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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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.
Reaction mass of N-(4-(bis(4-(methylamino)phenyl)methylene)cyclohexa-2,5-dienylidene)-N-methylmethanaminium acetate and [4-[[4-(dimethylamino)phenyl][4-(methylamino)phenyl]methylene]cyclohexa-2,5-dien-1-ylidene]dimethylammonium acetate and [4-[bis[4-(dimethylamino)phenyl]methylene]-2,5-cyclohexadien-1-ylidene]dimethylammonium acetate
EC number: 944-191-7 | CAS number: -
- 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
eye irritation, in vitro BCOP, discolouration of the cornea, corrosive
skin irritation, in vivo, rabbits, corrosive
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vivo
- Remarks:
- in vivo test
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: see 'Remark'
- Remarks:
- Test procedure in accordance with national standard methods with acceptable restrictions, study well documented; significance limited due to substance-induced coloration of the skin, which didn't allow correct reading of skin reactions; skin reactions could be caused by other components of the product (acetic acid).
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Method: Draize Testaccording to: Federal Register 38, No. 187, §1500.41, p.27019 of Sep 27, 1973
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- Vienna White
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS- Source: Gaukler- Weight at study initiation: female: 3.1 kg/ male: 3.2 kg
- Type of coverage:
- occlusive
- Preparation of test site:
- not specified
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- no
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 24 hour(s)
- Observation period:
- 8 days
- Number of animals:
- 6 (4 male/2 female)
- Details on study design:
- The undiluted test substance was applied to a 2.5 x 2.5 cm patch (0.5 ml) .
- Irritation parameter:
- erythema score
- Basis:
- animal:
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- not reversible
- Remarks on result:
- other: short observation period (8 days)
- Irritation parameter:
- edema score
- Basis:
- animal:
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- > 1.83 - < 2.17
- Reversibility:
- not reversible
- Remarks on result:
- other: short observation period (8 days)
- Interpretation of results:
- irritating
- Remarks:
- Migrated information
- Conclusions:
- The substance was tested following an itnernal procedure Draize test. The substance was tested following an itnernal procedure Draize test. Under the experimental conditions the substance showed an high erythema (>4) score and a moderate edema.
- Executive summary:
The substance was tested following an itnernal procedure Draize test. Six NZW rabbits (4 males and 2 females) were expsoed to the tested substance in a patch test for 24 hours and observed for 8 days. Under the experimental conditions the substance showed an high erythema score (ca. 4) and a moderate edema.
Reference
SKIN FINDINGS AFTER 24 AND 72 HOURS:
|
Skin |
Time |
Animal No. |
|||||
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|||
Erythema |
Intact |
24 h |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
72 h |
* |
* |
* |
4 |
* |
* |
||
Abraded |
24 h |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
* |
|
72 h |
* |
4 |
* |
* |
* |
* |
||
Edema |
Intact |
24 h |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
72 h |
2 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
||
Abraded |
24 h |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
72 h |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
* The irritation index could not be calculated exactly due to substance-induced coloration of the skin. Primary irrition index of the skin: 17.83/4 = 4.46.
SKIN FINDINGS AFTER 8 DAYS:
Animal No. |
Inctact |
Abraded |
1 |
Scaling |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
2 |
Severe scaling |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
3 |
Erythema +, spotted |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
4 |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
5 |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
6 |
Superficial necrosis with crusts |
Necrosis with crusts |
Individual scores for erythema could not be determined due to substance-induced coloration of the skin. The mean edema score (24, 72 h) was 1.3 in 1 of 6 animals, 2.0 in 4 of 6 animals and 3.0 in 1 of 6 animals. At the end of the observation period (day 8) scaling (in 2 animals) or superficial necrosis with crusts (in 3 animals) was observed. Only cutaneous effects observed after treatment of intact skin are considered relevant for hazard assessment and are described in detail.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (corrosive)
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:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Study following official guidelines performed on a similar substance
- Justification for type of information:
- Basic Violet 1 Acetate is produced and put on the market as acetic acid aqueous solution. The solid form without acetic acid and water is never produced. Solvent removal in liquid basic dyes is not always feasible and it ends with a substance with acetic acid crystals that is not representative of the composition of the real basic dye. Therefore,a s explained in the read across document, the test was performed on analogue substance 1 powder form.
