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: 223-267-7
CAS number: 3794-83-0
Total litter losses
occurred very rarely throughout the study and they showed no
relationship to dosage of the test substance. Only two litters
approached being totally lost in all test groups. One incident
occurred in the untreated controls in which two to three implants in
one female were dead and another occurred in the high dose group (1000
mg/kg) in which only one of five implants was alive at necropsy. Both
litter losses originated during the third week of mating and were
attributed to a malfunction in the individual animals and therefore
were not considered test-related.
The number of deaths
in females mated with males given the test substance did not differ
significantly from those in concurrent controls for any of the mating
of all test groups compared favorably with the controls. As in the
examination of individual female data, individual poor performance of
the sire which was not test related could easily be detected. For
example one male in the mid test group failed to impregnate a female
until the fifth week of mating. In the final two weeks of the study,
three of the four females mated with this male mouse conceived but
only carried an average of six implants per pregnancy. The average
number of implants for the rest of the group was 8.9 for the entire
study and 9.0 for all other sires combined during the same two weeks
of mating. The fact that eighteen implants sired by the male mouse
mentioned above produced no fetal deaths provides additional evidence
supporting the decision that the performance of this male was not test
When it came to
conception rates, implants and fetal mortality, little variation
occurred between test groups and controls for any of the parameters
The mutagenic index
was measured. It was a calculation based on two independent variables,
fetal deaths and total implants, used as a convenient comparison of
group to group performance. No significant differences (P= 0.05.
D.F=1) were found when test group mutagenic indices were compared to
either the vehicle or untreated controls.
Performance and Uterine Content Evaluation by Groups
Total / Average
1675 / 8.37
78 / 0.39
1635 / 8.65
64 / 0.37
EHDP 1.000 mg/kg
1618 / 8.42
74 / 0.39
EHDP 200 mg/kg
1545 / 8.78
66 / 0.38
EHDP 20 mg/kg
1543 / 8.82
53 / 0.30
Lethal Assay Mutagenic Indices
x 100 = Mutagenic Index
Phosphonic acid, P,'-(1 -hydroxyethylidene)bis-,sodium salt was administered orally (0.25 ml volumes) to male mice of the C3D2F1/J strain at three dose levels (1000, 200 and 20 mg/kg) for five consecutive days. The study also included a vehicle control (water) and an untreated group. 20 mice were assigned to each group.
Immediately following treatment, each male was caged with two untreated females for a period seven days and with two fresh females the following week. This procedure was continued for a total of six weeks, thereby encompassing the entire spermatogenic cycle of the mouse, which was purported to be 35 days.
Consequently, each male was mated to twelve females over a six-week period: A total of 240 matings per dose group.
On day 13 or 14 of gestation (as measured from the mid-week of presumptive mating), the females were sacrificed. Total implants, resorptions and dead embryos were enumerated and recorded.
Various parameters such as average number of implants per female, average number of fetal deaths/female, fetal deaths per sire, and percent pregnancy per group were subjected to statistical analysis.
The test substance produced data that were not significantly different from control values in conception rates, total implant averages, fetal death averages, resorption percentage and mutagenic indices.
Therefore, the test substance was considered to be non-mutagenic when administered orally at maximum tolerated doses in the test system employed.
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.
Tällä verkkosivustolla käytetään evästeitä parhaan mahdollisen käyttäjäkokemuksen varmistamiseksi.
Welcome to the ECHA website. This site is not fully supported in Internet Explorer 7 (and earlier versions). Please upgrade your Internet Explorer to a newer version.
Do not show this message again