Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.
The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.
Diss Factsheets
Use of this information is subject to copyright laws and may require the permission of the owner of the information, as described in the ECHA Legal Notice.
EC number: 695-696-1 | CAS number: 124763-51-5
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
In an experimental study according to OECD test guideline 439 under GLP conditions, the read-across substance did not reduce cell viability (96 % with an SD of 14.52) and is considered not irritating to skin (reference 7.3.1 -1).
In an in vitro eye corrosive and severe irritant study, using the Isolated Chicken Eye model (OECD 438) with the read-across substance, no ocular corrosion potential was observed. The overall ICE score was 1xI, 2xII (reference 7.3.2 -1).
In an experimental study according to OECD test guideline 492 under GLP conditions, the read-across substance reduced the cell viability in two experiments (55.8 % and 29.0 %) (reference 7.3.2 -2).
Based on the results of both studies the read-across substance is considered to have potential to cause eye irritation but not serious damage to the eye.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Justification for type of information:
- Please refer to section 13 for the read-across justification.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- % tissue viability
- Run / experiment:
- mean
- Value:
- 96
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 100
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 18
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Justification for type of information:
- Please refer to section 13 for the read-across justification.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Irritation parameter:
- percent corneal swelling
- Run / experiment:
- mean (240 min)
- Value:
- 3
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 0
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 28
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Run / experiment:
- mean
- Value:
- 1
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 0
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 4
- Irritation parameter:
- fluorescein leakage
- Run / experiment:
- mean
- Value:
- 1
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 0
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 3
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Justification for type of information:
- Please refer to section 13 for the read-across justification.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Irritation parameter:
- other: % viability
- Run / experiment:
- Experiment 1 (mean)
- Value:
- 55.8
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 39.5
- Irritation parameter:
- other: % viability
- Run / experiment:
- Experiment 2 (mean)
- Value:
- 29
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 32.4
Referenceopen allclose all
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin irritation
No study data with the test item is available for skin irritation. Therefore, a read-across to the read-across substance with a very similar chemical structure and comparable physico-chemical parameters is used to evaluate the skin irritation potential of the test item.
An EpiSkinTM SM test with the read-across substance has been performed to predict its irritation potential by measurement of its cytotoxic effect, as reflected in the MTT assay, according to the OECD Test Guideline No. 439.
Triplicates of the human skin model EPISKIN (Reconstructed Human Epidermis, SkinEthic Laboratories) were treated with read-across substance and incubated for 15 minutes at room temperature. Exposure of the reconstructed human epidermis skin units with the read-across substance was terminated by rinsing with PBS 1x solution. Epidermis units were then incubated at 37 °C for 42 hours in an incubator with 5 % CO2. The viability of each disk was assessed by incubating the tissues for 3 hours with MTT solution at 37 °C in 5 % CO2 protected from light. The precipitated formazan was then extracted using acidified isopropanol and quantified spectrophotometrically.
SDS (5 % aq.) and 1×PBS treated epidermis (three units / positive and negative control) were used as positive and negative controls respectively. For each treated tissue viability was expressed as a percentage relative to negative control.
A test item is identified as requiring classification and labelling according to UN GHS (Category 2 or Category 1), if the mean relative viability after 15 minutes exposure and 42 hours post incubation is less or equal (≤) to 50 % of the negative control.
In this in vitro skin irritation test using the EPISKIN model, the read-across substance did not show significantly reduced cell viability in comparison to the negative control (mean value: 96 %). All obtained test item viability results were far above 50 % when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control. Therefore the test item was considered to be non-irritant to skin.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected cell viability values within acceptable limits. The experiment was considered to be valid.
The results obtained from this in vitro skin irritation test, using the EPISKIN model, indicated that the read-across substance reveals no skin irritation potential under the utilised testing conditions. The read-across substance is considered to be non-irritant to skin and is therefore not classified (UN GHS No Category).
Eye irritation
No study data with the test item is available for eye irritation. Therefore, a read-across to the read-across substance with a very similar chemical structure and comparable physico-chemical parameters is used to evaluate the eye irritation potential of the test item.
To determine the corrosion or irritation potential of the read-across substance for the eye a stepwise weight of evidence approach was done. An Isolated Chicken Eye Test (ICET) according to OECD 438 (version 2013) was conducted resulting in “No prediction can be made” and therefore, neither classification in Category 1 (UN GHS) nor no classification (UN GHS: No Category) was triggered. Therefore an eye irritation study using Reconstructed human Cornea-like Epithelium according to OECD 492 (version 2015) was conducted in accordance with the top down approach described in the Guidance on an integrated approach on testing and assessment (IATA) for serious eye damage and eye irritation (Series on testing and assessment No. 263).
