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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 203-127-1 | CAS number: 103-60-6
- 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
![](https://echa.europa.eu/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/print_toxicological-information.png)
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Skin irritation: Not irritating, Method equivalent/similar to OECD 404, O'Connor (1979).
Eye irritation: Not irritating, OECD 405 and EU Method B.5, Sanders (2013).
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 13 August 1979 to 01 October 1979
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: A non-GLP study performed to sound scientific principles with a sufficient level of detail to assess the quality of the submitted data.
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 404 (Acute Dermal Irritation / Corrosion)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- A 0.5 mL aliquot of the test material was applied to the clipped dorsum of rabbits for 4 hours under a semi-occlusive patch. The irritation reactions were assessed immediately after removal of the patch and after 24, 48 and 72 hours.
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Age at study initiation: 9-12 weeks. - Type of coverage:
- semiocclusive
- Preparation of test site:
- clipped
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- yes
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount applied: 0.5 mL - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 4 hours
- Observation period:
- 72 hours
- Number of animals:
- 8
- Details on study design:
- TEST SITE
- Area of exposure: Rabbits were exposed on their dorsum, the specific treatment site were randomised. The whole dorsal surface was clipped 3-4 days before exposure. Only animals in the telogen phase of hair growth were selected.
- Type of wrap if used: Occlusive patches were prepared by attaching a piece of thin flexible polythene (3 cm x 3 cm) to a piece of zinc oxide plaster 9 cm x 2.5 cm. A 2.5 cm square of cotton gauze (8 ply folded in two) was laid on the polythene such that the edges of the pad were attached to the zinc oxide plaster. The test material was applied to the dry patch. The patches were firmly attached to ensure good contact between the skin and the test material. During exposure, the animals were immobilised in a canvas body sleeve.
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing: The test site was wiped clean of excess test material.
- Time after start of exposure: 4 hours, immediately after patch removal.
REFERENCE STANDARDS
- Diethyl phthalate
- Cyclamen aldehyde
- Geraniol
These standards are perfumery materials that are regularly used as marker controls in skin irritation tests.
All three standards were applied to each of the test rabbits, alongside the test material. Application sites were randomised on the different animals.
SCORING SYSTEM: The skin sites were assessed for irritation immediately after treatment, and at 24, 48 and 72 hours. Each animal was scored blind and the scores for each skin site were not linked to the material tested until the scoring at 72 hours was completed. The sites were scored for erythema, edema, cracking and scaling and any other feature using an 8-point anchored ordinate scale ranging from "a" (very slight) to "h" (severe) see Table 1. At the end of the test the reaction grades for each treatment group were converted to numerical scores which were used to calculate the total irritation score per site. - Irritation parameter:
- erythema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0.5
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- edema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0.25
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- erythema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0.375
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- edema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0.375
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- erythema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 72 hours
- Score:
- 0.375
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- edema score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 72 hours
- Score:
- 0.25
- Max. score:
- 12
- Reversibility:
- not fully reversible within: 72 hours
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- A single application of test material produced marginal erythema in some animals and marginal edema in a few animals at 24 hours. By 48 hours and 72 hours there was marginal erythema and edema in a few animals. The response was broadly similar to that produced by the control, diethyl phthalate, but considerably less than that produced by the controls, cyclamen aldehyde and geraniol. Total irritation scores of the test material and standards for comparison are given in Table 2, where Table 3 shows the macroscopic findings.
- Interpretation of results:
- not classified
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of the test, the test material elicited only very minor reactions in a few of the animals during the course of the study. The test material was concluded to be very slightly irritating. The persistency of this slight irritation continued until termination at 72 hours, no further observations were made.
- Executive summary:
The skin irritation potential of the test material was investigated according to a methodology similar to that of OECD 404. During the study 0.5 mL of the undiluted test material was applied to the clipped dorsum of 8 rabbits for 4 hours under a semi-occlusive patch. The irritation reactions were assessed immediately after removal of the patch and after 24, 48 and 72 hours.
