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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 265-334-3 | CAS number: 65059-45-2
- 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
Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
- Endpoint:
- toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2015
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 221 (Lemna sp. Growth Inhibition Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- None
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- none
- Analytical monitoring:
- yes
- Details on sampling:
- Verification of Test Concentrations
Samples were taken from the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test group on day 0 (from the bulk test preparation) and on day 7 (from the pooled replicates) for quantitative analysis. All samples were stored frozen prior to analysis. Duplicate samples were taken at each occasion and stored frozen for further analysis if necessary. - Vehicle:
- no
- Details on test solutions:
- Range-finding test
A nominal amount of test item (550 mg) was dispersed in 11 liters of culture medium with the aid of propeller stirring at approximately 1500 rpm for 48 hours. After 48 hours the stirring was stopped and any undissolved test item was removed by filtration through a 0.2 µm Sartorius Sartopore filter (first approximate 2 liters discarded in order to pre-condition the filter) to give a 100% v/v saturated solution. A series of dilutions was made from this saturated solution to give further test concentrations of 10 and 1.0% v/v saturated solution.
Each of the prepared concentrations was inverted several times to ensure adequate mixing and homogeneity.
Definitive test
A nominal amount of test item (550 mg) was dispersed in 11 liters of culture medium with the aid of propeller stirring at approximately 1500 rpm for 48 hours. After 48 hours the stirring was stopped and any undissolved test item was removed by filtration through a 0.2 µm Sartorius Sartopore filter (first approximate 2 liters discarded in order to pre-condition the filter) to give the required test concentration of 100% v/v saturated solution. - Test organisms (species):
- Lemna minor
- Details on test organisms:
- The test was carried out using Lemna minor. A culture of Lemna minor was obtained from Canadian Phycological Culture Centre, University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada. Cultures were maintained in the laboratory by the periodic replenishment of culture medium. The culture was maintained in the laboratory at a temperature of 24 ± 1ºC under continuous illumination (intensity approximately 7000 lux) for at least 7 days prior to the start of the test.
- Test type:
- static
- Water media type:
- freshwater
- Limit test:
- yes
- Total exposure duration:
- 7 d
- Post exposure observation period:
- None
- Hardness:
- No data
- Test temperature:
- The temperature and light intensity in the incubator were recorded daily. Temperature was maintained at 24 ± 2 ºC throughout the test.
- pH:
- The pH of each control and test flask was recorded on Day 0 and Day 7. The temperature and light intensity in the incubator were recorded daily.
- Dissolved oxygen:
- No data
- Salinity:
- No data
- Nominal and measured concentrations:
- Range-finding test: Nominal test concentrations of 1.0, 10 and 100% v/v saturated solution
Definitive test: 100% v/v saturated solution - Details on test conditions:
- Culture Medium
The culture medium used for both the range-finding and definitive tests was the same as that used to maintain the stock culture.
Range-finding Test
The test concentration to be used in the definitive test was determined by a preliminary range-finding test. The range-finding test was conducted by exposing Lemna minor to a series of nominal test concentrations of 1.0, 10 and 100% v/v saturated solution for a period of 7 days.
The test was conducted in glass conical flasks (500 mL). Two replicate flasks were prepared for each control and test concentration.
A nominal amount of test item (550 mg) was dispersed in 11 liters of culture medium with the aid of propeller stirring at approximately 1500 rpm for 48 hours. After 48 hours the stirring was stopped and any undissolved test item was removed by filtration through a 0.2 µm Sartorius Sartopore filter (first approximate 2 liters discarded in order to pre-condition the filter) to give a 100% v/v saturated solution. A series of dilutions was made from this saturated solution to give further test concentrations of 10 and 1.0% v/v saturated solution.
Each of the prepared concentrations was inverted several times to ensure adequate mixing and homogeneity.
The control group was maintained under identical conditions but not exposed to the test item.
At the start of the range-finding test the number of fronds present in each test and control culture was recorded along with observations on frond size, appearance, root length and number of colonies present. The flasks were then incubated at 24 ± 2 ºC under continuous illumination (intensity approximately 7000 lux) for 7 days.
On Days 2 and 5 the test solutions were renewed, and observations on the test organisms were recorded on days 0, 2, 5 and 7.
In order to determine the stability of the test item under test conditions a sample of each test concentration was taken for chemical analysis on Day 0 (fresh media) and Day 5 (old media). An additional sample of each test concentration was prepared on Day 0 and incubated alongside the test until Day 7 in order to determine stability over the entire test duration. All samples were stored frozen prior to analysis.
