 0.012
(0.019) 0.022
(0.023) -0.016
(0.027) 0.001
(0.014)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 F1-F0 -0.012
(0.022) 0.002
(0.023) 0.047
(0.025) -0.020
(0.043) 0.016
(0.023)

Viable Eggs as A Percentage of
Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 F1-F0 -0.015
(0.028) 0.004
(0.030) 0.030
(0.031) -0.040
(0.046) -0.025
(0.028)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8

after Two Weeks of Incubation F1-F0 -0.001
(0.005) -0.004
(0.005) 0.000
(0.006) -0.003
(0.005) -0.001
(0.004)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 112 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Reproduction (Continued)

Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8

after Two Weeks of Incubation F1-F0 0.000
(0.004) -0.004
(0.005) -0.000
(0.005) -0.002
(0.004) -0.001
(0.004)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of
Number of Viable Eggs from W F1-F0 0.023
(0.017) -0.004
(0.020) 0.002
(0.011) 0.011
(0.020) -0.011
(0.017)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving

Chicks as A Percentage of Egg F1-F0 0.073
(0.065) 0.068
(0.065) 0.087
(0.066) 0.054
(0.066) 0.052
(0.065)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of
Number of Eggs Set from Week F1-F0 0.008
(0.045) -0.025
(0.047) 0.057
(0.047) 0.012
(0.055) -0.002
(0.045)

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of

Number of Fertile Eggs from F1-F0 0.018
(0.036) -0.028
(0.038) 0.064
(0.039) 0.013
(0.043) -0.012
(0.037)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving
Chicks as A Percentage of Num F1-F0 0.087
(0.069) 0.031
(0.069) 0.130
(0.070) 0.047
(0.073) 0.054
(0.068)

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day F1-F0 0.002
(0.049) -0.055
(0.053) 0.072
(0.051) 0.000
(0.053) 0.015
(0.051)

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving
Chicks Per Hen Per Day F1-F0 0.073
(0.066) -0.006
(0.068) 0.113
(0.064) 0.025
(0.068) 0.058
(0.068)

Egg Shell and Weight

Pen Mean Egg Shell Thickness
(mm) F1-F0 -0.002
(0.004) 0.001
(0.004) 0.001
(0.004) -0.002
(0.004) 0.003
(0.004)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight -
Albumin (g) F1-F0 0.572
(0.296) 0.894
(0.301) 0.774
(0.296) 0.683
(0.291) 0.873
(0.287)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight -
Yolk (g) F1-F0 -0.004
(0.137) -0.063
(0.136) -0.058
(0.139) 0.050
(0.130) -0.054
(0.132)

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight -
Combined (g) F1-F0 0.637
(0.335) 0.831
(0.339) 0.767
(0.330) 0.734
(0.322) 0.807
(0.320)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 113 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Mating Behavior

Length of Time to First Neck
Grab (sec) - Day 1 F2-F1 36.342
(30.667) 12.022
(13.878) 1.874
(12.819) 82.456
(55.040) 54.568
(33.913)

Length of Time to First Neck
Grab (sec) - Day 2 F2-F1 30.486
(24.365) 3.114
(2.097) -1.145
(2.401) 11.981
(9.466) -2.688
(3.949)

Length of Time to First Neck
Grab (sec) - Day 3 F2-F1 42.601
(29.981) 0.100
(1.213) -0.253
(0.627) 4.394
(3.355) 1.861
(2.869)

Change in Length of Time to
First Neck Grab (sec) from

Day 1 to Day 3 F2-F1 3.266
(3.665) -11.070
(9.850) -8.356
(9.033) -78.997
(52.025) -42.291
(27.806) Decreasing in
difference (F2-
F1) at the highest

concentration

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 1 F2-F1 10.095
(34.054) 20.207
(22.197) -0.804
(15.332) 59.161
(55.994) 68.355
(36.974)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 2 F2-F1 47.892
(33.623) 4.080
(2.128) -0.724
(2.149) 6.923
(9.407) 48.599
(29.832)

Length of Time to First

Mount (sec) - Day 3 F2-F1 41.612
(29.866) 0.244
(1.288) 0.241
(1.032) 5.317
(3.802) 4.821
(4.212) .

Change in Length of Time to
First Mount (sec) from Day 1

to Day 3 F2-F1 17.219
(13.434) -17.488
(17.748) -2.243
(10.231) -74.352
(51.572) -47.936
(30.084) Decreasing in
difference (F2-
F1) at the highest

concentration

Number of Mount Attempts
(count) - Day 1 F2-F1 -0.095
(2.454) 0.375
(2.571) 2.765
(2.963) 2.982
(2.835) -1.159
(2.674)

Number of Mount Attempts
(count) - Day 2 F2-F1 0.674
(2.339) -0.199
(2.204) 1.983
(2.585) 1.606
(2.519) -0.154
(2.091)

Number of Mount Attempts
(count) - Day 3 F2-F1 -0.576
(1.724) -0.633
(1.305) 0.526
(1.837) 1.028
(1.264) -1.317
(1.353)

Change in Number of Mount
Attempts (count) from Day 1

to Day 3 F2-F1 -1.076
(3.418) -1.210
(3.465) -3.125
(3.787) -2.677
(3.800) -0.066
(3.310)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 114 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Mating Behavior (Continued)

Number of Cloacal Contacts
(count) - Day 1 F2-F1 -0.179
(0.700) 0.734
(0.975) 0.853
(0.970) -0.255
(0.905) -0.926
(0.731)

Number of Cloacal Contacts
(count) - Day 2 F2-F1 0.194
(0.891) -1.128
(0.699) -0.259
(0.620) -0.237
(0.632) -0.915
(0.519)

Number of Cloacal Contacts
(count) - Day 3 F2-F1 -0.811
(0.616) 0.131
(0.730) -1.157
(0.452) -0.732
(0.851) -1.301
(0.561)

Change in Number of Cloacal
Contacts (count) from Day 1 to

Day 3 F2-F1 -0.539
(0.926) -0.607
(1.422) -1.791
(1.212) -0.595
(1.476) -0.223
(0.993)

Number of Crows (Cock) or
Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1 F2-F1 -0.910
(1.509) -0.172
(1.714) -0.674
(1.755) -0.193
(1.674) -0.066
(1.431)

