Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Method toxicity

Benigni R, Richard AM. Quantitative structure-based modeling applied to characterization and prediction of chemical toxicity. Methods 1998 14 264-76. [Pg.492]

Mouche I, Malesic L, GiUardeaux O (2011) EETAX assay for evaluation of developmental toxicity. Methods Mol Biol 691 257-269... [Pg.421]

Central nervous system, liver, and kidney injuries are characteristic biomarkers for effects of chlorobenzene intoxication. Since the effects are indicative of exposure to many other toxicants, methods are needed for more specific biomarkers. [Pg.67]

Yildiz G, Demiryurek AT. Ferrous iron-induced luminol chemiluminescence a method for hydroxyl radical study. J Pharm Toxic Methods 1998 39 179-84. [Pg.33]

Peptide Class Safety Pharmacology VChronic Toxicity Carcinogenicity Testing Genetic Toxicity Method of Manufacture Approval Date... [Pg.503]

INFORMATION SOURCES FOR SOFTWARE FOR COMPUTER-AIDED PREDICTION OF TOXICITY METHODS... [Pg.210]

Cyclization is one of the earliest techniques applied to design peptidomimetics. Cyclic peptides are more stable to amide bond hydrolysis and allow less conformational flexibility consequently, the resulting analogs are anticipated to be more selective and less toxic. Methods for restricting conformations include peptide backbone cyclization, disulfide bond formation, side-chain cyclization, and metal ion chelation. [Pg.637]

Many test methods for the determination of the acute toxicity of combustion products from materials and products have been developed over the last two decades and continue to be developed and/or improved. In 1983, 13 of the methods published up to that time were evaluated by Arthur D. Little, Inc. to assess the feasibility of incorporating combustion toxicity requirements for building materials and finishes into the building codes of New York State. On the basis of seven different criteria, only two methods were found acceptable. These two methods were the flow-through smoke toxicity method developed at the University of Pittsburgh and the closed-system cup furnace smoke toxicity method developed at NIST (known at that time as the National Bureau of Standards (NBS)). Standard Reference Materials and protocols (SRM 1048 and SRM 1049) were developed at NIST and are available to the users of these methods to provide assurance that they are performing the methods correctly (see Relevant Websites ... [Pg.649]

No differences in flammability characteristics between the 0.1% Cu20-treated and untreated flexible polyurethane foam were observed. These characteristics were examined to assure that the positive effect on toxicity was not contradicted by negative effects on the flammability properties. The flammability characteristics examined were (1) ignitability in three systems (the NIST Cup Furnace Smoke Toxicity method, the Cone Calorimeter, and Lateral Ignition and Flame Spread Test (LIFT)), (2) heat release rates under small-scale (Cone Calorimeter) and medium-scale (furniture calorimeter) conditions, (3) heats of combustion under small-scale (Cone Calorimeter) and medium-scale (furniture calorimeter) conditions, (4) CO/CO2 ratios under small-scale (Cone Calorimeter) and medium-scale (furniture calorimeter) conditions, (5) smoke obscuration (Cone Calorimeter), and (6) rate of flame spread (LIFT). [Pg.651]

The toxicity method described in Subheading 3.7. is carried out in 96-well plates and the cells are harvested using a standard 96-well cell harvester (e.g., Skatron). If 6-mL tubes are used, cells are harvested using an Ilicon harvester adapted to aspirate 12 6-mL tubes simultaneously. This allows cells to be grown under the same conditions as those for p24 analysis (see Note 4). However, experience has shown that similar end-points for toxicity are obtained using either 96-well plates or 6-mL culture tubes. [Pg.197]

Akqakaya HR, Stark JD, Bridges TS. 2008. Demographic toxicity methods in ecological risk assessment. Oxford (UK) Oxford University Press. [Pg.138]

If these four simple, preventative measures don t work, try the following non-toxic or least toxic methods of killing or discouraging pests. [Pg.69]

