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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 213-234-5 | CAS number: 931-36-2
- 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
Toxicological Summary
- Administrative data
- Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
- Workers - Hazard via dermal route
- Workers - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - workers
- General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
- General Population - Hazard via dermal route
- General Population - Hazard via oral route
- General Population - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - General Population
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 2.8 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 25
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 70 mg/m³
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC = NOAEL (90d, oral, rat) *abs oral/abs inhal /0.38 m3/kg bw *6.7 m3/10 m3 = NOAEL /(2*0,38) *0.67 (R.8.4.2)
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- GLP study according to OECD TG 408 with 3 doses
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Subchronic to chronic extrapolation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling has to be applied in case of oral to inhalation route to route extrapolation.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- default for workers
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- sufficient reliable data available
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1.6 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 100
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 160 mg/kg bw/day
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL = NOAEL (90d, oral, rat) * abs.oral/abs.dermal = 80 mg/kg bw/d * 0.5
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- GLP study according to OECD TG 408 with 3 doses
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Subchronic to chronic extrapolation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- default for rat to man
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- default for workers
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- sufficient reliable data available
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 289 µg/cm²
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: see discussion
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 10
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- low hazard (no threshold derived)
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- medium hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - workers
Toxicokinetic
No data on absorption are available. According to Chapter R.8 of REACH Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment, it is proposed in the absence of route-specific information on the starting route, to include a default factor of 2 in the case of oral-to-inhalation extrapolation. This approach will be taken forward to DNEL derivation. For the dermal absorption could be considered to be maximal 50 % of the oral absorption.
Acute toxicity
2-Ethyl-4-methylimidazole has to be classified for acute oral toxicity. However, a short-term DNEL is deemed unnecessary because the long-term DNELs are considered to ensure sufficient protection to prevent peak exposure.
Repeated dose toxicity
The administration of 2-Ethyl-4-methylimidazole by gavage to male and female Wistar rats for 3 months caused signs of systemic toxicity only at the high dose level of 230 mg/kg bw/d: decreased body weight and body weight gain; increased total white blood cell (WBC) and absolute neutrophil counts in males, increased urea, cholesterol and inorganic phosphate levels in both sexes, decreased chloride levels in both sexes, increased triglyceride levels in females and decreased albumin levels in females; decreased terminal body weight in both sexes, increased mean absolute and relative liver weights in females and minimal centrilobular hepatocellular hypertrophy in 9/10 female animals. Therefore, under the conditions of the present study the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was 80 mg/kg bw/d for male and female Wistar rats.
This is supported by a GLP compliant combined 28 -days repeated dose toxicity study with reproduction/developmental toxicity screening test. 2 -Ethyl-4-methylimidazole was given to rats by oral gavage at dose levels of 0, 15, 50 or 150 mg/kg bw/d. Lower levels of total protein and albumin at 150 mg/kg bw/day were noted for females, and higher liver weights (absolute and relative to body weight) were recorded at 15, 50 and 150 mg/kg bw/day for males. These changes were minor or showed no dose-related response. No other treatment-related effects indicative of systemic availability were observed. Furthermore, no reproduction and developmental toxicity was observed up to the highest dose level tested (150 mg/kg bw/day). Based on these results, a parental, reproduction and developmental NOAEL of at least 150 mg/kg bw/day was derived.
Irritation / Sensitisation / Mutagenicity
2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole is considered to be irritating to the skin and eye. Since only a qualitative assessment was made on the irritating potential of 2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole to the skin, no local acute DNEL for dermal exposure could be derived.
2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole is considered to be sensitizing to the skin. In a LLNA, an EC3 of 14.2% (w/w) was derived.
2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole was not mutagenic in the reverse mutation assays performed, in anin vitroHPRT test, and in anin vitromicronucleus test. Therefore, 2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole is considered to be non-mutagenic.
DNEL derivation
For short-term toxicity, no DNEL needs to be derived for all routes of exposure, because the long-term DNELs are considered to ensure sufficient protection to prevent peak exposure. There are no consumer uses for 2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole, nevertheless the systemic long-term DNELs were derived.
Oral:For long-term toxicity, regarding systemic effects, a NOAEL of 80 mg/kg bw/day was observed in a 90 day repeated dose toxicity study. This NOAEL is used in the derivation of the DNELs. An absorption of 50% is assumed for the oral route.