Number of Crows (Cock) or
Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2 F2-F1 0.355
(0.650) 0.573
(0.659) 0.507
(1.216) -0.167
(0.623) -0.590
(0.635)

Number of Crows (Cock) or
Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3 F2-F1 -0.700
(1.389) -1.127
(1.557) -1.091
(1.504) -1.089
(1.512) -1.855
(1.452)

Change in Number of Crows
(Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) fro F2-F1 0.666
(2.398) -0.872
(2.583) -0.589
(2.560) -0.565
(2.543) -1.187
(2.372)

Thyroid Weight

15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid
Weight (mg) F2-F1 0.260
(0.255) 0.031
(0.242) 0.242
(0.259) 0.368
(0.251) 0.422
(0.258)

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) -

Males F1-F0 0.211
(1.327) 1.629
(1.420) 1.902
(1.372) 2.298
(1.385) 0.740
(1.362)

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) -

Females F1-F0 1.495
(0.938) 1.039
(0.921) -0.048
(1.044) 1.939
(1.147) 2.234
(1.144)

Sex Ratio

Ratio of Number of Males to Total
Number of Offspring (%) F2-F1 -3.731
(3.806) -1.099
(3.953) -2.630
(3.597) 3.758
(3.904) 2.113
(3.106)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 115 Table 17. (Continued). Differences between Generations across Labo ratories. Chemical Vincolozolin, Avian Study a,b



# .

Parameter Difference

Between

Generations Difference of Averages Between Generations

(Standard Error) c 

# Concentration

Trend Tests d 

# Groups with
Significant

Difference

between

Generations e,f 

# Control

(Group 1) 64 ppm

(Group 2) 160 ppm

(Group 3) 400 ppm

(Group 4) 1000 ppm

(Group 5)

Bio Chem

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) F1-F0 21.778
(21.156) 29.583
(20.817) 19.546
(20.474) 12.506
(20.208) 13.672
(20.447)

Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) F1-F0 649.816
(772.663) 837.978
(766.892) 165.171
(851.694) 554.172
(766.380) 112.718
(776.188)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 -
Adult Males (ng/mL) F1-F0 -0.090
(0.148) 0.076
(0.163) -0.130
(0.146) 0.073
(0.172) 0.105
(0.148)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 -
Adult Females (ng/mL) F1-F0 -0.061
(0.100) -0.067
(0.129) 0.292
(0.110) 0.315
(0.110) 0.142
(0.108) Increasing in
difference (F1-F0) at

the three highest

concentrations Groups 3 (  )
and 4(  )

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -
Adult Males (ng/mL) F1-F0 0.211
(1.371) -1.771
(1.473) -2.284
(1.583) 2.383
(1.431) -0.692
(1.335)

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 -
Adult Females (ng/mL) F1-F0 0.526
(0.820) -2.069
(1.390) 0.378
(1.110) 1.423
(0.973) 0.412
(0.869)

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol -
Adult Males (pg/mL) F1-F0 1.031
(1.107) -0.132
(0.808) -1.020
(0.854) 1.209
(0.734) 0.539
(0.728)

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol -
Adult Females (pg/mL) F1-F0 -0.430
(4.627) -2.097
(5.028) -0.941
(4.579) 0.819
(5.507) 2.326
(4.704)

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone
- Adult Males (pg/mL) F1-F0 58.498
(737.559) -741.56
(908.175) -535.74
(901.060) -793.16
(839.465) 288.970
(907.435)

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone
- Adult Females (pg/mL) F1-F0 4.146
(160.634) -2.638
(190.094) 369.037
(182.549) 80.781
(170.390) -15.550
(180.495)

a. random effects model with generation, con centration group and interaction of generati on and concentration group treated as fixe d effect, and laboratory, laborator y by generation and laboratory by generation by group as random e ffects, incorporating heterog eneous variances of group within laboratory and generation.

b. The degrees of freedom for the fixed effects were estimated as 2*((1/K)* ∑ (S R 2 

# + S i 2 

# )) 2 

# /(var(S R 2 

# )+(2/K 2 

# )* ∑ (S i 4 

# /df i 

# )), where S R 2 

# is the total random variance across laboratories, S i 2 

# and df i 

# are the reported variance and degrees of freedom within laboratory i, var(S R 2 

# ) is

the variance of S R 2

, 

# and K is the number of studies (Hartung and Makambi, 2001)

c. Differences of averages (least square means) between two genera tions and standard errors across laboratory for each concentrati on group were based on the above random effect models.

d. Step-down trend tests were performed in the differences between the two generations.

e. If generation or the interaction of genera tion and concentration group effect was signifi cant, then F-tests we re used to identi fy the concentration groups in which the two generations are significantly different at the 0.05 level.

f. “ ↓ ” F2 or F1 generation less than F1or F0 generation.

“ ↑ ” F2 or F1 generation greater than F1or F0 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 116 6. Comparison of Inter-laboratory CVs and Within-study Sensitivity across Endpoints

6.1 Comparison of Inter-labora tory CVs across Endpoints

The avian assay parameters were divided into 9 categories:

 Body Weight

 Feed Consumption

 Reproduction

 Egg Shell and Weight

 Thyroid Weight

 Bio Chem

 First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size

 Mating Behavior

 Sex Ratio

For each parameter, the CV across labs and the associated p-value for significance of the
laboratory random variation (i.e. differences among la boratories) for each generation were summarized
and are shown in Table 18. The ranges of CVs were compared across categories. Within each category,
the numbers of endpoints with larger CV for a later generation than a previous generation are given, based
on the common endpoints in the generations. These are shown in Table 19. The CVs are displayed in
Figure 1 through Figure 10, in which CVs for one genera tion are plotted against those for the subsequent
generation. The reference lines correspond to equality of CVs for the two generations. Parameters lying
above the reference line have greater percent CV fo r the generation in y-axis than the %CV for the
generation in the x-axis. For each endpoint (as represente d by a point on the graph), the closer the point is
to the line, the more agreement there is in the CV values between the two generations.

The following are some findings:

 There are no endpoints that were determined in all three generations. Within the
same category, two generations may me asure different endpoints. For some
categories, some generations could not be compared. Generation F0 can be
compared with generation F1 for 6 out of 9 categories, generation F1 can be
compared with generation F2 for 4 out of 9 categories, and generation F0 cannot be
compared with generation F2 for any category.