A description of toxicity methods used in support of leaching and RRR tests is presented here for reference purposes. Detailed procedures for these tests are included in Nelson et al. [4] as follows ... [Pg.285]

Another way of combining biological and toxic methods is to use pheromones (the natural insect sex-attractants) as lures to bring insects to poisoned baits (for pheromones, see Section 4.7). This method looks promising. Another contemporary search is for substances which could make crops unattractive to insects, or impair their appetites. [Pg.7]

Strom, S. C., Davila, J., and Grompe, M. (2010). Chimeric mice with humanized liver tools for the study of drug metabolism, excretion, and toxicity. Methods Mol Biol 640,491-509. [Pg.313]

TIES are an effective method for determining which stressors cause sediment toxicity. Methods have been developed for many common sediment contaminants [23], however, research remains to be performed on methods to identify several notable sediment contaminants such as methyl mercury, anionic metals and other chemicals of concern (COCs). The TIE methodology can be an important tool paired with other methods to look at a wide range of stressors affecting estuarine and marine systems in a diagnostic approach. [Pg.92]

A great deal of work has been published on the OUR of nitrifying bacteria and toxicity methods... [Pg.278]

The levels of naphthenic acids in extraction waters are aeutely toxic to many aquatic biota [J36,147], Application of molecular toxicity methods, in which stress-inducible genes from E. coli are exposed to oil sands derived naphthenic acids, indicated that the main toxic response was indieative of eytotoxicity with osmotic stress and membrane disruption... [Pg.415]

Metal removal from a sandy soil contaminated with 1710 mg/kg of Cd and 2010 mg/kg of Ni was later evaluated [3]. Maximum removal was obtained by foam produced by 0.5% rhamnolipid solution, after 20 pore volumes. Removal efficiency for the biosurfactant foam was 73.2% of Cd and 68.1% of Ni. For the biosurfactant liquid solution, 61.7% Cd and 51.0% Ni were removed. This was superior to Triton X-100 foam which removed 64.7% Cd and 57.3% Ni and liquid Triton X-100 which removed 52.8% Cd and 45.2% Ni. Distilled water removed only 18% of both Cd and Ni. Concentrations of 0.5,1.0 and 1.5% rhamnohpid at pH values of 6.8,8 and 10 were also evaluated but did not show significant effects. For a 90% foam quaUty, the average hydraulic conductivity was 4.1 X 10 cm/s, for 95%, it was 1.5 X 10 cm/s and for 99%, it was 2.9 X 10 cm/s. Increasing foam quality decreases substantially the hydraulic conductivity. All these values are lower than the conductivity of water at 0.02 cm/s. This higher viscosity will allow better control of the surfactant mobihty during in situ use. Therefore, rhamnohpid foam may be an effective and non-toxic method of remediating heavy metal, hydrocarbon... [Pg.293]


See other pages where Method toxicity is mentioned: [Pg.1004]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.51]    [Pg.123]    [Pg.75]    [Pg.362]    [Pg.273]    [Pg.362]    [Pg.33]    [Pg.190]    [Pg.253]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.827]    [Pg.175]    [Pg.103]    [Pg.406]    [Pg.482]    [Pg.650]    [Pg.1156]    [Pg.473]    [Pg.23]    [Pg.375]    [Pg.1159]    [Pg.1008]    [Pg.9]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.119 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.146 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.42 ]

See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.219 , Pg.220 , Pg.221 ]




SEARCH



Acute toxic class method

Aquatic toxicity test methods

Aquatic toxicity, methods

Distilled water toxicity test methods

Fire test methods smoke toxicity

Health issues toxicity test methods

Methods for Aquatic Toxicity Identification

Survey and Review of Typical Toxicity Test Methods

Total toxic residue analytical method

Toxicity Identification Evaluation (TIE) Methods

Toxicity dispersion methods

Toxicity estimation methods

Toxicity evaluation contact method

Toxicity evaluation injection method

Toxicity synthesis methods with little

Toxicity test methods

Toxicity test methods extraction solution

Toxicity testing concentration methods

© 2024 chempedia.info