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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 220-877-5 | CAS number: 2923-16-2
- 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
Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
- Endpoint:
- toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From 1993-05-05 to 1993-05-12
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- reference to same study
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- reference to other study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: ASTM (1991) E1415-91 Standard guide for conducting static toxicity tests with Lemna gibba G3.
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- no data
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Aqueous solutions of trifluoroacetic acid have naturally low pH and for testing on organisms either the sodium salt or pH adjustment were required.
Sodium trifluoroacetate (TFANa, CAS RN: 2923-18-4) is appropriate as test material in replacement of trifluoroacetic acid because of the following elements :
Both substances are very soluble in water (water solubility at 25°C of 625 g/L for TFANa and 1520 g/L for TFA) and have a low potential of bioaccumulation (QSAR estimated LogKow values of -3.31 for TFANa and 0.79 for TFA). TFANa is a crystalline solid with a low vapour pressure (Vapour pressure at 25°C of 10E-5 Pa for TFANa estimated by QSAR) whereas TFA is a liquid with a medium vapour pressure (12.4 kPa at 20°C). Despite this different volatility, in the aquatic environment, both substances are ionized into the trifluoroacetate anion. This is justified by the fact that trifluoroacetic acid is a strong organic acid with a pKa of 0.23 meaning that it is under dissociated form in all environmental compartments.
Therefore, in the aquatic environment the bioavailability of the trifluoroacetate moiety should be the same for both substances. Additionally, as the toxicity of the cation Na is of low concern, the toxicity of the trifluoroacetate moiety is taken into account to assess the toxicity of TFA and TFANa.
Moreover, it should be noted that pH adjustment would be required when testing TFA in water due to pH effect on the organisms. Using the sodium salt of the acid is therefore a relevant approach.
The results obtained on TFANa are recalculated to be expressed in mg of TFA moiety solely. - Analytical monitoring:
- yes
- Details on sampling:
- - Concentrations: The following nominal concentrations were tested : control, 19, 38, 75, 150, 300, 600, 1200 and 2400 mg/L
- Sampling method: Samples of each test solution were taken at the start of the test, using the excess remaining after filling the test vessels, to determine the concentration of the test substance by radiochemical analysis (liquid scintillation counting). At the end of the est, each replicate solution was analysed. The dry tissues from each replicate vessel were analysed for 14C residues, by liquid scintillation counting following sample oxidation. The fresh weight and dry weight of approximately 390 fronds (excess remaining after inoculation of test vessels) were determined to provide a fresh weight/dry weight ratio.
- Sample storage conditions before analysis: not specified. - Vehicle:
- no
- Details on test solutions:
- PREPARATION AND APPLICATION OF TEST SOLUTION (especially for difficult test substances)
- Method: A primary stock solution was prepared containing 4.8 g of sodium trifluoroacetate and 0.0003 g of trifluoro[2-14C]acetic acid in 25 mL of deionised water (192,000 mg/L). The specific activity of this mixture was 1.0 GBq/µg. A volume (20mL) of the primary stock solution was filter (0.2 µm) sterilised and added to sterile culture medium to give a total volume of 1600 mL at a concentration of 2400 mg/L, which was the highest nominal concentration tested. The remaining test concentrations were prepared by the addition of aliquots of the nominal 2400 mg/L solution to sterile culture medium. Using aseptic techniques, 160 mL volumes of the appropriate test solution were dispensed to each of the triplicate test vessels and the remaining test solutions used for physical and chemical analysis. Each replicate test vessel was inoculated with 3 plants, each consisting of 4 fronds (total of 12 fronds)
- Eluate: no data
- Differential loading: no data
- Controls: The control consisted of culture medium only.
- Chemical name of vehicle (organic solvent, emulsifier or dispersant): not applicable
- Concentration of vehicle in test medium (stock solution and final test solution(s) including control(s)): not applicable
- Evidence of undissolved material (e.g. precipitate, surface film, etc): no data - Test organisms (species):
- Lemna gibba
- Details on test organisms:
- TEST ORGANISM
- Common name: the duckweed Lemna gibba
- Strain: G3
- Source (laboratory, culture collection): University of Waterloo, Canada.
- Age of inoculum (at test initiation): no data
- Method of cultivation: axenic conditions
ACCLIMATION
- Acclimation period: The cultures were incubated at 25+/-1°C under continuous illumination using "warm-white" lights.
- Culturing media and conditions (same as test or not): same as test, and known as M-Hoagland's medium.