During the course of the study a single application of test material was seen to produce ‘marginal’ erythema and ‘slight’ edema in five out of eight animals at 24 hours. By 48 hours and 72 hours ‘marginal’ erythema and edema was observed in between two and four out of eight animals. The scores assigned in this study are roughly equivalent to a score of 1 according to the Draize scale (1977).
The response was broadly similar to that produced by the control, diethyl phthalate, but considerably less than that produced by the positive controls, cyclamen aldehyde and geraniol.
Under the conditions of the study, the test material was considered to be slightly irritating; however the elicited reaction was below the limits of classification.
Reference
Table 2: Total Irritation Scores
Rabbit No. | Irritation scores | ||||
Diethyl Phthalate | Test Material | Cyclamen Aldehyde | Geraniol | ||
1216 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 32 | |
1217 | 3 | 5 | 31 | 34 | |
1218 | 2 | 3 | 30 | 28 | |
1219 | 4 | 2 | 26 | 26 | |
1220 | 4 | 3 | 35 | 22 | |
1221 | 2 | 0 | 31 | 34 | |
1224 | 2 | 6 | 27 | 38 | |
1244 | 2 | 9 | 41 | 30 | |
Overall irritation score | 19 | 28 | 244 | 244 | |
Mean score per site | 2.38 | 4.0 | 30.5 | 30.5 | |
Mean score per site per day | 0.59 | 1.0 | 7.63 | 7.63 | |
Mean irritation ranking | 1.44 | 1.56 | 3.44 | 3.56 |
Table 3. Macroscopic Findings For Sites Exposed to the Test Material
Rabbit No. | 4 Hours | 24 Hours | 48 Hours | 72 Hours | Totals | Total Score | |||||
Erythema | Edema | Erythema | Edema | Erythema | Edema | Erythema | Edema | Erythema | Edema | ||
1216 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1217 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
1218 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
1219 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
1220 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
1221 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
1224 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 6 |
2244 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 9 |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 19 September 2012 to 04 October 2012
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: see 'Remark'
- Remarks:
- Study conducted in compliance with agreed protocols, with no or minor deviations from standard test guidelines and/or minor methodological deficiencies, which do not affect the quality of the relevant results. The study report was conclusive, done to a valid guidelines and the study was conducted under GLP conditions.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 405 (Acute Eye Irritation / Corrosion)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.5 (Acute Toxicity: Eye Irritation / Corrosion)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Age at study initiation: Twelve to twenty weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 2.98 to 3.42 kg
- Housing: Individually housed in suspended cages
- Diet: 2930C Teklad Global Certified Rabbit diet ad libitum
- Water: Mains tap water, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: At least five days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 17 to 23°C
- Humidity: 30-70%
- Air changes: At least fifteen changes per hour
- Photoperiod: 12 hours light/12 hours dark - Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- no
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): 0.1 mL
- Administration of the test material: A single treatment was administered to initially one rabbit. 0.1 mL of the test material was instilled into the conjunctival sac of the right eye. The eyelids were held together for a second to prevent loss of the test material. The left eye remained untreated as a control. Based on the initial pain reaction, the second rabbit was treated using the same procedure as the first animal after the administration of a local anaesthetic instilled into both eyes of the second rabbit. - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- A single treatment was administered, no washing was performed
- Observation period (in vivo):
- 72 hours
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- 2
- Details on study design:
- SCORING SYSTEM:
Draize Scale for Scoring Ocular Irritation
TOOL USED TO ASSESS SCORE: Standard ophthalmoscope
OTHER:
- pH: Prior to the commencement of the study, the pH of the test material was determined undiluted and as a 90 % aqueous preparation. The pH of the test material was determined to be approximately pH 7 undiluted, and approximately pH 6 as a 90 % aqueous preparation. - Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 24, 48 and 72 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Max. score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Irritation parameter:
- iris score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 24, 48 and 72 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Max. score:
- 2
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Irritation parameter:
- conjunctivae score
- Basis:
- animal: 72444
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0.33
- Max. score:
- 3
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible within: 48 hours
- Irritation parameter:
- conjunctivae score
- Basis:
- animal: 72515
- Time point:
- other: 24, 48 and 72 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Max. score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Irritation parameter:
- chemosis score
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 24, 48 and 72 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Max. score:
- 4
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- No corneal or iridial effects were noted in either animal at any of the time points during the study. Both animals had minimal conjunctival irritation at one hour post treatment. This had completely cleared in one animal by the 24 hour observation time, minimal irritation was still noted in the other animal at the 24 hour observation time, but had resolved by 48 hours.
