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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 203-039-3 | CAS number: 102-54-5
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Genetic toxicity in vitro
Description of key information
In Vitro: there are 8 studies included in the dossier; 4 AMES, 2 gene mutation mouse lymphoma assay (MLA) and 2 chromosome abberations. In Vivo; there are 2 studies included the dossier; a mammalian erthrocyte micronucleus tes and a Drosophila SLRL and reciprocal translocation tests. Under the REACh testing strategy the 3 test in vitro test battery is required. Adequate negative AMES data addresses the bacterial gene mutation end point. A recent MLA study conducted in accordance with the relevant OECD guidance and published recommendations, confirms a lack of mammalian gene mutation potential. No acceptable in vitro cytogenicity data has been generated, but the negative data from the in vivo mouse bone marrow micronucleus study is seen as an adequate substitute. Therefore, under the requirements of REACh it is concluded that ferrocene is devoid of any genotoxic potential
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- in vitro gene mutation study in mammalian cells
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2013
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 476 (In Vitro Mammalian Cell Gene Mutation Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of assay:
- mammalian cell gene mutation assay
- Target gene:
- thymidine kinase, tk +/- locus of the L5178Y mouse lymphoma cell line
- Species / strain / cell type:
- mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
- Details on mammalian cell type (if applicable):
- - Type and identity of media: Cells were routinely cultured in RPMI 1640 medium with Glutamax-1 and HEPES buffer (20 mM) supplemented with Penicillin (100 units/ml), Streptomycin (100 μg/ml), Sodium pyruvate (1 mM), Amphotericin B (2.5 μg/ml) and 10% donor horse serum (giving R10 media) at 37 °C with 5% CO2 in air
- Properly maintained: yes
- Periodically checked for Mycoplasma contamination: yes
- Periodically "cleansed" against high spontaneous background: yes - Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- S9-mix was prepared immediately prior to dosing by mixing S9, NADP (5 mM), G-6-P (5 mM), KCl (33 mM) and MgCl2 (8 mM) in R0
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- For Experiment 1 the dose range was 29.06 to 930 µg/ml in the absence of S9 and 1.82 to 116.25 µg/ml in the presence of S9. In Experiment 2 the dose range was 0.25 to 12 µg/ml in the absence of S9 and 2 to 80 µg/ml in the presence of S9
- Vehicle / solvent:
- dimethyl sulfoxide
- Untreated negative controls:
- no
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- ethylmethanesulphonate
- Remarks:
- Experiment 1&2 absence of metabolic activation
- Untreated negative controls:
- no
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- cyclophosphamide
- Remarks:
- Experiment 1&2 presence of metabolic activation
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: strain/cell type: thymidine kinase, tk +/-
- Conclusions:
- Interpretation of results: negative
It is concluded that dicyclopentadienyl iron did not induce mutation at the tk locus of L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells when tested under the conditions employed in this study. These conditions included four independent treatments at concentration up to 32 μg/ml in the presence (4 hours) of a rat liver metabolic activation system (at 1 and 2% (v/v) final concentration of S9 fraction) and at concentrations of 232.5 µg/ml and 2 μg/mL in the absence (4 and 24 hours, respectively) of metabolic S9. The maximum doses tested were limited by either acceptable reductions in toxicity (as measured by %RTG) or by precipitate (observed by eye) at the end of treatment in the absence or presence of S9, respectively. - Executive summary:
Ferrocene was assessed for its ability to induce gene mutations in an in vivo assay using mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells and conducted according to OECD Guideline 476.