No reprotoxic effects were observed in an OECD422 or OECD414 study up to the highest dose tested (150 and 230 mg/kg bw/d, respectively), Therfore, no reproduction DNELs needs to be derived.
Inhalation:The primary route of anticipated occupational exposure to 2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole is via skin contact. Given its low vapour pressure at room temperature (0.028 Pa), inhalation is not likely to occur. However, exposure to aerosols or droplets of an inhalable size cannot be excluded. Long-term inhalation toxicity data is not available and therefore route-to-route extrapolation is performed. An absorption of 100% is assumed for the inhalation route.
Dermal:Long-term dermal toxicity data is not available and therefore route-to-route extrapolation is performed. The long-term systemic DNEL was derived and additionally, due to the sensitizing effects of the substance, the long-term local DNEL.
For the derivation of the dermal DNELs the following considerations concerning dermal absorption were taken into account:
A) The acute LD50 after intraperitoneal injection for NMRI and BI6 mice lies between 180 and 200 mg/kg bw. In the LLNA study CBA mice were exposed to 50 µL of 25% 2-ethyl-4-methylimidazole for three days. Since the animals weights about 20g, this dermal exposure is the equivalent of 625 mg/kg bw/d, but no mortality was observed. The penetration through the skin is therefore maximum 200 / 625 * 100 = 32%, but probably lower since the dermal LD50 will be higher than 625 mg/kg bw.
B) QSAR model DERMWIN (part of the model EPI suite) results in an estimated Kp = 0.00467 cm/hr. According to the user manual of the Danish QSAR database, May 2005 this indicates low dermal absorption (range: very low/low/moderate/high).
The comparison of the effects after dermal absorption in the LLNA versus the acute LD50 after ip administration supports this assumption of a low dermal absorption. Therefore, in a Weight of Evidence the dermal absorption could be considered to be maximal 50 % of the oral absorption.
Long-term – dermal, local effects (based on LLNA test)
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOEL 14.2% |
EC3 = NOEL in human sensitization tests |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1 cm2/ ear = 2 cm2
25 µL / ear = 50µL = (50000 µg for density 1)
0.815 |
Area treated (1 cm2 = 1 mouse ear (ECHA Guidance Appendix R8.10 Skin sensitization)
Amount applied
Density of vehicle (olive oil:acetone 1:4, v/v) |
Modified dose-descriptor |
14.2 x 50000/2 x 0.815 / 100 = 2893 µg/cm2 |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
||
Vehicle or matrix effect |
1 |
Uncertainty factor for matrix effects is considered to be included in the exposure estimation and, therefore, disregarded. |
Exposure conditions |
1 |
Uncertainty factor for differences in exposure conditions between animal experiment and human exposure situation is considered to be included in the exposure estimation and, therefore, disregarded. |
Interspecies |
1 |
EC3 = NOEL in human sensitization tests |
Intraspecies |
10 |
combined influence of genetic effects, sensitive subpopulations, inherent barrier function, age, gender, ethnicity |
Exposure duration |
1 |
|
Dose response |
1 |
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
DNEL |
Value |
|
2893 / (1 x 1 x1 x 10 x 1 x 1 x 1) = 2893 / 10 =289 µg/cm2 |
Justification for the long-term, dermal, local DNEL:
An induction-specific DNEL was derived for skin sensitization according to Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment, Chapter R.8 (ECHA, Nov 2012) based on the EC3 value from an LLNA study (2012). The EC3 value for2-Ethyl-4-methylimidazole, CAS 931-36-2was reported to be14.2 % (w/w) = 2893 µg/cm2, indicative of a sensitizer of weak potency (ECETOC 2003).
Interspecies
There are different views on the threshold derived from local lymph node data (EC3, EC1.5). Whereas the ECHA guidance considers it to be the LOAEL for induction (ECHA guidance R.8), a number of other organizations were able to empirically show that the EC3 closely correlates with the NOEL from human sensitization tests designed to confirm lack of induction (Api et al., 2006, Api et al., 2008, ECETOC TR87, 2003). Therefore, it seems appropriate to use the EC3 or EC1.5, expressed as dose per skin area, as a surrogate for the human sensitization threshold without the modification by uncertainty factors.