- Other effects:
- Both animals employed in the study demonstrated expected bodyweight gain during the course of the study.
- Interpretation of results:
- not classified
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of the test, the test material induce only minimal reversible irritation during the test in the New Zealand White rabbit. The test material was therefore considered to be not irritating.
- Executive summary:
The irritancy potential of the test material to the eye of the New Zealand White rabbit was evaluated in a GLP compliant study designed to be compatible with OECD 405 and EU Method B.5. Undiluted test material (0.1 mL) was instilled into the eye of two rabbits. After the initial pain reaction of the first rabbit, the test in the second rabbit was performed with a local anaesthetic. The rabbits were observed at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours for signs of ocular irritation. Minimal conjunctival irritation was noted in both animals an hour post-instillation. One treated eye appeared normal at the 24 hour observation, and the other appeared normal at the 48 hour observation. Under the conditions of the test, the test material is considered to be non-irritating to the New Zealand White rabbit eye.
Reference
Table 2: Individual irritation scores
Rabbit Number and Sex |
72444 Male |
72515 Male |
|||||||
Initial Pain Reaction |
3 |
0+ |
|||||||
Time After Treatment (hours) |
1 |
24 |
48 |
72 |
1 |
24 |
48 |
72 |
|
Cornea |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Degree of opacity |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Area of Cornea Involved |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Iris |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Conjunctivae |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Redness |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Chemosis |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Discharge |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
+ Local anaesthetic (one drop of 0.5 % Tetracaine hydrochloride) |
Table 3: Bodyweights and bodyweight changes
Rabbit Number and Sex |
Individual Bodyweight (kg) |
Bodyweight Change (kg) |
|
Day 0 |
Day 3 |
||
72444 Male |
3.42 |
3.5 |
0.08 |
72515 Male |
2.98 |
3.03 |
0.05 |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin Irritation
In the key study (O’Connor, 1979), the skin irritation potential of the test material was investigated according to a methodology similar to that of OECD 404. During the study 0.5 mL of the undiluted test material was applied to the clipped dorsum of 8 rabbits for 4 hours under a semi-occlusive patch. The irritation reactions were assessed immediately after removal of the patch and after 24, 48 and 72 hours. During the course of the study a single application of test material was seen to produce ‘marginal’ erythema and ‘slight’ edema in five out of eight animals at 24 hours. By 48 hours and 72 hours ‘marginal’ erythema and edema was observed in between two and four out of eight animals. The scores assigned in this study are roughly equivalent to a score of 1 according to the Draize scale (1977). The response was broadly similar to that produced by the control, diethyl phthalate, but considerably less than that produced by the positive controls, cyclamen aldehyde and geraniol. Under the conditions of the study, the test material was considered to be slightly irritating; however the elicited reaction was below the limits of classification. The study was assigned a reliability score of 1 in accordance with principles defined in Klimisch (1997).
Two additional studies have been provided as supporting evidence Mulhern et al. (1990) and Moreno (1973). Mulhern et al. (1990) assessed dermal irritation as a result of exposure to the test material as part of a repeat dose dermal study, conducted following a methodology similar to the OECD guideline 411. Groups of twelve male and twelve females rats were exposed to the test material for 6 hours per day at concentrations of 100, 300 and 1000 mg/kg/day over 13 consecutive weeks. Under the conditions of the study, transient incidences of slight desquamation and erythema occurred sporadically throughout the dosing period, and were observed at a similar incidence and level of severity in all groups including the control. Since no dose response correlation was observed, and since similar skin assessments were made on the animals in the control group, the test material was considered to be not irritating.
