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: 215-691-6
CAS number: 1344-28-1
TABLE 4. Biomass and
Growth Inhibition of Green Algae (Selenastrum capricornutum)
After 96 hr of Exposure to Various Concentrations of Al3+.
Al3+ Concentration (mg/L)
Total Measured 1
Mean Corrected Algal Biomass (mg) (± SD)
5.12 ± 0.67
3.48 ± 0.42
1.20 ± 0.26
1.87 ± 0.21
2.35 ± 1.01A
1.73 ± 0.32
5.08 ± 0.25
3.07 ± 0.45
1.10 ± 0.20
0.33 ± 0.06
1.38 ± 0.06
1.23 ± 0.15
1- Total measured Al
is the initial amount present in the water column prior to pH adjustment
and the start of the test. No precipitate was observed.
Median and standard deviation from the median.
Table 1. P.subcapitata 72 -h Al growth inhibition test results expressed
as biomass with OECD medium at different conditions of pH
(6, 7 and 8), Hardness (24.3, 60 and 120 mg/L as CaCO3) and DOC (0, 2, 4
EC50values based on biomass
Mean Dissolved Al (μg/L)
Mean Monomeric Al (μg/L)
Table 2. P. subcapitata 72-h Al growth inhibition test results expressed
as growth rate with OECD medium at pH 6 and different conditions of
Hardness (24.3, 60 and 120 mg/L as CaCO3) and DOC (0, 2, 4 mg/L).
EC50values based on growth rate
large number of metals is present in aquatic ecosystems, often occurring
simultaneously, however, the isolated toxicity of them are better well
known than their mixtures. Based on that, for the first
time we aimed to test the effects of zinc (Zn) and aluminum (Al)
mixtures to the microalgae Raphidocelis
Regarding isolated toxicity, the 96 h IC50 of
Zn and Al based on specific
growth rates occurred, respectively, at 0.40 and 27.40 mM,
thus Zn was z70-fold
more toxic than Al. Both Zn and Al altered the cell size and complexity
the highest concentrations, although only during Zn exposure was the
chlorophyll a fluorescence
diminished. Microalgae exposed to Al produced more ROS than during Zn
exposure. Moreover, algae produced less ROS at the highest Zn
concentration than in the lower concentrations. According to species
sensitivity curves (SSD), R.
the most sensitive organism to Zn and one of the most sensitive to Al.
With respect to mixture toxicity tests, there were significant
deviations for both CA (concentration addition) and IA (independent
action) models, although data best fitted
the CA model and DL (dose level-dependence) deviation, in which metals
showed synergic effects at low concentrations and antagonist effects at
aluminium contamination can lead to high concentrations in coastal
waters, which have the potential for adverse effects on aquatic
organisms. This research investigated the toxicity of 72-h exposures of
aluminium to three marine diatoms (Ceratoneis
closterium (formerly Nitzschia
polymorphus and Phaeodactylum
by measuring population growth rate inhibition and cell membrane damage
(SYTOX Green) as endpoints. Toxicity was correlated to the time-averaged
concentrations of different aluminium size-fractions, operationally
defined as <0.025 m
filtered, <0.45 m
filtered (dissolved) and unfiltered (total) present in solution over the
72-h bioassay. The chronic population growth rate inhibition after
aluminium exposure varied between diatom species. C.
the most sensitive species (10% inhibition of growth rate (72-h IC10) of
80 (55–100) g
Al/L (95% confidence limits)) while M.
Al/L) and P.
Al/L) were less sensitive (based on measured total aluminium). Dissolved
aluminium was the primary contributor to toxicity in C.
while a combination of dissolved and precip- itated aluminium forms
contributed to toxicity in M.
contrast, aluminium toxicity to the most tolerant diatom P.
due predominantly to precipitated aluminium. Preliminary investigations
revealed the sensitivity of C.
closterium and M.
aluminium was influenced by initial cell density with aluminium toxicity
significantly (p <
0.05) increasing with initial cell density from 103 to
No effects on plasma membrane permeability were observed for any of the
three diatoms suggesting that mechanisms of aluminium toxicity to
diatoms do not involve compromis- ing the plasma membrane. These results
indicate that marine diatoms have a broad range in sensitivity to
aluminium with toxic mechanisms related to both dissolved and
Table 2. Calculated endpoints in the algal growth inhibition test (mean
values of replicates).
