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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 231-209-7 | CAS number: 7446-81-3
- 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
Based on data from the structural analogue acrylic acid, the test substance does not have a potential to cause skin sensitization in animals or humans.
There is no information available on the potential of the test substance to produce respiratory sensitization in animals or humans. Based on its physico-chemical properties (extremely low vapour pressure and solid substance), respiratory sensitization in humans is estimated to be very unlikely.
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:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The study was conducted according to the method described by Klecak (1977) and Klecak and Geleick (1977).
Klecak (1977), Dermatoxicology and Pharmacology. Eds, Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Klecak and Geleick (1977), Journal of the Society of Cosmetic Chemists, 28: 53. - GLP compliance:
- no
- Type of study:
- Freund's complete adjuvant test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- A reliable in vivo test was available before the implementation of the OECD 429 method.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Name of test material (as cited in study report): Acrylic acid
- Analytical purity: 55% (gas chromatigraphy) / >98% after destillation procedure.
- Impurities (concentrations): 45% (gas chromatography) / < 2% after destillation procedure. - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- other: Himalayan white and Dunkin-Hartley (two strains due to the shortage of animals)
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Himalayan white (Inst. for Biomedical Research, Füllinsdorf, Switzerland) / Dunkin-Hartley (Olac Ltd., Bicester, England)
- Weight at study initiation: 350-450 g
- Housing: in pairs
- Diet (ad libitum): Pellet
- Water (ad libitum): water containing vitamin C - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- other: Refer to Details on study design (Traditional tests)
- Concentration / amount:
- Induction: 0.5 M
- Day(s)/duration:
- On days 0, 2, 4, 7 and 9
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- other: Refer to Details on study design (Traditional tests)
- Concentration / amount:
- no concentration given
- Day(s)/duration:
- day 21 (right flank) and day 35 (left flank)
- No. of animals per dose:
- 8
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Skin irritation caused by a single open application was determined for Acrylic acid in FCA pretreated animals (not participating in the sensitization procedure). On the clipped flank of 8 animals 0.025 mL of the test substance was applied with a pipette in progressively diluted (one third) concentrations, each in areas of 2 cm2 marked with a circular stamp. A mixture of 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and 1 part of peanut oil by volume (Aramek) was used as a solvent. The reactions were read after 24 and 48 h. The maximum nonirritating concentration (m.n.i.c.) was determined, which is the highest concentration not causing a macroscopic reaction in any of the animals.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
After the acid was emulsified in FCA, an equal volume of distilled water was added. On days 0, 2, 4, 7 and 9 intradermal injections with 0.1 mL of this emulsion were given in the shoulder area from the left to the right paw. Control animals were similarly treated with FCA, blended with an equal volume of distilled water.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
All the animals were tested epicutaneously on day 21 (right flank) and day 35 (left flank). On day 21 right flank and on day 35 left flank of both groups were shaved. The test substance and the vehicle was applied in an amount of 0.025 mL with a pipette on an area of 2 cm2, marked with a circular stamp. The test sites were left uncovered and read at 24 h and 48 h. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- various monoacrylates
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Remarks on result:
- other: Test group (Acrylic acid (destillate, >98%)
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Remarks on result:
- other: Test group (Acrylic acid containing an unidentified impurity of 45%)
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 6
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- various acrylates have been tested and were positive (result from n-hexyl acrylate)
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- 1984
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The study was conducted according to the method described by Klecak (1977) and Van der Walle (1983).
Klecak (1977), Dermatoxicology and Pharmacology. Eds, Marzulli F N, Maibach H I. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Van der Walle H. B., Waegemaekers T. H., Bensink T. (1983), Contact Dermatitis 9: 10-20. - GLP compliance:
- no
- Type of study:
- other: modified Freund's complete adjuvant test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- At the time of the study there was only the maximization test available and was recommended by regulatory authorities.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Name of test material (as cited in study report): Acrylic acid from Merck Schuchardt, impure
- Analytical purity: < 93% (GC)
- Impurities (identity and concentrations): alpha, beta-Diacryloxypropionic acid, 7% (analytically determined), 5-hexenoic acid (identified but not quantified) - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Strain: Hartley outbred
- Source: Broekman Institute, Netherlands
- Weight at study initiation: 400 g
- Housing: in pairs in steel cages.
- Diet (ad libitum): Pellet food (Hope Farms, Netherlands)
- Water (ad libitum): yes - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- water
- Remarks:
- distilled
- Concentration / amount:
- 1.2% / 0.1 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 0, 5, and 9
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.3 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 21. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration.
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.3 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 35. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration.
