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: 237-410-6
CAS number: 13775-53-6
For cryolite exposure via soil (uptake from soil matrix), no data are
available. However, it should be noted, that due to the dissolution
behaviour, it can be expected, that when cryolite is mixed to soil
matrix and gets in contact with pore water, it is dissolved to different
aluminum and fluoride species and no exposure to dissolved cryolite
itself occurs in soil.
Based on the information of U.S. EPA (1996), cryolite is applied
in dust and in suspended form where much of cryolite can expected to
remain in particulate form. Ingestion of cryolite is expected to be the
relevant route of exposure. The substance is considered to act
predominantly as stomach poison while it releases fluoride ions (U.S.
EPA, 1996). Fluoride ions in turn form complexes with metal containing
enzymes in stomach (Corbett et al., 1974). The available two studies on
the target organisms beet armyworm (Spondoptera exigua; Yee and
Toscano, 1998) and tobacco caterpillar (Spodoptera litura; Prasad
et al., 2000) provide evidence on that ingestion as route of exposure
and particulate form as form of exposure in combination cause increased
response to increased dose.
Two other studies with honeybee (Apis mellifera; Atkins and
Kellum, 1986) and blueberry flea beetle larvae (Altica sylvia;Forsythe
and Collins, 1994) could be used in a tentative manner for PNEC
derivation related to exposure similar to insecticidal application. The
honeybee brood LD50 of 224.5 g cryolite/m2 is related to the application
rate as well as the results with the blueberry flea beetle larvae (LD50
≤1.67 g cryolite/m2). Target species blueberry flea beetle (short term
field test) seemed to be more sensitive than honeybee brood. Despite of
the uncertainty regarding to whether a proper dose-response resulted in
the test with blueberry flea beetle larvae, the lower application rate
of 1.67 g/m2 from this study is considered as the critical acute effect
value and an assessment factor of 100 is chosen for the risk
characterisation. This factor is deemed appropriate due to following
• two short-term field studies are available on invertebrates; one
of them has used target species, the other has employed sensitive larval
stages of a non-target species (honey bee);
• a variety of plant species are not expected to show effects at
application levels of cryolite as insecticide hence excluding the
apparent need to test plants in this assessment.
With the above given assumptions, a tentative PNEC related to the
exposure route deposition, “no-effect-deposition” (NEdep) can be
obtained. It should be noted, that although the units refer to exposure
via air, this value reflects effects caused by cryolite deposited from
air into soil or onto plants’ surface. It is considered not relevant to
derive from the critical deposition PNECsoil, because cryolite can be
expected to dissolve as soon as it gets into contact with porewater. It
is also noted, that the “no-effect-deposition” could be related to
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.
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