 The median of F1 CVs exceeds that of th e F0 CVs for 27 of 57 (47%) comparsions.
This is nearly 50% so there is no system atic generation difference with respect to
CVs. Some of the highest CVs are in the F1 generation, particularly for mating

behavior.

 The median of F2 CVs exceeds that of the F1 CVs in 15 of 24 (62.5%) comparisons.
This possibly suggests some degradation in sensitivity in F2 compared to F1.

 The smaller CVs for body weight in the F2 generation may be due to the fact that
adult body weights were not measured for the F2 generation.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 117 6.2 Comparison of Within-study Power Sensitivity across Endpoints

Power analyses were carried out to determine devi ations 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 pooled average within-laboratory variability for the control group parameters across the withinlaboratory studies. The sample sizes assumed are the nominal sample sizes for the control group. Table
20 displays the control group means, the sample si zes, the percent distances from the control group means
that can be detected with power 80% for each generati on (F0, F1, or F2), and the ratios of the F1 percent
deviation to the F0 percent deviation and the F2 pe rcent deviation to the F1 percent deviation for the
corresponding parameters. There is no ratio of genera tion F2 to generation F0 since there is no endpoint
that was measured in both F0 and F2 generations.

The ranges of percent deviations to attain high power were compared across categories. Within
each category, the numbers of endpoints with larger percent deviation for a later generation than a
previous generation are given, based on the common endpoints in the generations. These are shown in

Table 21.

F1 was compared to F0 for six of nine categori es. The F1 percent deviation exceeded the F0
percent deviation for 34 of 57 comparisons (60%). Th is possibly suggests some degradation in sensitivity
in F1 compared to F0. The F2 percent deviati on exceeded the F1 percent deviation for 14 of 24
comparisons (58%). This again possibly suggests some de gradation in sensitivity in F2 compared to F1.

Figure 11 through Figure 20 display the F0 vs. F1 and F1 vs. F2 percent deviations from the
control group means for the corresponding parameters fo r detection with 80% power with 5% (two-sided)
significance level. The reference lines correspond to equa lity of the percent devia tions. Parameters lying
above the reference line have greater percent deviation for the generation in y-axis than percent deviation
for the generation in the x-axis.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 118 Table 18. CV (%) and Significance Levels across Laboratories

Parameter CV (%) P-value

Random Laboratories

F0 F1 F2 F0 F1 F2

Body Weight

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males 28.731 27.911

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males 29.578 30.273

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females 27.335 31.107

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females 27.559 28.782

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0

. 17.213 16.846

. <.0001 <.0001

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14

. 26.774 24.773

. <.0001 <.0001

Feed Consumption

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 1 25.855 22.290

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 2 18.472 26.236

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 3 21.011 21.365

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 4 18.640 18.663

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 5 19.282 14.896

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 6 23.831 18.508

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 7 17.378 18.443

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8 16.933 20.224

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9

. 2.510

. . 1.0000

.
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10

. . . . . .
Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11

. . . . . .

Reproduction

Eggs Laid 7.089 7.109

. 0.0301 0.0854

.
Eggs Crack 103.138 59.020

. 0.0204 0.3369

.
Eggs Abnormal 98.889 112.195

. 0.0457 0.0325

.
Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 7.319 9.070

. 0.1170 0.0318

.
Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 8.241 54.635

. 0.1051 <.0001

.
Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 8 9.665 9.448

. 0.0560 0.3011

.
Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 8 11.157 55.649

. 0.0280 <.0001

.
Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 8 12.603 32.387

. 0.0067 <.0001

.
Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 8 15.977 54.416

. 0.0004 <.0001

.
Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation 12.020 31.518

. 0.0129 <.0001

.
Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation 15.526 6.381

. 0.0008 0.8958

.
Eggs Hatched 17.983 12.270

. 0.0008 0.2336

.
Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks 12.594 11.370

. 0.0842 0.3893

.
Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day 9.212 7.000

. 0.0026 0.0916

.
Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid 103.129 64.778

. 0.0157 0.3989

.
Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid 103.321 120.762

. 0.0623 0.0798

.
Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 2.025 2.560

. 0.7854 0.8054

.

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 119 Parameter CV (%) P-value

Random Laboratories

F0 F1 F2 F0 F1 F2

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 2.765 1.962

. 0.2591 1.0000

.
Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 4.756 2.965

. 0.1002 1.0000

.
Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 7.136 2.791

. 0.0099 1.0000

.
Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 0.653 0.920

. 0.5758 0.5293

.

Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 0.541 0.594

. 0.6127 0.7466

.

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8

after Two Weeks of Incubation 6.318 5.124

. 0.1036 0.0670

.

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Eggs Hatched 11.547 1.673

. <.0001 0.8747

.
Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 8 10.735 5.421

. 0.0070 1.0000

.
Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 8.615 3.800

. 0.0251 1.0000

.
Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Number of Eggs

Set from Weeks 7 and 8 7.806 5.733

. 0.2429 1.0000

.

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day 18.017 12.266

. 0.0008 0.2353

.
Number of 14-Day-Old Surviv ing Chicks Per Hen Per Day 12.478 11.398

. 0.0926 0.3874

.

Egg Shell and Weight

Pen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm) 7.610 6.688

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) 19.591 20.453

. <.0001 <.0001

.

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g) 11.142 8.447

. <.0001 <.0001

.
Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g) 10.459 13.906

. <.0001 <.0001

.

First Foam First Egg Cloacal Size

Age in Days at First Foam - Males

. 8.894

. . 0.0004

.
Age in Days at First Egg - Females

. 5.801

. . 0.0357

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males

. 14.097

. . 0.1126

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males

. 31.742

. . 0.0107

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males

. 21.997

. . <.0001

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Males

. . . . . .
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Males

. . . . . .
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Males

. . . . . .
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females

. 11.533

. . 0.6327

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females

. 64.012

. . <.0001

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females

. 81.865

. . <.0001

.
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Females

. . . . . .
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Females

. . . . . .
Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Females

. . . . . .

