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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 416-900-5 | CAS number: 79723-02-7 TMAP
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- August-September 1993
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: The study has been performed according to OECD and/or EC guidelines and according to GLP principles. Test substance only indicated by abbreviation; no information on test substance purity. No positive control included.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1981
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: David Hall Limited, Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, U.K.
- Age at study initiation: approximately eight to twelve weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 328 - 408g
- Housing: in groups of up to three in solid-floor polypropylene cages furnished with softwood shavings.
- Diet: ad libitum (Guinea Pig FD1 Diet, Special Diet Services Limited, Witham, Essex, U.K.)
- Water: free access to mains tap water
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 20 - 24
- Humidity (%): 47 - 66
- Air changes (per hr): 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
IN-LIFE DATES: From: 2 August 1993 To: 4 September 1993 - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% w/v in distilled water
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% w/v in distilled water
- No. of animals per dose:
- number of animals in test group: 20
number of animals in negative control group: 10 - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Four animals were intradermally injected with preparations of test material (1%, 5%, 10% or 25% w/v in distilled water). The highest concentration that did not cause local necrosis, ulceration or systemic toxicity, was selected for the intradermal induction stage of the main study. For selection of concentration for topical induction two guinea pigs (intradermally injected with Freund's Complete Adjuvant nine days earlier) were treated with four preparations of the test material (75%, 50%, 25% and 10% w/w in distilled water). The highest concentration producing only mild to moderate dermal irritation after a 48-hour occlusive exposure, was selected for the topical induction stage of the main study. For selection of concentration for topical challenge four preparations of the test material (75%, 50%, 25% and 10% w/w in distilled water) were applied occlusively to the flanks of two guinea pigs for a period of 24 hours. These guinea pigs did not form part of the main study but had been treated identically to the control animals of the main study, up to Day 14. The highest nonirritant concentration of the test material and one lower concentration were selected for the topical challenge stage of the main study.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
A row of three injections (0.1 ml each) was made on each side of the mid-line. The injections were:
i) Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water in the ratio 1:1.
ii) a 5% (w/v) dilution of test material in distilled water.
iii) a 5% (w/v) dilution of test material in a 1:1 preparation of
Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water.
Approximately 24 and 48 hours after intradermal injection the degree of erythema at the test material injection sites were evaluated according to the scale from Draize J.H. (1959).
On day 6, the nuchal region was clipped and shaved. A volume of 0.5 ml of sodium laurylsulphate (10% w/w in petrolatum) was applied in order to provoke an in flammatory response. The treatment sites remained non-occluded.
One week later, the same area on the shoulder region used previously for intradermal injections was treated with a topical application of the test material formulation (75% w/w in distilled water). The test material formulation (0.2 - 0.3 ml) was applied on filter paper (approximate size 40 mm x 20 mm) which was held in place by a strip of surgical adhesive tape (approximate size 60 mm x 25 mm) and covered with an overlapping length of aluminium foil. The patch and foil were further secured by a strip of elastic adhesive bandage (approximate size 250 mm x 35 mm) wound in a double layer around the torso of each animal . This occlusive dressing was kept in place for 48 hours. The treatment sites were decontaminated with distilled water after patch removal due to the toxicity of the test material.
Erythematous reactions were quantified one and twenty-four hours following removal of the patches using the scale from Draize J.H. (1959).
Control animals were treated in the same way except for exposure to the test material.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
On Day 21, an approximately 50 mm x70 mm area on both flanks of each animal, was clipped free of hair. A quantity of 0.1 - 0.2 ml of the test material formulation (75% w/w in distilled water) was applied to the shorn right flank of each animal on a square of filter paper (approximate size 20 mm x 20 mm) which was held in place by a strip of surgical adhesive tape (approximate size 40 mm x 50 mm). To ensure that the maximum non-irritant concentration was used at challenge, the test material at a concentration of 50% w/w in distilled water was also similarly applied to a separate skin site on the right shorn flank. The vehicle alone was similarly applied to the left shorn flank. The patches were occluded with an overlapping length of aluminium foil and secured by a strip of elastic adhesive bandage (approximate size 250 mm x 75 mm) wound in a double layer around the torso of each animal. After 24 hours, the dressing was carefully removed and discarded. The challenge sites were swabbed with cotton wool soaked in distilled water to remove residual material. The vehicle sites were similarly swabbed. Approximately 24 and 48 hours after challenge dressing removal erythematous reactions were quantified using the Draize scale. - Challenge controls:
- see details on study design
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- DNCB
- Positive control results:
- 10 test group females and 5 control females were treated with the following preparations of 2,4-Dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) for the induction and challenge phases: Intradermal Induction (Day 0): 0.5% (w/v) in arachis oil B.P; Topical Induction (Day 7): 0.75% (w/v) in absolute ethanol; Topical Challenge (Day 21): 0.25% (w/v) in absolute ethanol. The known contact sensitiser, 2,4-Dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB), produced a 90% (9/10) sensitisation rate.
