2001
DOI: 10.1007/s00128-001-0189-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative Study of Five Transferable Turf Residue Methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The performance of surface residue sampling methods has been compared by a number of researchers, including, but not limited to, Klonne et al (2001), Lu and Fenske (1999), and Fortune (1997) and reviewed by Lewis (2005).…”
Section: Indirect Methods For Estimating Dermal Exposurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The performance of surface residue sampling methods has been compared by a number of researchers, including, but not limited to, Klonne et al (2001), Lu and Fenske (1999), and Fortune (1997) and reviewed by Lewis (2005).…”
Section: Indirect Methods For Estimating Dermal Exposurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, since implementation of the rule in April 2006 until March 2008, only three human volunteer studies involving intentional exposure to pesticides have been approved by the USEPA, and all of those were for insect repellents. [32] However, the California roller [6,33] is a method to quickly, easily, and reproducibly measure transferable chemical residue from chemically treated surfaces that can be used to estimate potential human exposure.…”
Section: Cyfluthrin Total Cyfluthrin Deposition Residuementioning
confidence: 99%