The second supporting study Moreno, (1973) discussed dermal irritation as part of an acute dermal toxicity study in rabbits. The dermal irritation data was reported with limited details. Ten rabbits were subjected to dermal exposure at 5000 mg/kg test material. Following treatment, the animals were observed for mortality, clinical signs of toxicity and dermal irritation. The report stated that 3 out of 10 animals exhibited slight redness and 1 out of 10 animals exhibited moderate redness, in response to the acute exposure. Based on the available information the test material was considered to be non-irritating.
Eye Irritation
The key study, Sanders (2013) investigated the irritancy potential of the test material to the eye of the New Zealand White rabbit was evaluated in a GLP compliant study designed to be compatible with OECD 405 and EU Method B.5. Undiluted test material (0.1 mL) was instilled into the eye of two rabbits. After the initial pain reaction of the first rabbit, the test in the second rabbit was performed with a local anaesthetic. The rabbits were observed at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours for signs of ocular irritation. Minimal conjunctival irritation was noted in both animals an hour post-instillation. One treated eye appeared normal at the 24 hour observation, and the other appeared normal at the 48 hour observation. Under the conditions of the test, the test material is considered to be non-irritating to the New Zealand White rabbit eye.
Two studies have been provided as supporting data, Warren (2012) and Hopf (1968). Warren (2012), a complete study testing eye irritation in vitro, and Hopf (1968) a short description of an in vivo study which reports both support the conclusions of the key study, Sanders (2013).
Warren (2012) outlines the investigation into the eye irritation potential of the test material in vitro using the SkinEthic reconstructed Human Corneal Epithelium model after a treatment period of 10 minutes. The SkinEthic model consists of transformed human corneal epithelial cells of the cell line HCE that form a corneal epithelial tissue (mucosa), devoid of stratum corneum, resembling, histologically, the mucosa of the human eye. During the study, the test material was applied directly to the culture surface, at the air interface, so that undiluted test material could be tested directly. Cytotoxicity was determined by the reduction of MTT to formazan by viable cells in the test material treated tissues relative to the negative control. One tissue for each treatment group was retained for possible tissue histopathology. Under the conditions of the study, the test material did not directly reduce MTT and the relative mean viability of the test material treated tissues after a 10 minute exposure period was calculated to be 108.0 % indicating that the test material is a non-irritant. It was considered unnecessary to proceed with tissue histopathology. The study was performed to a good standard with complete reporting; however the study followed a non-validated guideline. Accordingly the study was assigned a reliability score of 2 according to the criteria for assessing data quality defined in Klimisch (1997).
Hopf (1968) reports the potential of the test material to cause irritation to the eye assessed according to the Draize method. During the study the conjunctival sac of eight rabbits were administered with 0.1 mL of test material diluted 1:1 with olive oil. After one minute fixation, the eyes of four of the animals were rinsed with warm water; the eyes of the remaining animals were left with the dose in situ. Following administration the rabbits were observed for any signs of mucosal reactions or immune response, as determined by the scoring system of Draize. Under the conditions of the study, no mucosal reactions were observed in the area of the eye or mucous membranes of the eyes. In addition, no spontaneous immune responses were noted. The test material is therefore considered to be non-irritating to the eyes. The study was presented in very limited detail. It was not possible to assess the quality of the data and was therefore assigned a reliability score of 4 according to Klimisch (1997).
Justification for selection of skin irritation / corrosion endpoint:
The non-GLP key study was performed to sound scientific principles with a sufficient level of detail to assess the quality of the submitted data. Accordingly it was assigned a reliability score of 2 in line with the criteria defined by Klimisch (1997) and considered suitable as an accurate reflection of the test material.
Justification for selection of eye irritation endpoint:
The key study was performed in line with GLP and currently accepted in vivo standard testing guidelines. The study was complete and performed to a high standard and the results were reported to a high level of detail. The study was therefore assigned a reliability score of 1 in accordance with the principles for assessing data quality as described in Klimisch (1997). The study was therefore considered to be an accurate reflection of the effects of the test material, and the results of the study were considered to be suitable to be taken forward for risk assessment and classification and labelling purposes.
Justification for classification or non-classification
According to the criteria outlined in Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 and Directive 67/548/EEC, the substance does not meet the criteria for classification as a skin or eye irritant.
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.
![ECHA](/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/echa_logo.png)