Definitive Test
Based on the result of the range-finding test a “limit test” was conducted at a concentration of 100% v/v saturated solution to confirm that at the highest attainable concentration, no effect on growth was observed.
Experimental Preparation
A nominal amount of test item (550 mg) was dispersed in 11 liters of culture medium with the aid of propeller stirring at approximately 1500 rpm for 48 hours. After 48 hours the stirring was stopped and any undissolved test item was removed by filtration through a 0.2 µm Sartorius Sartopore filter (first approximate 2 liters discarded in order to pre-condition the filter) to give the required test concentration of 100% v/v saturated solution.
The concentration and stability of the test item in the test preparations were verified by chemical analysis on Day 0 and Day 7
Exposure Conditions
As in the range-finding test glass conical flasks were used. Three flasks each containing 250 mL of solution were prepared for the control and six flasks for the treatment group.
The control group was maintained under identical conditions but not exposed to the test item.
Each control and test flask was inoculated with 3 colonies of Lemna minor (total 12 fronds). The flasks were then incubated at 24 ± 2 ºC under constant illumination (intensity approximately 7000 lux) for 7 days.
A static testing regime was employed.
Evaluations
Test Organism Observations
The number of fronds present in each test and control culture was recorded on days 0, 2, 5 and 7 along with observations on frond size, appearance, root length and number of colonies present.
In addition the dry weight of the fronds in each control and treatment group was determined on day 7. At the start of the test six replicate samples of fronds identical to those used to inoculate the test vessels were taken and the dry weight determined. At the end of the test the dry weight of colonies from each control and test vessel was determined by blotting the colonies dry and drying at 60 °C.
Data Analysis
Doubling Time
The doubling time (Td) of frond number, and hence performance of the test against the validation criterion of doubling time, was calculated for the control vessels using the following formula:
Td = ln 2/µ
Where:
µ = the average specific growth rate for the control vessels.
Response Variables
In order that the test results are acceptable to regulatory authorities worldwide, the effects on the growth of Lemna were evaluated using both response variables (a) and (b) described below:
a) Average specific growth rate: this response variable was calculated on the basis of changes in the logarithms of frond numbers, and in addition, on the basis of changes in the logarithms of dry weight over time (expressed per day) in the controls and each treatment group.
b) Yield: this response variable was calculated on the basis of changes in frond number, and in addition, on the basis of changes in dry weight in the controls and in each treatment group until the end of the test.
It should be noted that toxicity values calculated using these two response variables are not comparable and the difference must be recognized when using the results of the test. ECx values based upon average specific growth rate (ErCx) will be higher than results based upon yield (EyCx) under the test conditions of this Guideline, due to the underlying mathematics of the respective approaches. This is not to be interpreted as a difference in sensitivity between the response variables: simply the values are different mathematically. The concept of average specific growth rate is based upon the general exponential growth pattern of Lemna in non-limited cultures. Toxicity is estimated on the basis of the effects on the growth rate without being dependent on the absolute level of the specific growth rate of the control, slope of the concentration-response curve or on test duration. Results based upon yield are dependent upon all these variables.
Average Specific Growth Rate
The average specific growth rate for a specific period was calculated as the logarithmic increase in the growth variables -frond numbers and dry weight - using the formula below for each replicate of the control and treatment groups:
µi-j = (1n(Nj) – 1n(Ni)) / t
Where:
µi-j =Average specific growth rate from time i to j
Ni = number of fronds or dry weight in the test or control vessel at time i
Nj = number of fronds or dry weight in the test or control vessel at time j
t = time period from i to j
For each control and treatment group the mean value for growth rate along with the standard deviation was calculated.
Percentage inhibition of growth rate (Ir) was calculated as follows:
%Ir = ((µc - µt) / µc) x 100
Where:
% I = percentage inhibition of average specific growth rate
µc = mean value of µ for the control
µt = mean value of µ for the treatment group
Yield
Effects on yield were determined on the basis of frond numbers and dry weight present in each test vessel at the start and end of the test. For dry weight, the starting biomass was determined on the basis of a sample of fronds taken from the same batch used to inoculate the test vessels. For each test concentration and control, the mean value for yield along with variance estimates was calculated.