- Any deformed or abnormal cells observed: no data - Test type:
- static
- Water media type:
- freshwater
- Limit test:
- no
- Total exposure duration:
- 168 h
- Remarks on exposure duration:
- no remarks
- Post exposure observation period:
- none
- Hardness:
- no data
- Test temperature:
- The daily temperature measurements recorded, by thermometer, in the incubator ranged from 24.7 to 25.1°C.
- pH:
- The pH values was determined by a Corning Model 240 pH meter, at the start and finish of the test ranged from 4.6 to 4.7 at the start, and from 5.0 to 5.6 at the end of the study. See table 1 in "Any other information on materials and methods incl. tables" field.
- Dissolved oxygen:
- No data
- Salinity:
- Not applicable
- Nominal and measured concentrations:
- See table 2 in "Any other information on results incl. tables" field. The measured concentrations at the start of the test ranged from 102 to 113 % of the nominal values. At each nominal concentration the mean measured values at the end were the same as those at the start of the test.
- Details on test conditions:
- TEST SYSTEM
- Incubation chamber used: yes, the cultures were incubated at 25+/-1°C under continuous illumination using "warm-white" lights
- Test vessel: The test vessels were borosilicate glass crystallising
- Type (delete if not applicable): no data
- Material, size, headspace, fill volume: glass, dishes of 400 mL nominal capacity with loose-fitting lids.
- Type of cover: no data
- Aeration: no data
- Agitation: no
- Type of flow-through (e.g. peristaltic or proportional diluter): not applicable
- Renewal rate of test solution (frequency/flow rate): not applicable
- Control end cells density: 100 fronds in average
- No. of colonies per vessel: not applicable
- No. of fronds per vessel: 3 plants, each consisting of 4 fronds (total of 12 fronds per test vessel).
- No. of vessels per concentration (replicates): 3
- No. of vessels per control (replicates): 3
- No. of vessels per vehicle control (replicates): not applicable
GROWTH MEDIUM
- Standard medium used: yes, M-Hoagland's medium
- Detailed composition if non-standard medium was used: not applicable
SEDIMENT USED (for rooted aquatic vascular plants)
- Origin: not applicable
- Textural classification (% sand, %silt and clay): not applicable
- organic carbon (%): not applicable
- Geographic location: not applicable
TEST MEDIUM / WATER PARAMETERS
- Source/preparation of dilution water: no data
- Total organic carbon: no data
- Particulate matter: no data
- Metals: no data
- Pesticides: no data
- Chlorine: no data
- Alkalinity: no data
- Ca/mg ratio: no data
- Conductivity: no data
- Culture medium different from test medium: no
- Intervals of water quality measurement: no data
OTHER TEST CONDITIONS
- Sterile test conditions: yes
- Adjustment of pH: no
- Photoperiod: continuous illumination
- Light intensity and quality: 9220 lux on test day 1
EFFECT PARAMETERS MEASURED (with observation intervals if applicable) :
- Determination of frond number: On days 2, 5 and 7 the number of plants and the number of fronds were counted and recorded for each test vessel. All fronds which visibly projected beyond the edge of the parent frond were counted. See table 3 in "Any other information on results incl. tables" field and figure 1 in "illustration" field.
- Determination of biomass: At the end of the test (7days) the duckweed from each vessel was rinced briefly in distilled water and dried to constant weight at 60°C. The dry weight of the tissue was determined. See table 4 in "Any other information on results incl. tables" field.
- Determination of frond area: no specified
- Other: Any other symptoms of toxicity were recorded. The bioconcentration factor (BCF) after 7 days is also determined (See table 5 in "Any other information on results incl. tables" field) for each exposure concentration and was calculated as follows : Mean tissue concentration (mg/kg fresh weight) / Mean measured water concentration (mg/L).
RANGE-FINDING STUDY
- Test concentrations: no
- Results used to determine the conditions for the definitive study: no - Reference substance (positive control):
- no
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- 1 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Remarks:
- NaTFA
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Remarks on result:
- other: 95% CL = 960 to 1200 mg/L
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- 915 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- act. ingr.
- Remarks:
- TFA
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEC
- Effect conc.:
- 300 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Remarks:
- NaTFA
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEC
- Effect conc.:
- 250 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- act. ingr.
- Remarks:
- TFA
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- 1 200 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Remarks:
- NaTFA
- Basis for effect:
- biomass
- Remarks on result:
- other: 95% CL = 780 to 1900 mg/L
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- 999 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- act. ingr.
- Remarks:
- TFA
- Basis for effect:
- biomass
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEC
- Effect conc.:
- 300 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Remarks:
- NaTFA
- Basis for effect:
- biomass
- Duration:
- 168 h
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEC
- Effect conc.:
- 250 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- act. ingr.
