169 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 29315767)
1. Benchmark dose analysis framework for developing wildlife toxicity reference values.
Mayfield DB; Skall DG
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2018 May; 37(5):1496-1508. PubMed ID: 29315767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Efforts to standardize wildlife toxicity values remain unrealized.
Mayfield DB; Fairbrother A
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2013 Jan; 9(1):114-23. PubMed ID: 22915290
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Furthering the derivation of predictive wildlife toxicity reference values for use in soil cleanup decisions.
Mayfield DB; Johnson MS; Burris JA; Fairbrother A
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2014 Jul; 10(3):358-71. PubMed ID: 23913912
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Revisiting the Avian Eco-SSL for Lead: Recommendations for Revision.
Sample BE; Beyer WN; Wentsel R
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2019 Sep; 15(5):739-749. PubMed ID: 30963677
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Determination of a site-specific reference dose for methylmercury for fish-eating populations.
Shipp AM; Gentry PR; Lawrence G; Van Landingham C; Covington T; Clewell HJ; Gribben K; Crump K
Toxicol Ind Health; 2000 Nov; 16(9-10):335-438. PubMed ID: 11762928
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. An evaluation of inorganic toxicity reference values for use in assessing hazards to American robins (Turdus migratorius).
Beyer WN; Sample BE
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2017 Mar; 13(2):352-359. PubMed ID: 27155981
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Recommendations for the development and application of wildlife toxicity reference values.
Allard P; Fairbrother A; Hope BK; Hull RN; Johnson MS; Kapustka L; Mann G; McDonald B; Sample BE
Integr Environ Assess Manag; 2010 Jan; 6(1):28-37. PubMed ID: 19558201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. An evaluation of benchmark dose methodology for non-cancer continuous-data health effects in animals due to exposures to dioxin (TCDD).
Gaylor DW; Aylward LL
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2004 Aug; 40(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 15265602
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Critical perspectives on mercury toxicity reference values for protection of fish.
Fuchsman PC; Henning MH; Sorensen MT; Brown LE; Bock MJ; Beals CD; Lyndall JL; Magar VS
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2016 Mar; 35(3):529-49. PubMed ID: 26923857
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Toxicity reference values for methylmercury effects on avian reproduction: Critical review and analysis.
Fuchsman PC; Brown LE; Henning MH; Bock MJ; Magar VS
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2017 Feb; 36(2):294-319. PubMed ID: 27585374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Evaluation of the benchmark dose for point of departure determination for a variety of chemical classes in applied regulatory settings.
Izadi H; Grundy JE; Bose R
Risk Anal; 2012 May; 32(5):830-5. PubMed ID: 22126138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Introduction to benchmark dose methods and U.S. EPA's benchmark dose software (BMDS) version 2.1.1.
Davis JA; Gift JS; Zhao QJ
Toxicol Appl Pharmacol; 2011 Jul; 254(2):181-91. PubMed ID: 21034758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Toxicity reference values and tissue residue criteria for protecting avian wildlife exposed to methylmercury in China.
Zhang R; Wu F; Li H; Guo G; Feng C; Giesy JP; Chang H
Rev Environ Contam Toxicol; 2013; 223():53-80. PubMed ID: 23149812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Development of a chronic noncancer oral reference dose and drinking water screening level for sulfolane using benchmark dose modeling.
Thompson CM; Gaylor DW; Tachovsky JA; Perry C; Carakostas MC; Haws LC
J Appl Toxicol; 2013 Dec; 33(12):1395-406. PubMed ID: 22936336
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The benchmark dose method--review of available models, and recommendations for application in health risk assessment.
Filipsson AF; Sand S; Nilsson J; Victorin K
Crit Rev Toxicol; 2003; 33(5):505-42. PubMed ID: 14594105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Evaluation of subchronic toxicity data using the benchmark dose approach.
Gephart LA; Salminen WF; Nicolich MJ; Pelekis M
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol; 2001 Feb; 33(1):37-59. PubMed ID: 11259178
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The current state of knowledge on the use of the benchmark dose concept in risk assessment.
Sand S; Victorin K; Filipsson AF
J Appl Toxicol; 2008 May; 28(4):405-21. PubMed ID: 17879232
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Bootstrap estimation of benchmark doses and confidence limits with clustered quantal data.
Zhu Y; Wang T; Jelsovsky JZ
Risk Anal; 2007 Apr; 27(2):447-65. PubMed ID: 17511711
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Sensitivity of ecological soil-screening levels for metals to exposure model parameterization and toxicity reference values.
Sample BE; Fairbrother A; Kaiser A; Law S; Adams B
Environ Toxicol Chem; 2014 Oct; 33(10):2386-98. PubMed ID: 24944000
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Toxicity reference values for mink exposed to 2,3,7,8-tetrachlodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) equivalents (TEQs).
Blankenship AL; Kay DP; Zwiernik MJ; Holem RR; Newsted JL; Hecker M; Giesy JP
Ecotoxicol Environ Saf; 2008 Mar; 69(3):325-49. PubMed ID: 18054078
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