- Reading:
- other: 1st and 2nd
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 50% and 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: other: 1st and 2nd. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 50% and 75%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- other: 1st and 2nd
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 50% and 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: other: 1st and 2nd. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 50% and 75%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- In a guinea pig maximisation test, TMAP showed no skin reaction after intradermal and topical induction. As a result, TMAP is considered to have no skin sensitizing properties.
- Executive summary:
TMAP was tested for skin sensitising properties in a guinea pig maximisation test according to OECD 406 guideline. Twenty females were used for the test substance and 10 females were included for control treatment. Intradermal induction was done by intradermal injection of 5% TMAP (w/v) in distilled water, followed by dermal application of 10% SDS after 6 days. On Day 7, treatment was followed by topical induction of 75% TMAP (w/w) in distilled water, by using an occlusive dressing for 48 hours. On Day 21, animals were challenged by dermal application of 75% and 50% in distilled water on separate skin sites (under occlusion). Skin reaction was scored according to Draize after 24h and after 48h after challenge. No effects on body weight gain was observed. After intradermal induction, very slight to well-defined erythema was noted in all test group animals after 24 hours, and very slight erythema was noted after 48 hours in 11/20 animals. After topical challenge, no skin reactions were noted at the 24h and the 48h observations. Based on these results, TMAP is considered not to be a skin sensitizer.
Reference
Maximum concentration not causing irritating effects in the range-finding test: 75%
Based on the results of the range-finding test, the following concentrations were selected for the main study:
intradermal induction: 5% (w/v) in distilled water
topical induction: 75% (w/w) in distilled water
topical challenge : 75% and 50% (w/w) in distilled water
Main study:
Signs of irritation during induction: very slight to well-defined erythema was noted at the induction sites of all test group animals one hour after dressing removal.
Very slight erythema was noted at the induction sites of nine test group animals at 24 -hour observation. Other skin reactions noted at the induction sites of test group animals were bleeding and a hardened light brown-coloured scab.
No skin reactions were noted at the treatment sites of the control group animals at the 1- and 24 -hour observations.
Bodyweight gains of guinea pigs in the test group, between Day 0 and Day 24, were comparable to those observed in the control group animals over the same period.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
TMAP was tested for skin sensitising properties in a guinea pig maximisation test according to OECD 406 guideline. Twenty females were used for the test substance and 10 females were included for control treatment. Intradermal induction was done by intradermal injection of 5% TMAP (w/v) in distilled water, followed by dermal application of 10% SDS after 6 days. On Day 7, treatment was followed by topical induction of 75% TMAP (w/w) in distilled water, by using an occlusive dressing for 48 hours. On Day 21, animals were challenged by dermal application of 75% and 50% in distilled water on separate skin sites (under occlusion). Skin reaction was scored according to Draize after 24h and after 48h after challenge. No effects on body weight gain was observed. After intradermal induction, very slight to well-defined erythema was noted in all test group animals after 24 hours, and very slight erythema was noted after 48 hours in 11/20 animals. After topical challenge, no skin reactions were noted at the 24h and the 48h observations. Based on these results, TMAP is considered not to be a skin sensitizer.
It is of note that TMAP is the same test substance as TMHP (tetramethylammonium hydrogen phthalate).
Migrated from Short description of key information:
A reliable skin sensitisation study is available, performed according to EC/ OECD guidelines and GLP principles. Based on the results, TMAP is considered not to be a skin sensitizer. The test substance is only indicated by abbreviation, no information on test substance purity (Klimisch 2).
Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
One study available.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the absense of sensitising properties, tetramethylammonium hydrogen phthalate is not classified for skin sensitisation according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures.
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.