SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Allard P, Fairbrother A, Hope BK, Hull RN, Johnson MS, Kapustka L, Mann G, McDonald B, Sample BE. 2010. Recommendations for the development and application of wildlife toxicity reference values. Integr Environ Assess Manag 6:2837.
  • Bailer AJ, Oris JT. 1997. Estimating inhibition concentrations for different response scales using generalized linear models. Environ Toxicol Chem 16:15541559.
  • Barnthouse LW, Munns WR Jr, Sorensen MT, editors. 2008. Population-level ecological risk assessment. Boca Raton (FL): Taylor & Francis. 376 p.
  • Calabrese EJ, Baldwin LA. 2003. The hormetic dose-response model is more common than the threshold model in toxicology. Toxicol Sci 71:246250.
  • [CCME] Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment. 1996. A framework for ecological risk assessment: General guidance. Winnipeg (MB): CCME.
  • Calder WA, Braun EJ. 1983. Scaling of osmotic regulation in mammals and birds. Am J Physiol 224:R601R606.
  • Caux PY, Moore DRJ, MacDonald D. 1997. Ambient water quality guidelines for turbidity, suspended and benthic sediments—Technical appendix. Report prepared for BC Ministry of Environment, Land and Parks. 146 p.
  • Corrao G, Bagnardi V, Zambon A, Arico A. 1999. Exploring the dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and the risk of several alcohol-related conditions: A meta-analysis. Addiction 94:15511573.
  • Coull BA, Mezzetti M, Ryan LM. 2003. A Bayesian hierarchical model for risk assessment of methylmercury. J Agric Biol Environ Stat 8:253270.
  • Depew DC, Basu N, Burgess NM, Campbell LM, Evers DC, Grasman KA, Scheuhammer AM. 2012. Derivation of screening benchmarks for dietary methylmercury exposure for the common loon: rationale for use in ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 31:23992407.
  • Dillon T, Beckvar N, Kern J. 2010. Residue-based mercury dose-response in fish: An analysis using lethality-equivalent test endpoints. Environ Toxicol Chem 29:25592565.
  • [DTSC] California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2009. Guidance for ecological risk assessment. [cited 2013 April 16]. Available from: http://www.dtsc.ca.gov/AssessingRisk/eco.cfm.
  • Gelman A, Hill J. 2007. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press. 625 p.
  • Hunt D, Rai S. 2008. Interlitter response variability in a threshold dose-response model. Commun Stat Theor Meth 37:23042314.
  • Ioannidis JPA. 2005. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2:696701.
  • Kapustka L. 2008. Limitations of the current practices used to perform ecological risk assessment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 4:290298.
  • Keenan KP, Laroque P, Ballam GC, Soper KA, Dixit R, Mattson BA, Adams SP, Coleman JB. 1996. The effects of diet, ad libitum overfeeding, and moderate dietary restriction on the rodent bioassay: the uncontrolled variable in safety assessment. Toxicol Pathol 24:757768.
  • Kerr D, Meador J. 1996. Modeling dose response using generalized linear models. Environ Toxicol Chem 15:395401.
  • Krewski D, Brand KP, Burnett RT, Zielinski JM. 2002. Simplicity vs complexity in the development of risk models for dose-response assessment. Human Ecol Risk Assess 8:13551374.
  • Krewski D, Chambers A, Birkett N. 2010. The use of categorical regression in modeling copper exposure-response relationships. J Toxicol Environ Health A 73:187207.
  • Krewski D, Chambers A, Ransom Stern B, Aggett PJ, Plunkett L, Rudenko L. 2010. Development of a copper database for exposure-response analysis. J Toxicol Environ Health A 73:208216.
  • Lalonde RL, Ouellet D, Kimanani EK, Potvin D, Vaughan LM, Hill MR. 1999. Comparison of different methods to evaluate population dose-response and relative potency: Importance of interoccasion variability. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 27:6783.
  • Link WA, Albers PH. 2007. Bayesian multimodel inference for dose-response studies. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:18671872.