Mating Behavior

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1

. 59.392 83.568

. 0.6561 1.0000

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2

. 29.454 92.882

. 0.8696 1.0000

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3

. 12.409 92.736

. 1.0000 1.0000

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 120 Parameter CV (%) P-value

Random Laboratories

F0 F1 F2 F0 F1 F2

Change in Length of Time to First N eck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3

. 79.706 145.584

. 0.6773 1.0000

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1

. 56.537 73.901

. 1.0000 1.0000

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2

. 44.005 75.943

. 1.0000 1.0000

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3

. 24.847 90.089

. 1.0000 1.0000

Change in Length of Time to Firs t Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3

. 73.821 54.930

. 1.0000 1.0000

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1

. 21.778 70.141

. 0.7640 0.0590

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2

. 58.076 63.418

. 0.0514 0.2018

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3

. 48.592 39.164

. 0.4330 0.5167

Change in Number of Mount Atte mpts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3

. 272.469 196.641

. 0.0103 1.0000

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1

. 32.484 31.752

. 0.7605 1.0000

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2

. 42.822 53.720

. 0.6816 0.4102

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3

. 57.318 46.839

. 0.0812 0.2296

Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3

. 112.664 63.888

. 0.2418 0.8564

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1

. 76.604 117.058

. <.0001 0.0544

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2

. 67.035 113.624

. 0.0008 <.0001

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3

. 100.826 82.659

. <.0001 0.0045

Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fl uffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3

. 157.952 208.837

. 0.0053 1.0000

Thyroid Weight

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males

. . 50.623

. . <.0001

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females

. . 14.520

. . 0.8981

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males 49.818 30.290

. <.0001 0.0105

.
Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females 30.659 42.334

. <.0001 <.0001

.
15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)

. 40.269 53.455

. <.0001 <.0001

Sex Ratio

Ratio of Number of Males to Total Number of Offspring (%)

. 9.099 13.060

. 1.0000 0.3228

Bio Chem

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) 57.540 34.223

. <.0001 0.1630

.
Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) 20.125 56.217

. 1.0000 0.0005

.
Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL) 40.598 23.023

. <.0001 0.1021

.
Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL) 22.221 12.462

. 0.0077 0.5207

.
Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL) 16.968 61.524

. 1.0000 0.0144

.
Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL) 50.953 24.484

. 0.2702 0.9711

.
Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) 20.275 22.599

. 0.5539 1.0000

.
Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL) 38.479 18.807

. <.0001 0.8200

.
Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL) 55.003 67.775

. 0.0345 <.0001

.
Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL) 30.048 23.132

. 1.0000 1.0000

.
Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)

. . 51.471

. . <.0001

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)

. . 47.806

. . 0.2479

# DRAFT Inter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test



# 121 Parameter CV (%) P-value

Random Laboratories

F0 F1 F2 F0 F1 F2

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)

. . 63.781

. . 0.0075

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)

. . 33.754

. . 1.0000

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)

. . 40.164

. . 0.1843

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)

. . 18.056

. . 0.8433

Plasma Sex Hormone Testoster one - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)

. . 79.734

. . <.0001

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)

. . 81.519

. . <.0001



# Table 19. Ranges of CV% across La boratories. By Category.

Category F0 Generation F1 Generation F2 Generation # F1 > F0 # F2 > F1 CV Range Median CV Range Median CV Range Median