Concentration (% of T/D solution)
Concentration of Al (µg/L)
Growth rate (µ) d-1
% of control
Area under growth curve
Information on the ecotoxicity of aluminium towards algae is
available for the green alga P. subcapitata (other names: R.
subcapitata, S. capricornutum). Growth rate and biomass growth were the
main parameters that were assessed, and reported endpoints were EC50
(short-term endpoint), EC10 and NOEC (long-term endpoint). Most tests
were conducted with soluble Al-salts; the Norwegian Institute for Water
Research (NIVA), however, conduced and reported a number of algal tests
where aluminium substances with low solubility were used as test
material. The various studies expressed the observed effects as
dissolved aluminum and/or as total/nominal values, depending on the
sample treatment and depending whether the exposure concentrations were
All available studies data were used in a weight of evidence
approach to cover this endpoint. It should be noted that that the
majority of studies that investigated the effects of aluminum in the
aquatic environment used test solutions with aluminum concentrations
above that of its solubility limit. Results of these studies therefore
have limited value for the investigation of intrinsic toxicity.
The algal data from the 2009 and 2010 CIMM datasets demonstrate
that elevated pH and elevated DOC are protective against aluminium
toxicity, whereas hardness appeared to have a minimal effect. The
evidence of both pH and DOC effects are consistent with the Al BLM
(attached to IUCLID section 13). Multiple linear regression models
(MLRM) based on nominal DOC, and pH were developed to predict nominal
EC10 and EC50 values for the algae dataset. The EC50 and EC10 MLRMs
performed reasonably well for the dataset. The EC50 MLRM produced an
adjusted R2 of 0.747, and the EC10 MLRM produce an adjusted R2 of 0.987.
Several chronic toxicity studies to a freshwater microalga (P.
subcapitata) were identified in the literature as Klimisch 1 or 2
studies. Additional algal studies with P. subcapitata were performed at
CIMM to evaluate acute and chronic toxicity to algae and for evaluation
of water chemistry effects for modelling purposes. All endpoints from
CIMM (2009; 2010a) were reported on the basis of nominal Al
concentrations because total Al was not measured in these studies.
However, CIMM (2010b) compared nominal to measured total Al
concentrations in an identical set of algal test solutions prepared to
match all water quality conditions and nominal Al exposure
concentrations as used in the previous studies (2009; 2010a). In these
new test solutions, average total Al concentrations were within 10% of
nominal Al concentrations. A linear regression between total and nominal
Al concentrations demonstrated a strong relationship with an R2 value of
0.99. Therefore, nominal Al concentrations can be considered a reliable
estimator of total Al concentrations in these studies. ECr10s were
calculated using raw data provided from each study using the statistical
program Toxicity Relationship Analysis Program (TRAP) version 1.10 from
the US EPA National Health an Environmental Effects Research Laboratory
(NHEERL). All other endpoints were as reported in each study. ECr10s and
ECr50s ranged from 0.051 to 3.15 mg Al/L and 0.024 to 4.93 mg Al/L,
respectively. Water quality data for these studies suggest a direct
relationship between toxicity and pH, hardness, and DOC. Studies that
experimentally manipulated water quality were reported by CIMM 2009 and
One reliable toxicity study to a higher plant (L. minor) is
included, but no adverse effects were noted in this study. As a
consequence, both NOEC and EC10 values were > 45.7 mg Al/L.
For a detailed overview of the data, more information is provided
in the Background document "Environmental Effects Assessment of
Aluminium" attached to IUCLID section 13.
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