  • McDonald BG, Wilcockson JB. 2003. Improving the use of toxicity reference values in wildlife food chain modeling and ecological risk assessment. Human Ecol Risk Assess 9:15851594.
  • Mayfield DB, Fairbrother A. 2013. Efforts to standardize wildlife toxicity values remain unrealized. Integr Environ Assess Manag 9:114123.
  • Mood AM, Graybill FA, Boes DC. 1974. Introduction to the theory of statistics. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill. 480 p.
  • Moore D, Sample B, Suter G, Parkhurst B, Teed R. 1999. A probabilistic risk assessment of the effects of methylmercury and PCBs on mink and kingfishers along East Fork Poplar Creek, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA. Environ Toxicol Chem 18:29412953.
  • Moore DRJ, Breton RL, Lloyd K. 1997. The effects of hexachlorobenzene on mink in the Canadian environment: An ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 16:10421050.
  • Nagy KA. 1987. Field metabolic rate and food requirement scaling in mammals and birds. Ecol Monogr 57:111128.
  • Nagy KA. 2001. Food requirements of wild animals: Predictive equations for free living mammals, reptiles, and birds. Nutr Abstr Rev B 71:21R31R.
  • Ollson CA, Koch I, Smith P, Knopper LD, Hough C, Reimer KJ. 2009. Addressing arsenic bioaccessibility in ecological risk assessment: A novel approach to avoid overestimating risk. Environ Toxicol Chem 28:668675.
  • Pinheiro J, Bates D. 2000. Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. Springer-Verlag, New York. 528 p.
  • Salice CJ, Sample BE, Neilan RM, Rose KA, Sable S. 2011. Evaluation of alternative PCB clean-up strategies using an individual-based population model of mink. Environ Pollut 159:33343343.
  • Sample BC, Opresko DM, Suter GW II. 1996. Toxicological benchmarks for wildlife: 1996. Oak Ridge (TN): Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Revision ES/ER/TM-86/R3.
  • Saunders JR, Knopper LD, Koch I, Reimer KJ. 2011. Inclusion of soil arsenic bioaccessibility in ecological risk assessment and comparison with biological effects. Sci Total Environ 412–413:132137.
  • Schabenberger O, Birch JB. 2001. Statistical dose-response models with hermetic effects. Human Ecol Risk Assess 7:891908.
  • Smits JE, Fernie KJ, Bortolotti GR, Marchant TA. 2002. Thyroid hormone suppression and cell-mediated immunomodulation in American Kestrels (Falco sparverius) exposed to PCBs. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 43:338344.
  • Suter GW, Norton SB, Fairbrother A. 2005. Individuals versus organisms versus populations in the definition of ecological assessment endpoints. Integr Environ Assess Manag 1:397400.
  • Tannenbaum LV, Johnson MS, Bazar M. 2003. Application of the hazard quotient method in remedial decisions: A comparison of human and ecological risk assessments. Human Ecol Risk Assess 9:387401.
  • [USACHPPM] US Army Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Medicine. 2000. Standard practice for wildlife toxicity reference values. Technical Guide No. 254.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2000. CatReg software user manual. Washington, DC: Office of Research and Development, National Centre for Environmental Assessment. EPA/600/R-98-052.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Guidance for developing ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs). Eco-SSL Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #5: Wildlife TRV Data Evaluation. OSWER Directive 9285.7-55. November 2003.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2005. Guidance for developing ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs). OSWER Directive 9285.7-55. Revised February 2005.
  • [USEPA] US Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Guidance for developing ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSLs). Eco-SSL Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) #6: Derivation of Wildlife Toxicity Reference Value (TRV). OSWER Directive 9285.7-55. Revised June 2007.
  • Wayland M, Richard C, Woodsworth E. 2007. A dietary assessment of selenium risk to aquatic birds on a coal mine affected stream in Alberta, Canada. Human Ecol Risk Assess 13:823842.
  • Wheeler MW, Bailer AJ. 2009. Benchmark dose estimation incorporating multiple data sources. Risk Anal 29:249256.