Body Weight 27.3 – 29.6 28.1 17.2 – 31.1 28.3 16.8 – 24.8 16.8 3/4 0/2

Feed Consumption 16.9 – 25.9 19.0 2.5 – 26.2 18.7 NA NA 5/8 NA

Reproduction 0.54 –103.3 10.7 0.59 - 120.8 9.1 NA NA 12/29 NA

Egg Shell and Weight 7.6 – 19.6 10.8 6.7 – 20.5 11.2 NA NA 2/4 NA

First Foam First Egg

Cloacal Size NA NA 5.8 – 81.9 18. 0 NA NA NA NA

Mating

Behavior NA NA 12.4 – 272.5 57.7 31.8 – 208.8 79.3 NA 13/20

Thyroid Weight 30.7 – 49.8 40.2 30.3 – 42.3 40.3 14.5 – 53.5 50.6 1/2 1/1

Sex Ratio NA NA 9.1 – 9.1 9.1 13.1 – 13.1 13.1 NA 1/1

Bio Chem 17.0 – 57.5 34.2 12.5 – 67.8 23.8 18.1 – 81.5 49.6 4/10 NA

Total 0.54 – 103.3 17.4 0.59 – 272.3 23.1 13.1 – 208.8 63.6 27/57 15/24DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test122Table 20. Percent Deviations from Control Group Means for Detections with 80% Power and the Ratios Between Gyrations.ParameterControl MeanSample Size (N)Percent Distances from ControlRatio between Generationin Percent Distances fromControlF0F1F2F0F1F2F0F1F2F1/F0F2/F1Body WeightAdult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males168.849138.313.1818.8.0857.950.0.983.Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males184.637182.906.1818.7.2828.926.1.226.Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females207.898149.912.1818.10.46310.835.1.035.Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females227.716228.910.1818.9.28910.433.1.123.Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0.8.3658.060.1818.8.3468.450.1.012Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14.70.03567.491.1818.6.8708.043.1.171Feed ConsumptionAdult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 126.40227.262.1818.10.4779.242.0.882.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 226.19929.728.1818.14.5039.101.0.628.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 325.20328.659.1818.12.68412.560.0.990.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 426.79126.854.1818.13.84211.983.0.866.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 529.18326.431.1818.12.04513.013.1.080.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 628.97927.453.1818.11.12012.574.1.131.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 728.52428.391.1818.9.9419.781.0.984.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 826.84927.657.1818.8.44614.263.1.689.Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9.31.400..18..12.895...ReproductionEggs Laid42.89743.527.1818.16.72614.458.0.864.Eggs Crack0.9071.014.1818.246.207153.820.0.625.Eggs Abnormal1.2691.304.1818.256.171166.199.0.649.Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 811.67811.447.1818.15.39019.527.1.269.Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 817.44024.007.1818.15.34916.836.1.097.Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 811.24910.954.1818.17.29925.433.1.470.Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 816.86723.020.1818.17.07920.145.1.180.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test123ParameterControl MeanSample Size (N)Percent Distances from ControlRatio between Generationin Percent Distances fromControlF0F1F2F0F1F2F0F1F2F1/F0F2/F1Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 810.91512.528.1818.17.65425.215.1.428.Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 816.20222.290.1818.17.67821.977.1.243.Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation10.84112.377.1818.17.72426.276.1.483.Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation16.10615.873.1818.17.84225.215.1.413.Eggs Hatched9.90710.100.1818.22.32531.346.1.404.Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks8.7909.676.1818.30.49732.359.1.061.Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.9020.889.1818.12.69414.443.1.138.Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0220.025.1818.240.434166.368.0.692.Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid0.0320.033.1818.265.997192.231.0.723.Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9690.970.1818.7.71813.710.1.776.Fertile Eggs as A Percentage ofEggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9700.959.1818.6.5678.953.1.363.Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.9440.945.1818.9.80213.835.1.411.Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9350.927.1818.9.96512.043.1.208.Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation asA Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.9950.995.1818.2.3384.228.1.808.Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation asA Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.9960.997.1818.1.8343.962.2.161.Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs fromWeeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation0.9100.944.1818.12.22613.150.1.076.Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of EggsHatched0.8990.964.1818.16.9096.799.0.402.Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7and 80.8520.866.1818.16.43422.202.1.351.Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs fromWeeks 7 and 80.8810.913.1818.14.34316.377.1.142.Number of 14-Day-Old SurvivingChicks as A Percentage ofNumber of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.7680.834.1818.25.00623.586.0.943.Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.7080.722.1818.22.37131.395.1.403.Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.6270.691.1818.30.55532.405.1.061.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test124ParameterControl MeanSample Size (N)Percent Distances from ControlRatio between Generationin Percent Distances fromControlF0F1F2F0F1F2F0F1F2F1/F0F2/F1Egg Shell and WeightPen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.2150.213.1818.6.4706.166.0.953.Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)4.7435.257.1818.14.13311.911.0.843.Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.6403.626.1818.14.69210.611.0.722.Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)8.3948.881.1818.12.68810.025.0.790.First Foam First Egg Cloacal SizeAge in Days at First Foam - Males.37.227..18..22.312...Age in Days at First Egg - Females.44.964..18..11.818...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males.0.255..18..31.289...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males.0.384..18..51.638...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males.0.546..18..24.797...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females.0.249..18..39.008...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females.0.336..18..70.697...Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females.0.515..18..57.919...Mating BehaviorLength of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1.10.20850.218.77.332.825360.773.1.084Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2.6.39337.017.77.137.522427.554.3.109Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3.3.11845.719.77.92.526400.358.4.327Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 toDay 3.-6.676-2.243.77.484.4131072.173.2.213Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1.44.71355.717.77.333.232319.038.0.957Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2.14.35162.243.77.732.628338.194.0.462Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3.5.25646.868.77.546.313388.940.0.712Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3.-29.801-6.785.77.493.118367.122.0.744Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1.6.0555.862.77.80.840120.344.1.489Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2.7.4057.517.77.139.991138.865.0.992Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3.7.4256.673.77.123.790114.131.0.922DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test125ParameterControl MeanSample Size (N)Percent Distances from ControlRatio between Generationin Percent Distances fromControlF0F1F2F0F1F2F0F1F2F1/F0F2/F1Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3.1.8960.972.77.433.539892.147.2.058Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1.2.3392.542.77.139.226137.262.0.986Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2.3.0753.482.77.166.594146.037.0.877Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3.4.2033.200.77.102.131105.268.1.031Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3.1.8111.000.77.259.833270.003.1.039Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1.4.8593.500.77.84.508199.098.2.356Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2.2.8633.288.77.128.46696.549.0.752Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3.3.4252.931.77.95.846105.224.1.098Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) fromDay 1 to Day 3.-1.4600.241.77.355.1943361.243.9.463Thyroid Weight14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males..2.954..18..39.774..14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females..2.245..18..57.242..Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males7.3487.345.1818.53.94345.910.0.851.Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females9.09611.506.1818.40.21948.355.1.202.15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg).1.7952.051.1818.38.27345.884.1.199Sex RatioRatio of Number of Males toTotal Number of Offspring (%).53.08548.939.1818.40.13634.590.0.862Bio ChemEgg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)44.42167.845.55.49.02783.636.1.706.Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)2050.6363041.891.55.110.60469.641.0.630.Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.8710.748.55.63.55154.413.0.856.Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.8600.815.55.43.08544.612.1.035.Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)3.1643.722.55.120.061126.798.1.056.Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)1.7632.195.55.181.151134.390.0.742.Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)4.6115.569.55.96.557258.880.2.681.Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)18.45216.668.55.64.32690.699.1.410.DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test126ParameterControl MeanSample Size (N)Percent Distances from ControlRatio between Generationin Percent Distances fromControlF0F1F2F0F1F2F0F1F2F1/F0F2/F1Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)1694.2321759.598.55.98.02293.081.0.950.Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)337.621385.548.55.273.307168.710.0.617.Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)..0.943..5..43.803..Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)..1.320..5..123.170..Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)..2.597..5..157.501..Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)..2.864..5..156.170..Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)..4.016..5..137.446..Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)..11.992..5..75.412..Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)..23.526..5..132.891..Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone- 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)..18.332..5..198.495..DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test127Table 21. Ranges of Percent Deviations from Control Group Meansfor Detections with 80% Power and the Ratios Between Generations.By Category.CategoryPercent Distances from ControlRatio between Generation in Percent Distances fromControl##F1> F0# F2> F1F0 GenerationF1 GenerationF2 GenerationF1/F0F2/F1RangeMedianRangeMedianRangeMedianRangeMedianRangeMedianBody Weight7.282-10.4638.6876.870-10.8358.6368.043-8.4508.2460.983-1.2261.0791.012-1.1711.0923/4 0/2Feed Consumption8.446-14.50311.5839.101-14.26312.560NA NA0.628-1.6890.987NA NA 3/8 NAReproduction1.834-265.99717.0793.962-192.23121.977NA NA0.402-2.1611.208NA NA 22/29 NAEgg Shell and Weight6.470-14.69213.4116.166-11.91110.318NA NA0.722-0.9530.816NA NA 0/4 NAFirst Foam First EggCloacal SizeNA NA11.818-70.69735.149NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NAMating BehaviorNA NA80.840-732.628153.29396.549-3361.243294.521NA NA0.462-9.4631.035NA 11/20Thyroid Weight40.219-53.94347.08138.273-48.35545.91039.774-57.24245.8840.851-1.2021.0271.199-1.1991.1991/2 1/1Sex RatioNA NA40.136-40.13640.13634.590-34.59034.590NA NA0.862-0.8620.862NA 1/1Bio Chem43.085-273.30797.29044.612-258.88091.89043.803-198.495135.1690.617-2.6810.993NA NA 5/10 NATotal1.834-273.30716.7263.962-732.62831.3718.043-3361.243138.1560.402-2.6811.0760.462-9.4631.035 34/5714/24DRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test128Figure 1. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Body Weight.

