47 / 220
基準劑量推估每日可接受攝食量
45
http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/risk/rcd/propoxur.pdf
55. Propoxur: JMPR evaluations 1989 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v89pr13.htm
56. Rhomberg, L. R. 2005. Seeking optimal
design for animal bioassay studies. Toxi-
col. Sci. 84: 1-3.
57. Slob, W., Moerbeek, M., Rauniomaa, E.,
and Piersma, A. H. 2005. A statistical
evaluation of toxicity study designs for the
estimation of the benchmark dose in con-
tinuous endpoints. Toxicol. Sci. 84: 167-
185.
58. Slob, W., and Pieters, M. N. 1997. Few
large, or many small dose groups? An
evaluation of toxicological study designs
using computer simulations. RIVM Re-
port 620110006. National Institute of Pub-
lic Health and the Environment (RIVM),
Bilthoven, The Netherlands. 15 pp.
59. Terbufos: JMPR Evaluations 1990 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v90pr14.htm
60. Terbufos: JMPR evaluations 2003 part II
toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v2003pr13.htm
61. Thiodcarb: JMPR evaluations 2000 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v00pr09.htm
62. Thiodcarb: JMPR evaluations 2005 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agphome/documents/Pests_Pesticides/JMPR/Evalu-
ation01/16_Thiodicarb.pdf
63. Travis, K. Z., Pate, I., and Welsh, Z. K.
2005. The role of the benchmark dose in a
regulatory context. Regul. Toxicol. Phar-
macol. 43: 280-291.
64. Triadimefon: JMPR evaluations 1981 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v81pr32.htm
65. Triadimefon: JMPR evaluations 1985 part
II toxicological. Available at http://www.
inchem.org/documents/jmpr/jmpmono/v85pr18.htm
66. WHO. 2004. Principles for modelling
dose-response for the risk assessment of
chemicals (draft). Available at http://www.
who.int/ipcs/methods/harmonization/
dose_response/en/index.html