Percentage inhibition in yield (I ) was calculated for each treatment group as follows:
%Iy = ((bc – bt) / bc) x 100
Where:
% Iy = percentage reduction in yield
bc = final biomass minus starting biomass for the control group
bt = final biomass minus starting biomass for the treatment group
Determination of ECx Values
ECx values were determined by inspection of the growth rate and yield data after 7 days. - Reference substance (positive control):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 3,5-dichlorophenol
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- > 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Remarks on result:
- other: Average specific growth rate
- Remarks:
- Average specific growth rate
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- > 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- other: dry weight average sepcific growth rate
- Remarks on result:
- other: average sepcific growth rate
- Remarks:
- average sepcific growth rate
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEC
- Effect conc.:
- 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- > 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- frond number
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- > 100 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- other: Dry weight yield
- Details on results:
- Range-finding test
The results showed no significant effect on growth at the test concentrations of 1.0, 10 and 100% v/v saturated solution.
Based on this information a single test concentration of six replicates, of 100% v/v saturated solution was selected for the definitive test. This experimental design conforms to a “limit test” to confirm that at the highest attainable test concentration, no effect on growth was observed.
Chemical analysis of the test preparations on Days 0, 5 and 7 showed measured test concentrations of less than the limit of quantification (LOQ) of the analytical method employed were obtained which was determined to be 0.0025 mg/L. This does not infer that no test item was in solution, just that any dissolved test item present was at a concentration of less than the LOQ.
Definitive Test
Growth Data Based on Frond Number
The following results based on inhibition of average specific growth rate and yield were determined from the frond number data:
Average Specific Growth Rate
ErC10 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
ErC20 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
ErC50 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
Where:
ErCx = the test concentration that reduced average specific growth rate by x%.
Statistical analysis of the average specific growth rate data was carried out for the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration using a Student’s t-test incorporating Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981). There were no statistically significant differences between the control and 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration (P≥0.05), and therefore the "No Observed Effect Concentration" (NOEC) in terms of inhibition of average specific growth rates calculated from frond numbers was 100% v/v saturated solution.
Yield
EyC10 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
EyC20 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
EyC50 (frond number) = >100% v/v saturated solution
Where:
EyCx = the test concentration that reduced yield by x%.
Statistical analysis of the yield data was carried out for the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration using a Student’s t-test incorporating Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981). There were no statistically significant differences between the control and 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration (P≥0.05), and therefore the "No Observed Effect Concentration" (NOEC) in terms of inhibition of yield calculated from frond numbers was 100% v/v saturated solution.
Growth Data Based on Dry Weight
Accordingly the following results based on inhibition of average specific growth rate and yield were determined from the dry weight data:
Average Specific Growth Rate
ErC10 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
ErC20 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
ErC50 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
Where:
ErCx = the test concentration that reduced average specific growth rate by x%.
Statistical analysis of the average specific growth rate data was carried out for the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration using a Student’s t-test incorporating Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981). There were no statistically significant differences between the control and 100% v/v saturated solution test concentrations(P≥0.05), and therefore the "No Observed Effect Concentration" (NOEC) in terms of inhibition of average specific growth rate calculated from dry weight was 100% v/v saturated solution.
Yield
EyC10 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
EyC20 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
EyC50 (dry weight) = >100% v/v saturated solution
Where:
EyCx = the test concentration that reduced yield by x%.
Statistical analysis of the yield data was carried out for the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration using a Student’s t-test incorporating Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981). There were no statistically significant differences between the control and 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration (P≥0.05), and therefore the "No Observed Effect Concentration" (NOEC) in terms of inhibition of yield calculated from dry weight was 100% v/v saturated solution. - Results with reference substance (positive control):
- A positive control (Harlan Study Number 41403075) used 3,5-dichlorophenol as the reference item at concentrations of 0.625, 1.25, 2.5, 5.0 and 10 mg/L.
Exposure conditions and data evaluation for the positive control were similar to those in the definitive test.
Exposure of Lemna minor to the reference item gave the following results:
The average specific growth rate (frond number) EC50 was 3.4 mg/L with 95% confidence limits of 3.1 - 3.6 mg/L. The NOEC was 2.5 mg/L and the LOEC was 5.0 mg/L.
The average specific growth rate (dry weight) EC50 was 3.4 mg/L with 95% confidence limits of 3.2 - 3.7 mg/L. The NOEC was 1.25 mg/L and the LOEC was 2.5 mg/L.
The yield (frond number) EC50 was 2.6 mg/L with 95% confidence limits of 2.4 - 2.9 mg/L. The NOEC was 2.5 mg/L and the LOEC was 5.0 mg/L.
The yield (dry weight) EC50 was 2.7 mg/L with 95% confidence limits of 2.5 - 2.9 mg/L. The NOEC was 1.25 mg/L and the LOEC was 2.5 mg/L.
