-------

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------
chemical characteristics of substances and, as such, improved understanding of how substances
behave in the various environmental compartments is crucial to exposure assessments. The
modeling should be complemented by field data from pilot studies of areas where exposure and
effects hypotheses can be tested, especially weight-of-evidence of suspect endocrine disrupters
can be compared effects and biological responses in humans and wildlife.

REFERENCES
1.   Colborn, T and Clement, C, editors. Chemically induced alterations in sexual and functional
    development: The wildlife/human connection. Advances in Modern Environmental
    Toxicology. Vol. XXI, Princeton Scientific Publishing, Princeton, NJ.  401pp. (1992).
2.   Adams, NR.  Organizational and activational effects of phytoestrogens on the reproductive
    tract of the ewe. />5£SA/208:87-91 (1995).
3.   Stob, M.  Naturally occurring food toxicants: Estrogens.  IN: Handbook of Naturally
    Occurring Chemicals, M. Recheigl, editor, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, pp 81-102
    (1983).
4.   Bern, H.A. The Fragile Fetus. IN: Chemically induced Alterations in Sexual and Functional
    Development: The Wildlife-Human Connect on. Colborn, T.,  Clement, C. editors, vol. 21.
    Princeton Scientific Publishing,  Princeton, N.J. (1992)
5.   Kavlock R.J., Daston G.P., DeRosa C., Fenner-Crisp P., Gray L.E., Kaattari S., Lucier G.,
    Luster M., Mac M.J., Maczka C., Miller R., Moore J., Rolland R., Scott G., Sheehan D.M.,
    Sinks T.,  and Tilson H.A. (1996).  Research Needs for the Risk Assessment of Health and
    Environmental Effects of Endocrine Disrupters: A Report of the US EPA Sponsored
    Workshop.  Environmental Health Perspectives (in press).
6.   Natural Research Counci 1. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the
    Process.  Washington D.C. National Academy Press. 191 pp. (1983).
7.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1992).  Federal Register. Guidelines for Exposure
    Assessment. Vol. 57. No. 104.  FRL-4129-5.
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
8.   National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (1991). Human Exposure
    Assessment for Airbone Pollutants: Advances and Opportunities. Washington, DC:
    National Academy Press.
9.   Huggett, R.J., Kimerle, R.A., Mehrle, Jr., P.M., and Bergman, H.L. eds.  1992.  Biomarkers-
    Biochemical, Physiological, and Histological Markers of Anthropogenic Stress.  Boca Raton,
    LA:  Lewis Publishers;
10. Hunsaker, C.T, MacCarthy, J.F., Shugart, L.R., and O'Neill, R.V. (1990). Indicators
    Relevant to Multiple Resource Categories.  In Ecological Indicators for the Environmental
    Monitoring and Assessment Program.  Hunsaker, C.T and Carpenter, D.E., editors , 2-1 -
    2-18. EPA 600/3-90/060.  Research Triangle Park, NC:  U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency, Office of Research and  Development.
11. McCurdy, T. (Draft in Process). Modeling the "Dose Profile" in Human Exposure
    Assessments.  Ozone as an Example. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development.
12. Derelanko, M.J. (1995).  Risk Assessment Calculations.  IN: CRC Handbook of
    Toxicology. Derelanko, M.J. and Hollinger, M.A. editors. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 653-656.
13. Hidy, G.M. (1975). Summary of the California Aerosol Characterization Experiment. J. Air
    Poll. Cont. Assoc.  25: 1106-1114.
14. Karickhoff, S.W. and Long, J.M. (1996). Research Program: SPARC. National Exposure
    Research  Laboratory Briefing.

-------

-------