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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 210-095-2 | CAS number: 605-71-0
- 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
Genetic toxicity: in vitro
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
- Remarks:
- (Q)SAR
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 1986 and 1994
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Justification for type of information:
- The analogue approach was chosen as a suitable method for read-across since the target molecule, 1,5-dinitronapthalene, was not found in any of the existing chemical categories searchable in the following databases -US EPA, OECD, eChemPortal and OECD QSAR Toolbox.
Following that decision, the selection of suitable analogues for the molecule of interest involved the use of structural similarity analysis. These analyses were conducted in the ChemIDplus portal and relied on a quantitative measurement (scored between 0 and 1) after the evaluation of molecules with a structural similarity higher than 95% by the Tanimoto index.
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- other company data
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 017
- Report date:
- 2017
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- no guideline required
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Guideline not specified, summary data from read-across report. These data were peer-reviewed and considered acceptable.
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Read-across endpoint is taken from a collection of data - the GLP compliance is not specified. Studies were conducted in 1986 and 1994.
- Type of assay:
- other: read-across to multiple studies: In vitro Ames; In Vivo test Drosophilia; Bacterial mutagenicity ISSSTY
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- 1-nitronaphthalene
- EC Number:
- 201-684-5
- EC Name:
- 1-nitronaphthalene
- Cas Number:
- 86-57-7
- Molecular formula:
- C10H7NO2
- IUPAC Name:
- 1-nitronaphthalene
- Test material form:
- solid: crystalline
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Read-across molecule, test material specifics are not available.
Method
- Target gene:
- Not specified
Species / strain
- Species / strain / cell type:
- bacteria, other: bacteria, strain not specified
- Additional strain / cell type characteristics:
- not specified
- Metabolic activation:
- not specified
Controls
- Untreated negative controls:
- not specified
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- not specified
- True negative controls:
- not specified
- Positive controls:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Data from read-across summary, controls not specified
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- Results taken from read-across to multiple studies.
Results and discussion
Test results
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- bacteria, other: not specified
- Metabolic activation:
- not specified
- Genotoxicity:
- positive
- Remarks:
- Read-across, detail not available
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Read-across, detail not available
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Read-across, detail not available
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Read-across, detail not available
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Remarks:
- Read-across, detail not available
- Remarks on result:
- other: Positive results in vitro were supported by a positive result in vivo, by a somatic cell test, is considered as evidence to classify when relying on in silico data. Therefore, it is acceptable to classify the substance of interest as a Mutagen Category 2.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Positive in vitro data in the bacterial system (Ames test) is available from the searchable databases for both target and source substances. Peer-reviewed, non-standardised data were considered acceptable for the current evaluation (original publications of Mortelmans et al., 1986 and Mersch-Sunderman et al., 1994).
In vivo mutagenicity potential was also reported in somatic cells of Drosophila for both target and source molecules. The results of the “Wing somatic mutation and recombination”- SMART test in Drosophila revealed that both compounds can cause genetic toxicity by eliciting an increased incidence of homologous somatic recombination. Specifically, 1-nitro-naphthalene was the compound with the strongest genotoxicity and 1,5-dinitronapthalene approximately 333 times less potent than this compound. (original data, peer-reviewed studies (standard), authors Delgado-Rodriguez et al., 1995 available at HSDB database)
The fact that positive results in vitro were supported by a positive result in vivo, by a somatic cell test, is considered by ECHA as enough evidence to lead to classification when the assessment relies upon in silico data. Therefore, it is acceptable to classify the substance of interest as a Mutagen Category 2.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- Positive in vitro data in the bacterial system (Ames test) is available from the searchable databases for both target and source substances. Peer-reviewed, non-standardised data were considered acceptable for the current evaluation (original publications of Mortelmans et al., 1986 and Mersch-Sunderman et al., 1994).
In vivo mutagenicity potential was also reported in somatic cells of Drosophila for both target and source molecules. The results of the “Wing somatic mutation and recombination”- SMART test in Drosophila revealed that both compounds can cause genetic toxicity by eliciting an increased incidence of homologous somatic recombination. Specifically, 1-nitro-naphthalene was the compound with the strongest genotoxicity and 1,5-dinitronapthalene approximately 333 times less potent than this compound. (original data, peer-reviewed studies (standard), authors Delgado-Rodriguez et al., 1995 available at HSDB database)
The fact that positive results in vitro were supported by a positive result in vivo, by a somatic cell test, is considered by ECHA as enough evidence to lead to classification when the assessment relies upon in silico data. Therefore, it is acceptable to classify the substance of interest as a Mutagen Category 2. - Executive summary:
Positive in vitro data in the bacterial system (Ames test) is available from the searchable databases for both target and source substances. Peer-reviewed, non-standardised data were considered acceptable for the current evaluation (original publications of Mortelmans et al., 1986 and Mersch-Sunderman et al., 1994).
In vivo mutagenicity potential was also reported in somatic cells of Drosophila for both target and source molecules. The results of the “Wing somatic mutation and recombination”- SMART test in Drosophila revealed that both compounds can cause genetic toxicity by eliciting an increased incidence of homologous somatic recombination. Specifically, 1-nitro-naphthalene was the compound with the strongest genotoxicity and 1,5-dinitronapthalene approximately 333 times less potent than this compound. (original data, peer-reviewed studies (standard), authors Delgado-Rodriguez et al., 1995 available at HSDB database)
The fact that positive results in vitro were supported by a positive result in vivo, by a somatic cell test, is considered by ECHA as enough evidence to lead to classification when the assessment relies upon in silico data. Therefore, it is acceptable to classify the substance of interest as a Mutagen Category 2.
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.