- Remarks:
- TFA
- Basis for effect:
- biomass
- Details on results:
- - Any visual signs of phytotoxicity (abnormalities): no data
- Decrease in frond size: no data
- Necrosis / chlorosis: no data
- Sinking of fronds: no data
- Other: From day 5 onwards, plants in the nominal 600, 1200 and 2400 mg/L exhibited pale, misshapen fronds with decreased root growth, compared with the control. There were no observed symptoms at or below a nominal concentration of 300 mg/L compared with the control.
- Any stimulation of growth found in any treatment: At nominal concentrations of 75 and 150 mg/L, the increase in number of fronds was significantly greater (p=0.05) than the control. This apparent stimulation should be interpreted with caution.
- Any observations (e.g. precipitation) that might cause a difference between measured and nominal values: no data
- Effect concentrations exceeding solubility of substance in test medium: no data - Results with reference substance (positive control):
- not applicable
- Reported statistics and error estimates:
- no data
- Validity criteria fulfilled:
- yes
- Remarks:
- the doubling time of frond number in the control is less than seven-fold increase in seven days
- Conclusions:
- The duckweed, Lemna gibba G3, was cultured in a range concentrations of sodium trifluoroacetate under static test conditions at 25°C for 7 days. The procedures employed were based on the relevant ASTM standard. The EC50 (frond increase) and EC50 (weight increase) were 915 and 999 mg/L of TFA, respectively.
= 1200 mg/L (95% Confidence Limits = 780 - 1900 mg/L) - Executive summary:
The duckweed, Lemna gibba G3, was cultured in a range concentrations of sodium trifluoroacetate under static test conditions at 25°C for 7 days. The following nominal concentrations tested were 19, 38, 75, 150, 300, 600, 1200 and 2400 mg/L. A control was performed with culture inoculum only. Triplicate cultures of the control and of each concentration of the test substance were employed. Each replicate test vessel was inoculated with 3 plants, each consisting of 4 fronds (total of 12 fronds). The pH values determined at the start and finish of the test ranged from 4.6 to 4.7 at the start, and from 5.0 to 5.6 at the end of the study. The daily temperature measurements in the incubator ranged from 24.7 to 25.1°C. The light intensity was 9220 Lux. The test substance was mixed with 14C-labelled trifluoroacetic acid to enable radiochemical analysis of the test solutions at the start and finish, and analysis of the plant tissue at the end of the exposure. Moreover, the bioconcentration factor was determined for each measured concentrations. The measured concentrations at start of the test ranged from 102 to 113% of the nominal values. At each nominal concentration the mean measured values at the finish were the same as those at the start of the test. The number of fronds and the dry weights of tissue were determined during the test. Furthermore, other symptoms of toxicity were determined : from day 5 onwards, plants in the nominal 600,1200 and 2400 mg/L exhibited pale, misshapen fronds with decreased root growth, compared with the control. There were no observed symptoms at or below a nominal concentration of 300 mg/L compared with the control.
The EC50 for increase in frond number and increase in frond dry weight were as follows:
EC50 (frond increase) = 915 mg/L of TFA
EC50 (weight increase) = 999 mg/L of TFA
These values were based on nominal concentrations which were confirmed by radiochemical analysis. There were no significant (p=0.05) inhibitory effects on frond or weight increase, at a nominal concentration of 300 mg NaTFA/L (250 mg TFA/L). The tissues showed only slight bioconcentration of the test substance after 7 days, with bioconcentration factors ranging from 1.0 to 1.6, based on radiochemical analysis.
Reference
Table 2 : Radiochemical analysis of test solutions
Nominal concentration (mg/L) |
Measured concentration (mg/L) |
Mean as % nominal |
|||
Day 0 |
Day 7 |
Mean (days 0-7) |
|||
Reps |
Mean |
||||
19 |
20 |
20 20 20 |
20 |
20 |
105 |
38 |
39 |
39 39 39 |
39 |
39 |
103 |
75 |
79 |
81 79 78 |
79 |
79 |
105 |
150 |
170 |
170 170 170 |
170 |
170 |
113 |
300 |
320 |
320 320 320 |
320 |
320 |
107 |
600 |
610 |
620 610 610 |
610 |
610 |
102 |
1200 |
1300 |
1300 1300 1300 |
1300 |
1300 |
108 |
2400 |
2500 |
2600 2400 2500 |
2500 |
2500 |
104 |
Table 3 : Increase in number of fronds
Nominal concentration (mg/L) |
Increase in number of fronds (days 0 -7) # |
% Inhibition |
|||
Rep A |
Rep B |
Rep C |
Mean |
||
Control |
90 |
84 |
90 |
88 |
- |
19 |
81 |
106 |
97 |
95 |
- |
38 |
94 |
104 |
97 |
98 |
- |
75 |
153 |
122 |
121 |
132 |
- |
150 |
120 |
145 |
139 |
135 |
- |
300 |
112 |
104 |
111 |
109 |
- |
600 |
52 |
48 |
68 |
56* |
36 |
1200 |
32 |
38 |
36 |
35* |
60 |
2400 |
27 |
26 |
34 |
29* |
67 |
# Increase = (No. of fronds at day 7 - No. of fronds (12) at day 0).
* Significant decrease (p=0.05, one-sided) from the control.