% CV (F1)202224262830323436% CV (F0)20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 361-Body WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test129Figure 2. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Body Weight.

% CV (F2)151821242730% CV (F1)15 18 21 24 27 301-Body WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test130Figure 3. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Feed Consumption.

% CV (F1)1012141618202224262830% CV (F0)10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 302-Feed ConsumptionResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test131Figure 4. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Reproduction.

% CV (F1)020406080100120% CV (F0)0 20 40 60 80 100 1203-ReproductionResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test132Figure 5. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Egg Shell and Weight.

% CV (F1)5678910111213141516171819202122232425% CV (F0)5 10 15 20 254-Egg Shell and WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test133Figure 6. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Mating Behavior.

% CV (F2)0306090120150180210240270300% CV (F1)0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 3006-Mating BehaviorResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test134Figure 7. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Thyroid Weight.

% CV (F1)202530354045505560% CV (F0)20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 607-Thyroid WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test135Figure 8. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Thyroid Weight.

% CV (F2)30354045505560% CV (F1)30 35 40 45 50 55 607-Thyroid WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test136Figure 9. F1 CV% vs. F2 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Sex Ratio.

% CV (F2)56789101112131415% CV (F1)5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 158-Sex RatioResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test137Figure 10. F0 CV% vs. F1 CV% for Corresponding Parameters. Bio Chem.

% CV (F1)10203040506070% CV (F0)10 20 30 40 50 60 709-Bio ChemResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test138Figure 11. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Body Weight.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)7891011Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)7 8 9 10 111-Body WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test139Figure 12. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Body Weight.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F2)678910Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)6 7 8 9 101-Body WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test140Figure 13. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Feed Consumption.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)89101112131415Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)8 9 10 11 12 13 14 152-Feed ConsumptionResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test141Figure 14. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Reproduction.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)050100150200250300Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)0 50 100 150 200 250 3003-ReproductionResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test142Figure 15. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Egg Shell and Wight.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)56789101112131415Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 154-Egg Shell and WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test143Figure 16. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Mating Behavior.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F2)05001000150020002500300035004000Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 10006-Mating BehaviorResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test144Figure 17. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Thyroid Weight.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)30354045505560Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)30 35 40 45 50 55 607-Thyroid WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test145Figure 18. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Thyroid Weight.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F2)30354045505560Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)30 35 40 45 50 55 607-Thyroid WeightResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test146Figure 19. F1 vs. F2 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Sex Ratio.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F2)30354045505560Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)30 35 40 45 50 55 608-Sex RatioResultsEqual LineDRAFTInter-Laboratory Statistical Analysis Report for Avian 2-Tier Test147Figure 20. F0 vs. F1 Percent Deviations from the Control GroupMeans for the Corresponding Parameters to Detect Effects with Power80%. Bio Chem.

Percent Distance From Control Mean (F1)050100150200250300Percent Distance From Control Mean (F0)0 50 100 150 200 250 3009-Bio ChemResultsEqual Line

# Appendix A

Figures for Avian Control Data

Means ± 2 Standard ErrorsDRAFTAvian Control DataA-1

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males8090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-2

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-3

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females8090100110120130140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-4

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females140150160170180190200210220230240250260270280290300310ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-5

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 067891011ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-6

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14405060708090100ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-7

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 117181920212223242526272829303132333435ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-8

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 2192021222324252627282930313233343536373839ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-9

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 318192021222324252627282930313233343536ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-10

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 420212223242526272829303132333435ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-11

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 521222324252627282930313233343536ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-12

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 6212223242526272829303132333435363738ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-13

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 7212223242526272829303132333435ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-14

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 82021222324252627282930313233343536ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-15

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9293031323334353637ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-16

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 102930313233ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-17

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 112324252627282930ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-18

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Laid35363738394041424344454647484950ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-19

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Crack-101234ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-20

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Abnormal-10123456ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-21

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 891011121314ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-22

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 801020304050ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-23

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 8891011121314ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-24

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 801020304050ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-25

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 878910111213141516171819ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-26

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 8010203040ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-27

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation78910111213141516171819ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-28

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation111213141516171819ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-29

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Hatched678910111213ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-30

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks678910111213ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-31

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day0.710.720.730.740.750.760.770.780.790.800.810.820.830.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.011.021.031.041.05ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-32

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid-0.010.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.08ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-33

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid-0.02-0.010.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.100.110.120.130.140.15ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-34

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.011.021.031.04ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-35

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Fertile Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.01ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-36

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 80.820.830.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.01ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-37

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 80.770.780.790.800.810.820.830.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.011.02ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-38

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 80.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.011.02ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-39

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Viable Eggs from Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation as A Percentage of Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 80.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.011.02ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-40

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Viable Eggs from Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation0.760.770.780.790.800.810.820.830.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.001.01ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-41

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Eggs Hatched0.640.660.680.700.720.740.760.780.800.820.840.860.880.900.920.940.960.981.001.02ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-42

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.640.660.680.700.720.740.760.780.800.820.840.860.880.900.920.940.960.981.001.02ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-43

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Hatched as A Percentage of Number of Fertile Eggs from Weeks 7 and 80.700.710.720.730.740.750.760.770.780.790.800.810.820.830.840.850.860.870.880.890.900.910.920.930.940.950.960.970.980.991.00ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-44

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks as A Percentage of Number of Eggs Set from Weeks 7 and 80.560.580.600.620.640.660.680.700.720.740.760.780.800.820.840.860.880.900.920.940.960.98ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-45

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day0.440.460.480.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.680.700.720.740.760.780.800.820.840.860.880.900.92ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-46

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day0.440.460.480.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.680.700.720.740.760.780.800.820.840.860.880.90ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-47

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Pen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm)0.1960.1980.2000.2020.2040.2060.2080.2100.2120.2140.2160.2180.2200.2220.2240.2260.2280.2300.2320.2340.2360.2380.2400.242ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-48