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #3
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.3 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 49. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration.
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 1 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 21. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 1 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 35. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #3
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- methyl ethyl ketone
- Remarks:
- 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and one part of peanut oil by volume
- Concentration / amount:
- 1 M / 0.025 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 49. Readings were performed after 24 and 48 h of administration.
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- 8
- Details on study design:
- MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: Three
- Exposure period: day 0, 5, and 9
- Test groups: impure acrylic acid, 5-hexenoic acid, a,b-diacryloxypropionic acid
- Control group: no substance was added
- Site: in the shaved nuchal area
- Frequency of applications: not specified
- Duration: 9 days
- Concentrations: 0.17 M for all test substances
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: Three
- Day(s) of challenge: Day 21, 35, and 49
- Exposure period: 28 days
- Test groups: impure acrylic acid, 5-hexenoic acid, a,b-diacryloxypropionic acid (DAPA)
- Control group: all test compounds
- Site: shaved contralateral flank
- Concentrations: impure acrylic acid (0.3 M, 1 M), DAPA (0.01 M, 0.03 M), 5-hexenoic acid (1 M, 3 M)
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 h and 48 h - Challenge controls:
- Challenge controls received all tested compounds, i.e. impure acrylic acid, DAPA (a,b-diacryloxypropionic acid), and 5-hexenoic acid. Concentrations of the challenge for the control group are not specified.
- Reading:
- other: Day 21
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1 M
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- impure acrylic acid
- Reading:
- other: Day 35
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1 M
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- impure acrylic acid
- Reading:
- other: Day 21
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.3 M
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- impure acrylic acid
- Reading:
- other: Day 49
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.3 M
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- impure acrylic acid
- Reading:
- other: Day 21
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- no data
- Remarks on result:
- not measured/tested
- Interpretation of results:
- study cannot be used for classification
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- - Principle of test: Modified Maguire Method (Maguire H. C., The Bioassay of Contact Allergens in the Guinea Pig, J. Soc. Cosmet. Chem., 24, 151, 1973).
- Short description of test conditions: The Maguire method derives from the "split adjuvant" technique, in which chemical allergen and Freund' s adjuvant are administered separately to the skin rather than as an emulsion. A typical test procedure consisted of topical application of a 0.1 mL aliquot of the test material to the clipped and depilated backs of 10 guinea pigs four times in 10 days. At the time of the third application, 0.2 mL of Freund's adjuvant was injected intradermally at one point adjacent to the insult site. After a 2-week rest period, the animals were challenged on the clipped flanks with the test material on one flank and a solvent (if used) on the other flank.
- Parameters analysed / observed: The challenge site was evaluated for erythema and edema at 24 and 48 hours. A moderate erythema and/or edema in two or more animals was considered sufficient to classify the test material as a potential human skin sensitizer. - GLP compliance:
- no
- Type of study:
- split adjuvant test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- A reliable in vivo test was available before the implementation of the OECD 429 method.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Name of test material (as cited in study report): Acrylic acid
- Analytical purity: no data - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- no data
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.1 mL aliquot of the test substance
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- no data
- Concentration / amount:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Prior to conducting the sensitization test, the test material was applied as received to the clipped flanks of animals to determine if primary irritation would occur. If significant irritation was observed, dilutions of the test material were made in a suitable solvent. The highest concentration which did not cause primary irritation was used for the sensitization test.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Control group: For induction, 10 guinea pigs were routinely subjected to the same dosing regimen with the diglycidyl ether of 2,2-di-(p,p'-hydroxyphenyl)propane (DER* 331 Epoxy Resin -- Dow Chemical U .S .A .), a known sensitizer to serve as a positive control .
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- Control group: Challenge was performed two weeks after the last injection of the induction series. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 2,2-Di-(p,p'-hydroxyphenyl)propane didlycidyl ether (DER* 331 Epoxy Resin -- Dow Chemical U .S .A .)
- Positive control results:
- The positive reference substance ( DER* 331 Epoxy Resin) induced moderate skin sensitization.
