1964
DOI: 10.2307/3571541
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Response of the Pocket Mouse to Ionizing Radiation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1966
1966
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
4
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bowel perforation is possible with OC, although the overall risk is relatively small for experienced users. Lethal or noxious effects of x-rays are possible but unlikely in microCT; rodents have long been known to be resistant to ionizing radiation (28). It is important to ask whether tumor stasis and regression are caused by the radiologic doses used in the documentation of tumor fate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bowel perforation is possible with OC, although the overall risk is relatively small for experienced users. Lethal or noxious effects of x-rays are possible but unlikely in microCT; rodents have long been known to be resistant to ionizing radiation (28). It is important to ask whether tumor stasis and regression are caused by the radiologic doses used in the documentation of tumor fate.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The meadow vole has an acute LD 50-30 of 7-8.4 Gy (Iverson and Turner, 1976a) compared to 10-12 Gy in Clethrionomys (Mihok et al, 1985a), and 13 Gy in P. formusus (Gambino and Lindberg, 1964). Yet, no effects were evident when lifetime doses approached the median acute lethal dose for many breeding voles.…”
Section: Chronic Radiation Exposure Of Wild Populations Of Rodentsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Both experiments suggest that the pika is relatively sensitive to ionizing radiation in comparison to other wild mammals (Chang et al , 1964;Golley et al, 1965;Gambino and Lindberg, 1964;Provost et al , 1965) and similar in sensitivity to laboratory mice (Roderick, 1963).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%