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g)34567ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-49

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g)3.03.13.23.33.43.53.63.73.83.94.04.14.24.34.44.5ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-50

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g)7891011ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-51

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Age in Days at First Foam - Males333435363738394041424344454647484950ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-52

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Age in Days at First Egg - Females41424344454647484950515253ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-53

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males0.180.190.200.210.220.230.240.250.260.270.280.290.300.310.320.330.34ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-54

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males0.220.240.260.280.300.320.340.360.380.400.420.440.460.480.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.680.70ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-55

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males0.360.380.400.420.440.460.480.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.680.700.720.740.76ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-56

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Males0.520.530.540.550.560.570.580.590.600.610.620.630.640.650.660.67ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-57

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Males0.530.540.550.560.570.580.590.600.610.620.630.64ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-58

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Males0.540.550.560.570.580.590.600.610.620.630.64ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-59

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females0.150.160.170.180.190.200.210.220.230.240.250.260.270.280.290.300.310.32ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-60

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.7ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-61

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.2ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-62

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Females0.560.570.580.590.600.610.620.630.640.650.660.670.680.690.700.710.720.730.74ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-63

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Females0.560.570.580.590.600.610.620.630.640.650.660.670.680.690.700.71ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-64

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Females0.610.620.630.640.650.660.670.680.690.700.710.720.730.740.75ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-65

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg)4.34.44.54.64.74.84.95.05.15.25.3ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-66

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males0123456ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-67

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females1.51.61.71.81.92.02.12.22.32.42.52.62.72.82.93.03.13.23.33.4ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-68

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1-40-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130140ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-69

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2-50-40-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-70

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3-50-40-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130140ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-71

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-50-40-30-20-10010ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-72

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130140150ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-73

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2-1000100200ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-74

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3-40-30-20-100102030405060708090100110120130140ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-75

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3-140-130-120-110-100-90-80-70-60-50-40-30-20-100102030ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-76

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 101234567891011121314ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-77

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 201234567891011121314151617181920ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-78

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 31234567891011121314151617181920ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-79

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-6-5-4-3-2-1012345678910111213ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-80

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1012345ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-81

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 20123456789ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-82

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 31234567891011ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-83

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-2-1012345678ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-84

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1-3-2-10123456789101112ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-85

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2-2-10123456789ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-86

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3-1012345678910ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-87

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) from Day 1 to Day 3-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-101234ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-88

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for 15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg)01234ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-89

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males3456789101112131415ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-90

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females4567891011121314151617181920ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-91

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Ratio of Number of Males to Total Number of Offspring (%)3040506070ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-92

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g)102030405060708090100110120ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-93

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g)1000200030004000500060007000ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-94

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL)0.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21.31.4ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-95

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.2ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-96

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)01234ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-97

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL)012345678910ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-98

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL)0123456ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-99

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL)0123456ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-100

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL)0123456ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-101

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL)01234567891011121314151617181920ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-102

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL)010203040ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-103

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)2345678910ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-104

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)567891011121314151617181920ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-105

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL)01000200030004000ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-106

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL)-1000100200300400500600700800900100011001200ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-107

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL)010203040506070ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2DRAFTAvian Control DataA-108

Means ± 2 Standard Errors for Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL)0102030405060ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALL ST SV WLI ALLGeneration F0 Generation F1 Generation F2

# Appendix B

Figures for Avian Inter-Laboratory Anal ysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin vs

Control

Means ± 2 Standard Errors Plots for Each Endpoint by GenerationDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-1

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males (F0)1001201401601802002202402601 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-2

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Males (F1)801001201401601802002201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-3

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males (F0)1101301501701902102302502701 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-4

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Males (F1)1101301501701902102302502701 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-5

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females (F0)1301401501601701801902002102202302402502602702802903001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-6

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 0 - Females (F1)801001201401601802002202401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-7

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females (F0)1401601802002202402602803003203401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-8

Adult Body Weight (g) Day 56 - Females (F1)1401601802002202402602803003203401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-9

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0 (F1)678910111 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-10

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 0 (F2)678910111 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-11

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14 (F1)4050607080901001101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-12

Mean Offspring Body Weight by Pen (g) Day 14 (F2)4050607080901001101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-13

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 1 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-14

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 1 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-15

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 2 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-16

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 2 (F1)10203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-17

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 3 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-18

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 3 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-19

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 4 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-20

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 4 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-21

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 5 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-22

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 5 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-23

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 6 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-24

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 6 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-25

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 7 (F0)10203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-26

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 7 (F1)10203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-27

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-28

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 8 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-29

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9 (F0)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-30

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 9 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-31

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 10 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-32

Adult Feed Consumption (g/bird/day) - Week 11 (F1)101520253035401 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-33

Eggs Laid (F0)20253035404550551 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-34

Eggs Laid (F1)20253035404550551 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-35

Eggs Crack (F0)012341 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-36

Eggs Crack (F1)0123451 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-37

Eggs Abnormal (F0)0123451 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-38

Eggs Abnormal (F1)012345671 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-39

Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-40

Eggs Set From Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-41

Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)101214161820221 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-42

Eggs Set From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-43

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-44

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-45

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)1012141618201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-46

Eggs Fertile From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-47

Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-48

Eggs Viable From Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)791113151719211 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-49

Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)1012141618201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-50

Eggs Viable From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-51

Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation (F0)78910111213141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-52

Viable Eggs From Weeks 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation (F1)791113151719211 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-53

Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation (F0)791113151719211 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-54

Viable Eggs From Weeks 6 7 and 8 after Two Weeks of Incubation (F1)791113151719211 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-55

Eggs Hatched (F0)510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-56

Eggs Hatched (F1)510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-57

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks (F0)510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-58

Number of 14-Day-Old Surviving Chicks (F1)510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-59

Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day (F0)0.50.60.70.80.91.01.11 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-60

Eggs Laid Per Hen Per Day (F1)0.50.60.70.80.91.01.11 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-61

Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid (F0)0.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-62

Cracked Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid (F1)0.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.100.110.121 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-63

Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid (F0)0.000.050.100.150.200.251 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-64

Abnormal Eggs as A Percentage of Eggs Laid (F1)0.000.050.100.150.200.251 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-65

Fertile Eggs as A Percentage From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-66

Fertile Eggs as A PercentageFrom Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-67

Fertile Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-68

Fertile Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-69

Viable Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-70

Viable Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-71

Viable Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-72

Viable Eggs as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-73

Viable Eggs (7-8) as A Percent From Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-74