The results from the positive control with 3,5-dichlorophenol were within the normal ranges for this reference item. - Reported statistics and error estimates:
- A Student’s t-test incorporating Bartlett's test for homogeneity of variance (Sokal and Rohlf, 1981) were carried out on the average specific growth rate and yield data at 7 days for the control and the 100% v/v saturated solution test concentration to determine any statistically significant differences between the test and control groups. All statistical analyses were performed using the SAS computer software package (SAS, 1999-2001).
- Validity criteria fulfilled:
- yes
- Conclusions:
- The average specific growth rate (frond number) EC50 was >100 % v/v saturated solution, while the NOEC was 100 % v/v saturated solution.
- Executive summary:
A study was performed to assess the effect of the test item on the growth of the freshwater plant Lemna minor. The method followed that described in the OECD Guideline No. 221 “Lemna Growth Inhibition Test (March 2006)”.
.
Information provided by the Sponsor indicated the water solubility of the test item to be less than 2.3 µg/L. Preliminary solubility work conducted indicated that it was not possible to obtain a testable solution of the test item using traditional methods of preparation e.g. ultrasonication and high shear mixing.
A preliminary media preparation trial indicated that a saturated solution method of preparation, followed by the removal of any undissolved test item by filtration through a 0.2µm Sartorius Sartopore filter (first approximate 2 liters discarded) was most appropriate for this test item.
Following a preliminary range-finding test, Lemna minor was exposed to an aqueous solution of the test item at a single concentration of 100% v/v saturated solution (six replicate flasks) for a period of 7 days, under constant illumination at a temperature of 24 ± 2°C. The test item solution was prepared by stirring an excess (50 mg/L) of test item in culture medium using a propeller stirrer at approximately 1500 rpm for 48 hours. After the stirring period any undissolved test item was removed by filtration (0.2 µm Sartorius Sartopore filter, first approximate 2 liters discarded in order to pre-condition the filter) to produce a 100% v/v saturated solution of the test item.
The number of fronds in each control and treatment group was recorded on days 0, 2, 5 and 7 along with observations on plant development.
Chemical analysis of the test preparation on Day 0 (fresh media) and Day 7 (old media) showed measured test concentrations of less than the limit of quantification (LOQ) of the analytical method employed were obtained which was determined to be 0.0025 mg/L. This does not infer that no test item was in solution, just that any dissolved test item present was at a concentration of less than the LOQ.
The effect of the test item on the growth of Lemna minor has been investigated over a 7-Day period and gave the following results.
The average specific growth rate (frond number) EC50 was > 100 % v/v saturated solution
The average specific growth rate (dry weight) EC50 was > 100 % v/v saturated solution
The yield (frond number) EC50 was > 100 % v/v saturated solution
The yield (dry weight) EC50 was > 100 % v/v saturated solution
The NOEC was 100 % v/v saturated solution.
Reference
Verification of Test Concentrations
Chemical analysis of the test preparation on Day 0 (fresh media) and Day 7 (old media) showed measured test concentrations of less than the limit of quantification (LOQ) of the analytical method employed were obtained which was determined to be 0.0025 mg/L. This does not infer that no test item was in solution, just that any dissolved test item present was at a concentration of less than the LOQ.
Validation Criteria
The following data show that the doubling time of the control cultures was 1.9 days in line with the OECD Guideline that states the doubling time should be less than 2.5 days:
Mean frond number in control cultures at day 0: 12
Mean frond number in control cultures at day 7: 98