Table 4 : Dry weights
Nominal concentration (mg/L) |
Tissue dry weight (day 7) (mg) |
Mean increase # (days 0-7) (mg) |
% Inhibition |
|||
Rep A |
Rep B |
Rep C |
Mean |
|||
Control |
15.4 |
14.2 |
19.7 |
16.4 |
14.4 |
- |
19 |
14.7 |
20.6 |
19.0 |
18.1 |
16.1 |
- |
38 |
15.2 |
19.6 |
17.5 |
17.4 |
15.4 |
- |
75 |
27.8 |
18.5 |
19.4 |
21.9 |
19.9 |
- |
150 |
16.8 |
21.1 |
21.2 |
19.7 |
17.7 |
- |
300 |
14.9 |
14.1 |
13.5 |
14.2 |
12.2 |
15 |
600 |
11.6 |
10.5 |
11.1 |
11.1 |
9.1* |
37 |
1200 |
8.5 |
9.3 |
9.3 |
9.0 |
7.0* |
51 |
2400 |
7.6 |
7.5 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
5.8* |
60 |
# Increase = (Dry weight at day 7 - estimated day 0 dry weight).
Dry weight at day 0 estimated from control dry weight to be 2.0 mg/12 fronds.
(Calculated from day 7 determination, (300) fronds weighing 49.3 mg).
* Significant decrease (p=0.05, one sided) from the control.
Table 5 : Tissue concentrations (based on 14C residues) and bioconcentration factors
Mean measured water concentration (mg/L) |
Rep |
Tissue concentration (mg/kg dry wt) |
Mean (mg/kg dry wt) |
Mean (mg/kg fresh wt)* |
BCF** |
20 |
A B C |
600 570 560 |
580 |
31 |
1.6 |
39 |
A B C |
1,100 1,100 980 |
1,100 |
58 |
1.5 |
79 |
A B C |
1,700 1,900 2,300 |
2,000 |
110 |
1.4 |
170 |
A B C |
5,200 3,600 4,200 |
4,300 |
230 |
1.4 |
320 |
A B C |
10,000 9,300 7,900 |
9,100 |
480 |
1.5 |
610 |
A B C |
14,000 15,000 16,000 |
15,000 |
790 |
1.3 |
1300 |
A B C |
24,000 29,000 25,000 |
26,000 |
1,400 |
1.1 |
2500 |
A B C |
47,000 53,000 48,000 |
49,000 |
2,600 |
1.0 |
* Calculated from fresh/dry weight ratio = 19
** BCF = Mean tissue concentration (mg/kg fresh wt) / Mean measured water concentration (mg/L)
Description of key information
No data on potassium trifluoroacetate is available for this endpoint. However, a reliable key study is available for sodium trifluoroacetate which is used in a read-across approach. This endpoint is covered by two studies: a key study on the duckweed Lemna gibba, showing an EC50 frond number/weight of 1100 mg/L and a NOEC of 300 mg/l after 7 days of exposure. A supporting study in microcosms show no effect on somatic endpoints of TFA at a concentration up to 10 mg/l during 49 days of exposure.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
- EC50 for freshwater plants:
- 1 100 mg/L
- EC10 or NOEC for freshwater plants:
- 300 mg/L
Additional information
The key study, performed according to standard guideline and GLP, shows that the EC50 after 7 days of exposure for frond number and frond dry weight were 915 mg/L and 999 mg/L of TFA, respectively. There were no significant inhibitory effects at a concentration of 250 mg/L of TFA. The key value EC50 for chemical safety assessment on Lemna gibba was 915 mg/L of TFA.
Moreover, a non standard but reliable supporting study in microcosms on the aquatic macrophytes Myriophyllum spicatum and Myriophyllum sibiricum shows that no effect on somatic endpoints were observed after 49 days of exposure to TFA concentrations up to 10 mg/l . There were statistically significant effects of the Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) and TFA mixture on certain pigment concentrations immediately after the start of exposure (2 -7 days) but the plants showed no signs of stress thereafter.
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.