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.1 mL
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- no data
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Group:
- negative control
- Remarks on result:
- not measured/tested
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
Referenceopen allclose all
Table 1: Sensitizing potential in the modified Freund's Adjuvant Test
Test substance | Induction | Challenge concentration*) | Number of sensitized animals/number of tested animals | ||
Day 21 | Day 35 | Day 49 | |||
Acrylic acid, from Merck Schuchardt | 3•0.17 M (= 1.2%) | 1 M 0.3 M | 8/8 1/8 | 8/8 N.T. | N.T. 7/8 |
DAPA | 1•0.17 M**) (= 3.6%) | 0.03 M 0.01 M | 8/8 7/8 | N.T. 7/8 | N.T. 7/8 |
5-hexenoic acid | 3•0.17 M (= 1.9%) | 3 M 1 M | 0/8 0/8 | 0/8 0/8 | 0/8 0/8 |
controls | 3•FCA dist. water | All the above compounds | 0/8 | 0/8 | 0/8 |
N.T. = not tested
*) = In Aramek, 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone, one part peanut oil by volume
**) = Different induction procedure
Table 1: Results of the test group
Substance | animals tested | animals sensitized |
Acrylic acid (0.1 mL aliquot) | 10 | 0 |
Sensitization with the test substance was not observed in this test.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
No experimental data on the test substance is available.
Sodium acrylate is the sodium salt of acrylic acid, only the proton of the hydroxy group has been replaced by a sodium ion in NaA. Both are equally charged ions.pH dependent sodium acrylate dissociates into acrylic acid and sodium hydroxid in aqueous media.
According to Henderson-Hasselbalch: pH = pKs + lg (c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid))
With the pKa-value of acylic acid = 4.25.
The ratio c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid) was caluclated according to the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation: c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid)) = 10 pH - pKs
pH 1 : c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid)) = 10 1 – 4,25 = 0,00056; ~ 99,94 % as acrylic acid
pH 3 : c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid)) = 10 3 – 4,25 = 0,056; t ~ 94,7 % as acrylic acid
pH 5 : c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid) = 10 5 – 4,25 = 5,62; ~ 15,1 % as acrylic acid
pH 7 : c(NaAcrylate) / c(Acrylic acid) = 10 7 – 4,25 = 562,3; ~ 0,2 % as acrylic acid
Especially after oral uptake in the acidic environment in the stomach sodium acrylate is nearly completely dissociated to acrylic acid. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the human health hazard data of acrylic acid for the assessment of sodium acrylate. In respect to the hazard data on ecotoxicity, using the acrylic acid data assuming a complete dissociation reflects the worst case.
Acrylic acid was tested in guinea pigs using a modified Split Adjuvant Test procedure. The highest concentration which did not cause primary irritation was used but no data were given on the test concentrations. Ten animals per test received a 0.1 ml aliquot of acrylic acid to the backs four times in 10 days. At the time of the third application, 0.2 ml Freund's adjuvant was injected at one point adjacent to the insult site. After a 2-week rest period, the guinea pigs were challenged with the test material on one flank and a solvent (if used) on the other flank. The challenge site was evaluated for erythema and oedema at 24 and 48 hours. Acrylic acid was negative (0/10) (Rao et al., 1981).
Van der Walle et al. (1982) reported a sample of commercial grade acrylic acid to be sensitizing in a Freund’s Complete Adjuvant test. 8/8 guinea pigs were sensitized. However, analysis by gas chromatography revealed an impurity of 45 % in this sample. The sample of acrylic acid was distilled in vacuo and the sensitized animals were tested with the distillate (containing >98% acrylic acid) and with the residue. None of the animals reacted to the distillate but all the animals reacted to the residue. The identity of the allergen in this residue was under investigation at the time of publication of this paper.
In a modified Freund's Complete Adjuvant test 8 guinea pigs/group received 3 intradermal injections during the induction phase on days 0, 5 and 9 (the test substance was mixed with FCA in a volume of 0.1 ml). Non-irritant test concentrations were used for challenge at day 21. The test concentrations for intradermal injections were 3 x 0,17 M (1.2%) in water and for challenge 1 and 0.3 M in Aramek, a mixture of 2 parts methyl ethyl ketone and 1 part of peanut oil. Distilled acrylic acid was negative but commercial acrylic acid proved to be a strong skin sensitizer. The skin reactions were due to the presence of varying quantities (up to 7%) of a,ß-diacryloxypropionic acid (DAPA). Positive skin reactions were still present after a third challenge on day 49 (Waegemakers and Van der Walle, 1984).
Based on the presented data, acrylic acid does not have a skin sensitizing potential in animal studies. Positive test results obtained with commercial grade samples of the compound were caused by the presence of the impurity DAPA.
Based on the structural similiarties to acrylic acid it is anticipated that the test substance will not cause skin sensitisation in animals and humans.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Classification, Labelling, and Packaging Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008
The available experimental test data are reliable and suitable for classification purposes under Regulation 1272/2008. As a result, the substance is not considered to be classified for sensitization under Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, as amended for the fourteenth time in Regulation (EC) No. 2020/217.
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.