Intraspecies
It is recognized that a general DNEL must take into account that the threshold for skin sensitization varies between individuals. This may be due to differences in parameters such as genetic effects, sensitive subpopulations, inherent barrier function, age, gender, and ethnicity (Api et al., 2008). Whereas the latter three are recognized to have some effect on the sensitization threshold, it is generally recognized that genetic differences, the inherent barrier function and especially sensitive subpopulations play a major role Api et al., 2008). The barrier function of the skin may be compromised which in turn may lead to a greater susceptibility of the individual. At the same time the barrier function is thought to be very similar from infancy to adulthood. The influence of the genetic setting is not well understood, however, may be plausible in the light of the immunological effect under consideration. The term ‘sensitive subpopulations’ refers mostly to individuals who have previously been sensitized to other substances which may increase the susceptibility to further sensitizers (Api et al., 2006, Api et al., 2008). All of these effects make up the intraspecies factor and a factor of 10 is thought to adequately address the combined influence of these effects
Reference:
· Api AM, Basketter DA, Cadby PA, Cano M-F, Graham E, Gerberick F, Griem P, McNamee P, Ryan CA, Safford B (2006). Dermal Sensitization Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for fragrance ingredients. Technical dossier. March 15, 2006 (revised May 2006).
· Api AM, Basketter, DA, Cadby PA, Cano M-F, Ellis G, Gerberick GF, Griem P, McNamee PM, Ryan CA, Safford R (2008). Dermal sensitization quantitative risk assessment (QRA) for fragrance ingredients.Reg Toxicol Pharmacol52: 3-23.
· ECETOC (2003). Contact Sensitization: classification according to potency.Technical Report No. 87, April 2003.
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 0.7 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 50
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 35 mg/m³
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
NOAEC = NOAEL (90d, oral, rat) *abs oral/abs inhal /1.15 m3/kg bw = NOAEL /(2*1.15) (R.8.4.2)
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- GLP study according to OECD TG 408 with 3 doses
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Subchronic to chronic extrapolation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling has to be applied in case of oral to inhalation route to route extrapolation.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 10
- Justification:
- default for general population
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- sufficient reliable data available
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 0.8 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 200
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 160 mg/kg bw/day
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL (90d, oral, rat) * abs. oral/abs. dermal = 80 mg/kg bw/d *0.5
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- GLP study according to OECD TG 408 with 3 doses
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Subchronic to chronic extrapolation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- default from rat to man
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 10
- Justification:
- default for general population
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- sufficient reliable data available
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 289 µg/cm²
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: see discussion
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 10
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 0.4 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 200
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 80 mg/kg bw/day
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
NOAEL (90d, oral, rat) = 80 mg/kg bw/d
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- GLP study according to OECD TG 408 with 3 doses
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Subchronic to chronic extrapolation
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- default from rat to man
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 2.5
- Justification:
- default
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 10
- Justification:
- defaut for general population
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- sufficient reliable data available
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- default
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- medium hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - General Population
Although there are no consumer uses, DNELs for the general population were derived. For point of departure of all derived DNELs and justification of long-term, dermal local DNEL see Discussion for worker DNELs.
Long-term – dermal, local effects (based on LLNA test)
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEL 14.2% |
EC3 = NOEL in human sensitization tests |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1 cm2/ ear = 2 cm2
25 µL / ear = 50µL = (50000 µg for density 1))
0.815 |
Area treated
Amount applied
Density of vehicle (olive oil:acetone 1:4, v/v) |
Modified dose-descriptor |
14.2 x 50000/2 x 0.815 / 100 = 2893 µg/cm2 |
|
Step 3) Assessment factors |
||
Vehicle or matrix effect |
1 |
Uncertainty factor for matrix effects is considered to be included in the exposure estimation and, therefore, disregarded. |
Exposure conditions |
1 |
Uncertainty factor for differences in exposure conditions between animal experiment and human exposure situation is considered to be included in the exposure estimation and, therefore, disregarded. |
Interspecies |
1 |
Assessment factor for allometric scaling is not needed; empiral evidence shows that the EC3/EC1.6 closely correlates with the NOEL from human sensitization tests designed to confirm lack of induction. |
Intraspecies |
10 |
A factor of 10 is considered to adequately address the combined influence of factors influencing individual susceptibility. |
Exposure duration |
1 |
|
Dose response |
1 |
|
Quality of database |
1 |
|
DNEL |
Value |
|
2893 / (1 x 1 x1 x 10 x 1 x 1 x 1) = 2893 / 10 =289 µg/cm2 |
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.