An Isolated Chicken Eye Test (ICET) according to OECD 438 (version 2013) was conducted to evaluate the potential ocular corrosivity and irritancy of the read-across substance by its ability to induce toxicity in enucleated chicken eyes. The read-across substance was applied in a single dose (30 mg/eye) onto the cornea of isolated chicken eyes and rinsed after 10 seconds with saline. Tested corneas were evaluated pre-treatment and at approximately 30, 75, 120, 180, and 240 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. The endpoints evaluated were corneal opacity, swelling, fluorescein retention, and morphological effects. All of the endpoints, with the exception of fluorescein retention (which was determined only at pre-treatment and 30 minutes after test substance exposure) were determined at each of the above time points. Imidazole (positive control) was ground before use in the study. The read-across substance and positive control were applied in an amount of 30 mg/eye by powdering the entire surface of the cornea attempting to cover the cornea surface uniformly with the read-across substance or positive control. Three read-across substance treated eyes and three positive control eyes were used in this study. One negative control eye was treated with 30 μL saline solution. After an exposure period of 10 seconds from the end of the application the cornea surface was rinsed thoroughly with approximately 20 mL saline solution at ambient temperature and this procedure was repeated for each eye.
In this ICET, the read-across substance did not cause ocular corrosion or severe irritation in the enucleated chicken eyes. The overall ICE class was 1xI, 2xII.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected results. The experiment was considered to be valid.
According to the guideline OECD 438 (version 2013), the read-across substance overall in vitro classification is neither UN GHS Classification Category I (an ocular corrosive or severe eye irritant) nor No Category. Thus, according to the guideline OECD 438 (version 2013), the read-across substance has been categorized as “No prediction can be made”.
A study according to OECD 492 (version 2015) was conducted to evaluate the eye irritation potential of the read-across substance. Two experiments were performed. The first experiment was not sufficient to determine the properties of the read-across substance due to non-concordant replicates. The result of the second experiment was unequivocal and led to the same classification as the mean value of the first experiment.
The solid test item was applied to a three-dimensional human cornea tissue model in duplicate for an exposure time of at least 6 hours. After treatment, the substance was rinsed from the tissue; then, cell viability of the tissues was evaluated by addition of MTT, which can be reduced to formazan. The formazan production was evaluated by measuring the optical density (OD) of the resulting solution.
Demineralised water was used as negative control and methyl acetate was used as positive control. The controls showed the following results: After treatment with the negative control, the absorbance values were within the required acceptability criterion of 0.8≤mean OD≤2.5, OD was 1.5 (1st experiment) and 1.8 (2nd experiment). The positive control showed clear eye irritating effects (< 50 %), the relative tissue viability was reduced to 39.5 % (1st experiment) and 32.4 % (2nd experiment).
Variation within tissue replicates was acceptable in both experiments (range≤20 %).
After treatment with the read-across substance, the mean value of relative tissue viability was 55.8 % (1st experiment) and 29.0 % (2nd experiment). Both values are below the threshold for eye irritation potential (≤60 %).
Under the conditions of the test system, the read-across substance is considered as eye irritant / inducing serious eye damage in the EpiOcularTM Eye Irritation Test according to OECD 492 (version 2015).
Conclusion
Based on the result from the Isolated Chicken Eye Test according to OECD 438 (version 2013) a classification as No category according to UN GHS was not possible due to the result of “No predication can be made”. The second in vitro study, the eye irritation study using Reconstructed human Cornea-like Epithelium according to OECD 492 (version 2015), determined that the read-across substance induces eye damage, but that no prediction regarding classification as Category 1 or Category 2 of the read-across substance can be made.
In the meantime new guideline versions for both OECD test guidelines were published and the impact of the changes of the guidelines were checked for the registration of the target substance (Summer 2020). The current guideline versions are OECD TG 438 of 27th June 2018 and OECD TG 492 of 18th June 2019. In both guidelines the procedures for the conduction of the described experiments remained the same, as did the criteria for evaluation of the results (e.g. ICE class for OECD 438). However, in both guidelines the prediction models according to the UN GHS classification changed due to new scientific knowledge. In OECD 438 version 2018 the overall ICE class of 1xI, 2xII is considered as “No category” (previously “No predication can be made”). For OECD 492 the predicted classification besides “No category” changed to “No predication can be made” (from previously “potentially requiring classification and labelling according to UN GHS (Category 2 or Category 1)”.
Considering the experimental results of the studies under the new guideline versions the following is determined:
According to the guideline OECD 438 (version 2018), the read-across substance has been categorized as “No category”.
Under the conditions of the test system, the read-across substance is considered as “No predication can be made” in the EpiOcularTM Eye Irritation Test according to OECD 492 (version 2019).
Using the top down approach described in the Guidance on IATA for serious eye damage and eye irritation an overall conclusion for the read-across substance can be reached based on the updated guidelines. The weight of evidence with the two conducted studies determined that the read-across substance is not to be classified as UN GHS Category 1. With the results of “No Category” and “No predication can be made”, it was decided to assume the worst-case classification in order to avoid an in vivo study. Therefore, the read-across substance is considered to be eye irritating and classified into Category 2 (UN GHS).
Justification for classification or non-classification
Classification, Labelling, and Packaging Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008
The available experimental test data are reliable and suitable for classification purposes under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. Based on available data on skin irritation, the test item does not require classification for skin irritation or corrosion according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP), as amended for the fifteenth time in Regulation (EU) No 2020/1182.
The available experimental test data are reliable and suitable for classification purposes under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. Based on available data on the potential to cause damage to the eye, the test item requires classification for causing eye irritation into Category 2 (H319: Causes serious eye irritation) according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP), as amended for the fifteenth time in Regulation (EU) No 2020/1182.
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.