Frond Numbers and Percentage Inhibition of Growth from the Range-finding Test
Nominal Concentration (% v/v Saturated Solution) |
Number of Fronds |
Average Specific Growth Rate |
Yield |
||||||
Day 0 |
Day 2 |
Day 5 |
Day 7 |
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
||
Control |
R1 |
9 |
16 |
37 |
77 |
0.307 |
- |
68 |
- |
R2 |
9 |
17 |
43 |
92 |
0.332 |
83 |
|||
Mean |
9 |
17 |
40 |
85 |
0.320 |
76 |
|||
1.0 |
R1 |
9 |
15 |
33 |
72 |
0.297 |
3 |
63 |
8 |
R2 |
9 |
16 |
39 |
86 |
0.322 |
77 |
|||
Mean |
9 |
16 |
36 |
79 |
0.310 |
70 |
|||
10 |
R1 |
9 |
14 |
38 |
68 |
0.289 |
3 |
59 |
7 |
R2 |
9 |
17 |
43 |
91 |
0.331 |
82 |
|||
Mean |
9 |
16 |
41 |
80 |
0.310 |
71 |
|||
100 |
R1 |
9 |
14 |
45 |
91 |
0.331 |
[5] |
82 |
[12] |
R2 |
9 |
19 |
48 |
96 |
0.338 |
87 |
|||
Mean |
9 |
17 |
47 |
94 |
0.335 |
85 |
R1– R2= Replicates 1 and 2
Frond Numbers from the Definitive Test
Nominal Concentration (% v/v Saturated Solution) |
Number of Fronds |
||||
Day 0 |
Day 2 |
Day 5 |
Day 7 |
||
Control |
R1 |
12 |
17 |
51 |
99 |
R2 |
12 |
18 |
52 |
95 |
|
R3 |
12 |
17 |
47 |
99 |
|
Mean |
12 |
17 |
50 |
98 |
|
100 |
R1 |
12 |
19 |
54 |
103 |
R2 |
12 |
20 |
56 |
102 |
|
R3 |
12 |
17 |
45 |
87 |
|
R4 |
12 |
18 |
46 |
92 |
|
R5 |
12 |
17 |
54 |
108 |
|
R6 |
12 |
17 |
51 |
103 |
|
Mean |
12 |
18 |
51 |
99 |
R1– R6= Replicates 1 to 6
Inhibition of Average Specific Growth Rate and Yield Based on Frond Numbers
Nominal Concentration |
Average Specific Growth Rate |
Yield |
|||
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
||
Control |
Mean |
0.299 |
- |
86 |
- |
SD |
0.003 |
2 |
|||
100 |
Mean |
0.301 |
[1] |
87 |
[1] |
SD |
0.012 |
8 |
SD– Standard Deviation
[Increase in growth compared to controls]
Dry Weights from the Definitive Test
Nominal Concentration (% v/v Saturated Solution) |
Dry Weight (mg) |
||
Day 0* |
Day 7 |
||
Control |
R1 |
|
10.6 |
R2 |
|
9.7 |
|
R3 |
|
11.2 |
|
Mean |
0.68 |
10.5 |
|
100 |
R1 |
|
9.8 |
R2 |
|
9.9 |
|
R3 |
|
8.7 |
|
R4 |
|
10.7 |
|
R5 |
|
11.4 |
|
R6 |
|
10.4 |
|
Mean |
0.68 |
10.2 |
*Mean value determined from 6 replicate weighings
R1– R6= Replicates 1 to 6
Inhibition of Average Specific Growth Rate and Yield Based on Dry Weight
Nominal Concentration |
Average Specific Growth Rate |
Yield |
|||
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
(0 – 7 Day) |
% Inhibition |
||
Control |
Mean |
0.391 |
- |
9.8 |
- |
SD |
0.010 |
0.8 |
|||
100 |
Mean |
0.386 |
1 |
9.5 |
3 |
SD |
0.013 |
0.9 |
SD– Standard Deviation
pH Values in the Definitive Test
Nominal Concentration (% v/v Saturated Solution) |
Time (Days) |
||
0 |
7 |
||
Control |
R1 |
7.0 |
9.6 |
R2 |
6.9 |
9.6 |
|
R3 |
6.9 |
9.8 |
|
100 |
R1 |
6.9 |
9.0 |
R2 |
7.0 |
9.3 |
|
R3 |
7.0 |
9.3 |
|
R4 |
7.0 |
9.3 |
|
R5 |
7.0 |
9.4 |
|
R6 |
7.0 |
9.4 |
R1– R6= Replicates 1 to 6
Description of key information
The average specific growth rate (frond number) EC50 was >100 % v/v saturated solution, while the NOEC was 100 % v/v saturated solution.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
- EC50 for freshwater plants:
- 100 mg/L
- EC10 or NOEC for freshwater plants:
- 100 mg/L
Additional information
A key study was performed to assess the effect of the test item on the growth of the freshwater plant Lemna minor. The method followed that described in the OECD Guideline No. 211 “Lemna Growth Inhibition Test (March 2006). Chemical analysis of the 100 % v/v saturated solution test preparation on Day 0 (fresh media) and Day 7 (old media) showed measured test concentrations of less than the limit of quantification (LOQ) of the analytical method employed were obtained which was determined to be 0.025 mg/L.
Exposure of Lemna minor to the test item gave the following results:
The average specific growth rate (frond number) EC50 was >100 mg/L.
The average specific growth rate (dry weight) EC50 was >100 mg/L.
The yield (frond number) EC50 was >100 mg/L.
The yield (dry weight) EC50 was >100 mg/L.
The NOEC was >100 mg/L and the LOEC was >100 mg /L.
Therefore, it can be concluded that there were no toxic effects at saturation.
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.