It is concluded that dicyclopentadienyl iron did not induce mutation at the tk locus of L5178Y mouse lymphoma cells when tested under the conditions employed in this study. These conditions included four independent treatments at concentration up to 32 μg/ml in the presence (4 hours) of a rat liver metabolic activation system (at 1 and 2% (v/v) final concentration of S9 fraction) and at concentrations of 232.5 µg/ml and 2 μg/mL in the absence (4 and 24 hours, respectively) of metabolic S9. The maximum doses tested were limited by either acceptable reductions in toxicity (as measured by %RTG) or by precipitate (observed by eye) at the end of treatment in the absence or presence of S9, respectively.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (negative)
Additional information
Additional information from genetic
toxicity in vitro:
Research in the area of genotoxicity has been prolific, both at the fundamental level and also with respect to comparative analysis of the performance and predictivity of individual tests and combination of tests for risk assessment. For an adequate evaluation of the genotoxic potential of a chemical substance, different endpoints (i.e. induction of gene mutations, structural and numerical chromosomal alterations) have to be assessed, as each of these events has been implicated in carcinogenesis and heritable diseases. Traditionally the 3 test in vitro battery has been used, comprising of a bacterial reverse gene mutation test (typically the Ames test), a mammalian forward gene mutation test (typically the MLA) and a chromosome aberration study (as outlined by REACh). Extensive work by Kirklandet al[[i], [ii]] has shown that a test battery consisting of the Ames and in vitro micronucleus test (or chromosomal aberration test) will detect (410/557 = 73.6%) of rodent carcinogens. When the MLA test is added to this test battery an additional 24 carcinogens are detected (434/557 = 77.9%). Whilst a marginal increase in sensitivity[1]is observed the data are not convincing for a number of reasons (which will not be explored further in this opinion). Any furtherin vitromammalian cell tests in the revised test battery would significantly reduce specificity[2] with no substantial gain in sensitivity. As a result of this extensive work the requirements for genotoxicity testing have been revised globally. ICH[3][[iii]] and UK COM[4][[iv]] have recently published updated guidance and EFSA[5][[v]] has published a recent opinion advocating the revised in vitro two test battery which has impacted upon the guidance for plant protection products.
It is important to note that the REACh endpoint specific guidance requirements for chemical safety assessment were published back in 2008 [[vi]], and whilst revisions have taken place these revisions have not affected the recommendations for mutagenicity testing [[vii]].
The published data on ferrocene will therefore be assessed against the current REACh requirements.
Following a review of the available genotoxicity data for ferrocene several published papers concluded that ferrocene showed evidence of gene mutation in the in vitro mammalian gene mutation mouse lymphoma assay. When the data is assessed against the current guideline requirements and the recommendations of Mooreet al., the data is considered unreliable/ uninterpretable, with no definitive conclusion drawn from the published data. Consequently a GLP, OECD guideline MLA study was conducted. This study returned negative results, with the maximum dose tested limited by toxicity at the end of treatment.
Under the REACh testing strategy the 3 test in vitro test battery is required. Adequate negative AMES data addresses the bacterial gene mutation end point. A recent MLA study conducted in accordance with the relevant OECD guidance and published recommendations confirms a lack of mammalian gene mutation potential. No acceptable in vitro cytogenicity data has been generated, the negative data from the in vivo mouse bone marrow micronucleus study is seen as an adequate substitute. Therefore, under the requirements of REACh it is can be concluded that ferrocene is devoid of any genotoxic potential.
[1] In the context of genotoxicity testing sensitivity refers to the correct prediction of rodent carcinogens which arein vivogenotoxins
[2] In the context of genotoxicity testing specificity refers to the correct prediction of non-carcinogens
[3] International Conference on Harmonisation of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use
[4] United Kingdom Committee on Mutagenicity of Chemicals in food, consumer products and the environment
[5] European Food Safety Authority
[i] Kirkland, D., Aardema, M., Henderson, L. & Muller, L. (2005). Evaluation of the ability of a battery of threein vitrogenotoxicity tests to discriminate rodent carcinogens and non-carcinogens. 1. Sensitivity, specificity and relative predictivity.Mutation Research,584, pp 1-256.
[ii] Kirkland, D., Reeve, L., Gatehouse, D. & Vanparys, P. (2011). A corein vitrogenotoxicity battery comprising the Ames test plus thein vitromicronucleus test is sufficient to detect rodent carcinogens andin vivogenotoxins.Mutation Research,721, pp 27-73
[iii] International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use. Guidance on genotoxicity testing and data interpretation for pharmaceuticals intended for human use S2(R1). Step 4. November 2011.
[iv] Committee on Mutagenicity (COM) of Chemicals in food, consumer products and the environment. Guidance on a strategy for genotoxicity testing of chemical substances. 2011.
[v] European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (2011). Scientific opinion on genotoxicitytesting strategies applicable to food and feed safety assessment. EFSA Journal9(9): 2379.
[vi] ECHA (2008). Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7a: Endpoint specific guidance. European Chemicals Agenc, May 2008.
[vii] ECHA (2008). Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment. Chapter R.7.7: Mutagenicity and carcinogenicity. European Chemicals Agency, May 2008.
Justification for selection of genetic toxicity endpoint
Most reliable upto date study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
From the data available, Ferrocene should not be classified as a mutagen for CLP
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.