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 437 (Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Appearance: violet powderStorage: The test substance should be stored in dry room in dark in closed container at the room temperature.Stability / Expiration date: 12/2020
- Vehicle:
- other: other: 20% tested material in a 0.9% sodium chloride solution
- Details on study design:
- Bovine eyes source:Breeding service CHOVSERVIS a.s., division TORO® Hlavečník, Hradec Králové, Czech RepublicEyes were collected by slaughterhouse employees.The eyes were enucleated as soon as possible after death. No detergent was used. Only healthy animals (12 to 60 months old) considered suitable for entry into the human food chain were used as a source of corneas for use in the BCOP test. The risk of contamination was minimized (e.g., by keeping the container containing the eyes on ice, by adding antibiotics to the HBSS used to store the eyes during transport (e.g., penicillin at 100 IU/mL and streptomycin at 100 μg/mL).The time interval between collection of the eyes and use of corneas in the BCOP was minimized (typically collected and used on the same day). The results were based on the selection criteria for the eyes, as well as the positive and negative control responses. All eyes used in the assay were from the same group of eyes collected on a specific day.Selection criteria for eyes used in BCOP:The eyes, once they arrive at the laboratory, were carefully examined for defects including scratched, and neovascularisation. Only corneas from eyes free of such defects were used.The isolated corneas, after achieve normal metabolic activity (inductive incubation at 32 ± 1°C for one hour), were examined again. The corneas that show macroscopic tissue damage (e.g., scratches, pigmentation, neovascularization) or a baseline opacity >7 opacity units were discarded.From 21 eyes the 6 eyes were eliminated after inductive incubation, because the baseline opacity values were >7. Nine corneas were used for the study (the corneas No. 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16,), 3 eyes was superfluous and remaining 3 were used for the testing of another substance.Number of corneas per group:Exposed group (test substance) - 3 corneas (No. 8, 9, 11)Positive control group (20% Imidazole) – 3 corneas (No. 12, 14, 16)Negative control group (0.9% NaCl) – 3 corneas (No. 5, 7, 13)Positive control substance: imidazoleNegative control substance: 0.9% NaClProcedure scheme:Selection of corneas, mounting in holders → incubation with EMEM 1hour (32 ± 1°C) → removed EMEM, measurement of baseline opacity → treatment by positive and negative control substances and test substance (incubation 4 hours) → washing of epithelium, measurement of opacity after application → application of sodium fluorescein (5 mg/ml), incubation 1.5 hour (32 ± 1°C) → measurement of absorbance (490 nm).Preparation of the eyes:Corneas free of defects were dissected with a 2 to 3 mm rim of sclera remaining to assist in subsequent handling, with care taken to avoid damage to the corneal epithelium an endothelium. Isolated corneas were mounted in specially designed corneal holders that consisted of anterior and posterior compartments, which interfaced with the epithelial and endothelial sides of the cornea, respectively.Both chambers were filled to excess with pre-warmed Eagle's Minimum Essential Medium (EMEM). The device was then equilibrated at 32 ± 1°C for at least one hour in water bath to allow the corneas to equilibrate with the medium and to achieve normal metabolic activity, to the extent possible. Following the equilibration period, fresh pre-warmed EMEM was added to both chambers and baseline opacity readings were taken for each cornea. Any corneas that showed macroscopic tissue damage (e.g., scratches, pigmentation, neovascularization) or an opacity >7 opacity units were discarded.Each test group (test substance, concurrent negative and positive controls) consisted of the three eyes. The three corneas with opacity values close to the median value for all corneas were selected as negative control corneas. The remaining corneas were then distributed into treatment and positive control groups.Closed-chamber method was used, because the test substance was applicable by micropipette. The test substance (750 µL of application form) to cover the epithelial side of the cornea is introduced into the anterior chamber through the dosing holes on the top surface of the chamber, and the holes were subsequently sealed with the chamber plugs during the exposure.Control substances:Concurrent negative controls and positive controls were included in experiment. The controls were included in the BCOP test method so that nonspecific changes in the test system could be detected and to provide a baseline for the assay endpoints (see chapter 3.3, 3.4).Post-exposure:After the exposure period, the negative control and the positive control substance was removed from the anterior chamber with EMEM (containing phenol red- the effectiveness of rinsing acidic or alkaline materials). The corneas were given a final rinse with EMEM (without phenol red). The EMEM (without phenol red) was used as a final rinse to ensure removal of the phenol red from the anterior chamber prior to the opacity measurement. The anterior chamber was then refilled with fresh EMEM without phenol red. The opacity and permeability of each cornea were recorded.The test substance was removed from the anterior chamber with EMEM – repeatedly, because the test substance is coloured . Subsequently the test substance was removed mechanically using a cotton swab and brush. The corneas (applied the test substance) were also rinsed with EMEM (containing phenol red). Lastly EMEM (without phenol red) was used for final rinsing. The test substance was complete removal, but corneas stayed coloured by the test substance. The anterior chamber was then refilled with fresh EMEM without phenol red. The opacity and permeability of each cornea were recorded.Endpoints measured:Opacity: the amount of light transmission through the cornea. Corneal opacity was measured quantitatively with the aid of an opacitometer (Opacitometer, MC2 - Le spécialiste du laboratoire – France) resulting in opacity values measured on a continuous scale.Permeability: the amount of sodium fluorescein dye that penetrates all corneal cell layers (i.e., the epithelium on the outer cornea surface through the endothelium on the inner cornea surface) measured indirectly using visible light spectrophotometry. 