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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 217-682-2 | CAS number: 1929-82-4
- 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 soil microorganisms
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
Description of key information
The degradation product inhibited the conversion of ammonium to nitrite in soil at 1000 ppm but not at 100 ppm, Goring et al. (1967).
Key value for chemical safety assessment
- Short-term EC50 for soil microorganisms:
- 3.1 mg/kg soil dw
Additional information
In the key study, as reported by Roberts et al. (2003), a 28 day N transformation test was developed according to the OECD guideline 216. In the laboratory-based test, a suitable soil was amended with powdered plant meal as an organic N source. Soil samples of 1 kg were treated with five concentrations of test material, in the range 1.0–100 mg/kg dry weight and incubated for 28 days at 20 ± 2 °C. A dose response was produced and the N mineralisation EC50 (95% C.L.) for the test material was determined to be 3.1 (1.9–4.3) mg/kg dry soil.
A further study is available on the substance, and was reported by Roberts et al. (2010), the findings from the study are regarded as supporting information.
The aim of the study was to identify the moisture content range, within which the measured concentration of nitrate-N was sufficiently above background levels in soil. This moisture content range, which will be different for soils of different texture types, focused on a sandy loam soil fulfilling the criteria of the OECD 216 guideline (OECD, 2000). The nitrate-N yield and the EC50 (the concentration causing 50% inhibition of nitrogen transformation) of the test material, were determined at varying soil moisture contents. The results indicate that the current OECD recommended upper limit for the soil moisture content (60% MHC) may be too high. The yield of nitrate-N and the EC50 for the test material, were relatively constant between 20 and 40% MHC
In addition to the data that are available on the substance itself, two reports are available outlining the effect of the substance, its degradation product, or a formulation containing the substance at around 24 %, on soil microorganisms.
In the first report, Goring et al (1967) presented data to demonstrate the selective nature of the test material in soil. Since the chemical is converted to its degradation product, data on the toxicity of this compound to microorganisms and biological soil processes was also presented.
Under the conditions of the study the degradation product was found to be inactive against 43 of the 48 organisms evaluated at 1000 ppm in the medium. With 5 of the organisms it was inactive at 100 ppm but gave varying degrees of activity from partial to complete inhibition at 1000 ppm. The test material was found to be inactive on 4 organisms at a concentration of 256 ppm in the medium. The degradation product was essentially inactive on the total fungal and microbial soil populations at 1000 ppm in the soil, and at this concentration did not significantly inhibit carbon dioxide production by the soil. The test material was inactive on the soil microorganisms at 100 ppm and had no effect on carbon dioxide production at 95 ppm. However, significant effects were obtained in both instances at concentrations of 1000 and 950 ppm, respectively. The degradation product inhibited the conversion of ammonium to nitrite in soil at 1000 ppm but not at 100 ppm.
In the second report, O’Melia (1966) evaluated the effect of the substance, its formulation inerts, and the degradation product, on the general soil fungi and bacterial populations. Overall, it was concluded that:
- The test material appears to have no effect on general soil fungi at concentrations of 40 ppm and below, but tends to decrease numbers of colonies at 400 ppm and above. The data would indicate that the diluents themselves are primarily responsible for this reaction.
- The degradation product of the substance has no effect on the total fungi colonies up to and including 1,000 ppm.
- The test material and the diluents alone increase the soil bacteria population when concentrations of 400 ppm and above of the materials are used. Lower concentrations have only a small or negligible effect.
- The degradation product of the substance has little effect on the general soil bacterial at 100 ppm and below but tends to increase the number of colonies at 1,000 ppm.
- Rates of substance (as test material) normally used with fertilisers would not be expected to have any significant effect on the total soil population.
Further supporting information is available in the form of three publications. The studies reported in all three publications were conducted to sound scientific principles and were therefore assigned a reliability score of 2 in line with the criteria of Klimisch et al. (1997).
The first publication was reported by Facherl & Amberger (1990).
Facherl & Amberger found that the nitrification inhibitor dicyandiamide [DCD] did not inhibit growth and respiration of N-fixing bacteria (Rhizobium leguminosarum and Azotobacter chroococcum) in cell suspensions with concentrations of 400 ppm DCD. Growth of Rhizobium leguminosarum was inhibited by 17 % with 100 ppm test material but respiration was not affected. Growth ofAzotobacter chroococcumwas inhibited by 10 ppm (10 %) and 100ppm test material (50 %); in the latter case, respiration was also impaired (36 %). Thiourea only caused a minor growth inhibition of Azotobacter chroococcum with 100 ppm (8 %) and had no effect on Rhizobium leguminosarum.
In the second publication, reported by Belser & Schmidt (1981) five strains of Nitrosomonas and one each of Nitrosospira and Nitrosolobus were examined for sensitivity to the test material nitrification inhibitor. Considerable variation in sensitivity was observed, with some strains about five times more resistant than others. Sensitivity to test material varied more with strain than with genus.
In the third publication, reported by Goring (1961) the effect of the test material in controlling soil fungi and bacteria was determined by injecting acetone compositions into 50 g samples of moist soil in 4 ounce ointment jars. The jars were immediately capped, and the contents were thoroughly mixed by tumbling for 30 minutes. The jars were incubated for 3 days at 70 °F. Samples of the soil were then diluted in water and plated on rose bengal-streptomycin agar for fungi, and peptone-dextrose agar for bacteria. Counts of fungi and bacteria in the treated soil samples were compared with those in appropriate check samples. Under the conditions of the study concentrations of test material in the soil up to at least 1200 ppm gave no appreciable control of the general soil fungi and bacterial populations.
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.