Viable Eggs (7-8) as A Percent From Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-75

Viable Eggs (6-8) as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-76

Viable Eggs (6-8) as A Percent From Weeks 6 7 and 8 (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-77

Eggs Hatched as A Percent from 7-8 after Incub (F0)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-78

Eggs Hatched as A Percent from 7-8 after Incub (F1)0.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-79

14+ Surviving Chicks as A Percent of Eggs Hatched (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-80

14+ Surviving Chicks as A Percent of Eggs Hatched (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-81

Eggs Hatched as A Percent from Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-82

Eggs Hatched as A Percent from Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-83

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage from Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-84

Eggs Hatched as A Percentage from Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-85

Number of 14+ Surviving Chicks as A Percentfrom Weeks 7 and 8 (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-86

Number of 14+ Surviving Chicks as A Percentfrom Weeks 7 and 8 (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-87

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-88

Eggs Hatched Per Hen Per Day (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-89

Number of 14+ Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day (F0)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-90

Number of 14+ Surviving Chicks Per Hen Per Day (F1)0.00.20.40.60.81.01.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-91

Pen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm) (F0)0.190.200.210.220.230.240.251 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-92

Pen Mean Egg Shell Thickness (mm) (F1)0.190.200.210.220.230.240.251 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-93

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) (F0)3456781 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-94

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Albumin (g) (F1)3456781 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-95

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g) (F0)3451 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-96

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Yolk (g) (F1)3451 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-97

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g) (F0)7891011121 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-98

Pen Mean Egg Content Weight - Combined (g) (F1)7891011121 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-99

Age in Days at First Foam - Males (F1)303540455055601 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-100

Age in Days at First Egg - Females (F1)303540455055601 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-101

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-102

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-103

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-104

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-105

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-106

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Males (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-107

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 4 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-108

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 5 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-109

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 6 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.11.21 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-110

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 7 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-111

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 8 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-112

Cloacal Area (cm2) at 9 Weeks - Females (F1)0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-113

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1 (F1)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-114

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 1 (F2)0501001502002503001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-115

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2 (F1)0204060801001201401601802001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-116

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 2 (F2)0204060801001201401601802001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-117

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3 (F1)0204060801001201401601802001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-118

Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) - Day 3 (F2)0204060801001201401601802001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-119

Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F1)-200-150-100-500501001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-120

Change in Length of Time to First Neck Grab (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F2)-200-150-100-500501001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-121

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1 (F1)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-122

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 1 (F2)0501001502002503001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-123

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2 (F1)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-124

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 2 (F2)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-125

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3 (F1)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-126

Length of Time to First Mount (sec) - Day 3 (F2)0501001502001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-127

Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F1)-200-150-100-500501001501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-128

Change in Length of Time to First Mount (sec) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F2)-200-150-100-500501001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-129

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1 (F1)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-130

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 1 (F2)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-131

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2 (F1)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-132

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 2 (F2)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-133

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3 (F1)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-134

Number of Mount Attempts (count) - Day 3 (F2)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-135

Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F1)-20-15-10-5051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-136

Change in Number of Mount Attempts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F2)-20-15-10-5051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-137

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1 (F1)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-138

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 1 (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-139

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2 (F1)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-140

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 2 (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-141

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3 (F1)0246810121 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-142

Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) - Day 3 (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-143

Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F1)-505101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-144

Change in Number of Cloacal Contacts (count) from Day 1 to Day 3 (F2)-505101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-145

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1 (F1)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-146

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 1 (F2)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-147

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2 (F1)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-148

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 2 (F2)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-149

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3 (F1)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-150

Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) - Day 3 (F2)024681012141 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-151

Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) (F1)-10-50510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-152

Change in Number of Crows (Cock) or Fluffs (Hen) (count) (F2)-10-50510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-153

15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg) (F1)012341 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-154

15 Day Embryo (ED15) Thyroid Weight (mg) (F2)012341 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-155

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males (F0)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-156

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males (F1)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-157

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females (F0)0510152025301 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-158

Adult Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females (F1)0510152025301 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-159

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-160

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Males (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-161

14-Day Old Left Thyroid Weight (mg) - Females (F2)02468101 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-162

Ratio of Number of Males to Total Number of Offspring (%) (F1)30405060701 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-163

Ratio of Number of Males to Total Number of Offspring (%) (F2)30405060701 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-164

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) (F0)0204060801001201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-165

Egg Yolk Estradiol (pg/g) (F1)0204060801001201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-166

Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) (F0)02000400060008000100001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-167

Egg Yolk Testosterone (pg/g) (F1)02000400060008000100001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-168

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL) (F0)0.00.51.01.52.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-169

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Males (ng/mL) (F1)0.00.51.01.52.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-170

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL) (F0)0.00.51.01.52.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-171

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - Adult Females (ng/mL) (F1)0.00.51.01.52.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-172

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) (F2)0.00.51.01.52.02.51 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-173

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T3 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL) (F2)0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.01 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-174

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL) (F0)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-175

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Males (ng/mL) (F1)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-176

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL) (F0)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-177

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - Adult Females (ng/mL) (F1)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-178

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Males (ng/mL) (F2)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-179

Plasma Thyroid Hormone T4 - 14-Day Old Females (ng/mL) (F2)0510151 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-180

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) (F0)051015201 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-181

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Males (pg/mL) (F1)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-182

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL) (F0)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-183

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - Adult Females (pg/mL) (F1)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-184

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL) (F2)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-185

Plasma Sex Hormone Estradiol - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL) (F2)010203040501 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-186

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL) (F0)0100020003000400050006000700080001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-187

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Males (pg/mL) (F1)0100020003000400050006000700080001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-188

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL) (F0)05001000150020001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-189

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - Adult Females (pg/mL) (F1)05001000150020001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-190

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Males (pg/mL) (F2)0204060801001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppmDRAFTAvian Interlab Analysis: Comparisons of Vinclozolin and ControlB-191

Plasma Sex Hormone Testosterone - 14-Day Old Females (pg/mL) (F2)0204060801001 2 3 4 5ST1 2 3 4 5SV1 2 3 4 5WLI1 2 3 4 5AverageGroup & Lab1-Control 2-64 ppm3-160 ppm 4-400 ppm5-1000 ppm