1 mL sodium fluorescein solution (5 mg/mL) was added to the anterior chamber of the corneal holder, which interfaced with the epithelial side of the cornea, while the posterior chamber, which interfaced with the endothelial side of the cornea, is filled with fresh EMEM. The holder was incubated in horizontal position for 1.5 hours at 32 ± 1 ºC.The amount of sodium fluorescein that crosses into the posterior chamber was quantitatively measured with the aid of UV/VIS spectrophotometry (Spectrophotometer GENESYSTM 10 UV/VIS Scanning). The values of absorbance measured at 490 nm were recorded as optical density (OD490) values. This term was used because the measuring is performed with visible light spectrophotometer using a standard 1 cm path length.Mean opacity:Opacity values of treated corneas were corrected by subtracting individual background opacity values and the mean opacity is calculated.Mean permeability:Mean OD value of treated corneas was corrected by subtracting the mean OD value of negative control and the mean permeability is calculated.IVIS calculation:Resulting mean opacity and OD490 values for each treatment group was combined in an empirically-derived formula to calculate an in vitro irritancy score (IVIS) for each treatment group as follows:IVIS = mean opacity value + (15 x mean permeability OD490 value)
- Irritation parameter:
- in vitro irritation score
- Run / experiment:
- test group
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable
- Remarks:
- IVIS could not be calculated for the tested substance since no opacity values could be measured. The opacity after test substance application could not be measured since corneas have been coloured dark violet
- Irritation parameter:
- in vitro irritation score
- Run / experiment:
- negative control
- Value:
- ca. 2.05
- Irritation parameter:
- in vitro irritation score
- Run / experiment:
- positive control
- Value:
- ca. 81.43
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of opacity differences over corneas # 8,9,11. Test group
- Remarks on result:
- other: The irritation parameter is cornea opacity. The opacity after test substance application could not be measured since corneas have been coloured dark violet.Opacity differences resulted equal to: cornea #8 : 195, cornea #9: 196 and cornea#11: 196
- Remarks:
- The irritation parameter is cornea opacity. The opacity after test substance application could not be measured since corneas have been coloured dark violet.Opacity differences resulted equal to: cornea #8 : 195, cornea #9: 196 and cornea#11: 196
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of opacity differences over corneas # 5,7,13. Negative control
- Value:
- ca. 1.67
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- The irritation parameter is the corneal difference opacity
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of opacity differences over corneas # 12, 14 and 16. Positive control
- Value:
- ca. 54.97
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- The irritation parameter is the corneal difference opacity
- Irritation parameter:
- fluorescein retention score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of permeability differences over corneas n#8, 9 and 11. Test group
- Value:
- ca. 0.026
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Irritation parameter is cornea permeability
- Irritation parameter:
- fluorescein retention score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of permeability differences over corneas # 5,7,13, negative control
- Value:
- ca. 0.025
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Irritation parameter is cornea permeability
- Irritation parameter:
- fluorescein retention score
- Run / experiment:
- mean value of permeability differences over corneas # 12, 14 and 16. Positive control
- Value:
- ca. 1.92
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Irritation parameter is cornea permeability
- Conclusions:
- The substance was tested for eye irritation following OECD 437 in vitro test. Under the experimental conditions the IVIS value could not be calculated. However, the discolouration of the cornea triggers the classification of the substance as corrosive following Regulation 1272/2008
- Executive summary:
The substance was tested for eye irritation following OECD 437. Bovine Cornea collected directly from the slaugther were examined for defects and exposed to the tested substance suspended in a 0.9% solution of the tested material (at 20%). Negative and positive control were concurrent with NaCl and imidazole, respectively.The In Vitro Irritancy Score (IVIS) for test substancecould not becalculated. The basic values for the IVIS calculation (opacity values) could not be measured because of colouring of corneas which were applied by the test substance.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (irritating)
Additional information
Analogue substance 1 was tested following OECD 437 (R&C; 2016) for in-vitro eye irritation. Discolouration of the corneas was observed which did not allow to measure corneal opacity.
Analogue substance 2 was tested following internal guidelines (BASF, 1978) for in vivo skin irritation. High score erythema (ca. 4) was observed.
Effects on skin irritation/corrosion: corrosive
Effects on eye irritation: corrosive
Justification for classification or non-classification
According to Regulation 1272/2008 substance are classified as producing irreversible effects on the eye/serious damage to eyes (Category 1) when, in studies performed on animals, cornea lesions and other severe reactions (e.g., destruction of cornea) observed at any time during the test, as well as persistent corneal opacity, discoloration of the cornea by a dye substance, adhesion, pannus, and interference with the function of the iris or other effects that impair sight are observed. In this context, persistent lesions are considered those which are not fully reversible within an observation period of normally 21 days. Analogue substance 1 was tested in an in-vitro test showing discolouration of the cornea and in a conservative approach the classification used for animal testing is followed, i.e. H318 Category 1.
According to Regulation 1272/2008 a substance is classified as skin irritant cat2 when:
Mean value of ≥ 2,3 - ≤ 4,0 for erythema/ eschar or for oedema in at least 2 of 3 tested animals from gradings at 24, 48 and 72 hours after patch removal or, if reactions are delayed, from grades on 3 consecutive days after the onset of skin reactions.
Based on the test results (erythema ca. 4, edeam 1.8 -2.3) analogue substance 2 is classified as H315 Category 2.
Based on the read across considerations same results apply to Basic Violet 1 Acetate.
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.