TABLE 4:

Summary of the 250 species and metal combination entries in the compilation of metal bioavailability toxicity model studies in Supplemental Data, Table S1

Category	Typea	Percent (number)b
Type of model	BLMc	66.0 (165)
	WHAM-FTOXd	11.6 (29)
	MRM	14.8 (37)
	Mixed	9.2 (23)
	FIAM	4.4 (11)
	Hardness	1.6 (4)
	GLMM + WHAM	0.4 (1)
	MixTox	0.4 (1)
	TKTD	0.4 (1)
	TOX	0.4 (1)
	WHAM regression	0.4 (1)
Type of validation	Autovalidation	49.6 (124)
	Independent validation	25.6 (64)
	Autovalidation and independent validation	16.8 (42)
	Cross-species extrapolation	8.0 (20)
Method used to present results	Predicted versus observed (1:1) plot	80.4 (201)
	Other graphical method	17.6 (44)
	Table	5.2 (13)
	Narrative	0.4 (1)

^aTypes of models: BLM = biotic ligand model-type model (e.g., Di Toro et al. 2001); FIAM = free-ion activity model; GLMM = generalized linear mixed model; Hardness = based on hardness regression; Mixed = mixture of model types; MixTox = MixTox model of Jonker et al. (2005); MRM = multiple regression–type model; TKTD = toxicokinetic/toxicodynamic model; TOX = Tox function–type model (e.g., Balistrieri et al. 2015); WHAM = WHAM-F_TOX-type model (e.g., Tipping and Lofts 2013); WHAM = Windermere humic aqueous model (e.g., Tipping 1994); WHAM regression = regression based on WHAM speciation.

^bFor types of models and for methods used to present results, the sum of the types exceeds 100% because for some entries more than one type of model was validated or more than one type of method was used to present the validation results.

^cIn addition, 1 metal speciation-validation analysis was conducted for a BLM.

^dIn addition, 4 metal speciation-validation analyses were conducted for a WHAM.