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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 257-446-6 | CAS number: 51818-55-4
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vitro
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- Study Initiation Date: 05 September 2017 Exerimental Completion Date: 06 October 2017
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 017
- Report date:
- 2017
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442D (In Vitro Skin Sensitisation: ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method)
- Version / remarks:
- The study was conducted to meet the known requirements of OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals Method 442D (adopted February 2015).
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- Analysis for stability, achieved concentration and homogeneity of test article formulations was not conducted as part of this study as it was not a requirement of the Test Guideline.
- Type of study:
- other: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation (ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method)
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The data will be used as part of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) to support the discrimination between skin sensitisers and non-sensitisers for the purpose of hazard classification and labelling.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Neodecanoic acid, iron salt
- EC Number:
- 257-446-6
- EC Name:
- Neodecanoic acid, iron salt
- Cas Number:
- 51818-55-4
- Molecular formula:
- C10H20O2.xFe
- IUPAC Name:
- λ²-iron(2+) bis(2-ethyl-2,5-dimethylhexanoate)
- Test material form:
- solid
- Details on test material:
- CAS Number: 51818-55-4
EC Number 257-446-6
Molecular formula: C30H57FeO6
Molecular weight: 569.6
Purity: 100%
Storage conditions: Refrigerated under Nitrogen ( 2-8 °C )
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
-
Storage: 2 to 8°C, protected from light, under nitrogen
Batch Number: Ln11013894
In vitro test system
- Details on the study design:
- The study was conducted to investigate the potential of the test item to induce genes that are regulated by the antioxidant response element (ARE). The data may be used as part of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) to support the discrimination between skin sensitisers and non-sensitisers for the purpose of hazard classification and labelling.
The ARE-Nrf2 luciferase test method utilises an immortalised adherent cell line derived from HaCaT human keratinocytes. The cell line is stably transfected with a plasmid containing a luciferase gene under the transcriptional control of the SV40 promoter fused with the ARE from a gene known to be up-regulated by contact sensitisers.
The luciferase signal reflects the activation by sensitisers of endogenous Nrf2 dependent genes and the dependence of the luciferase signal in the recombinant cell line on Nrf2 has been demonstrated. This allows quantitative measurement (by luminescence detection) of luciferase gene induction, using well established light producing luciferase substrates, as an indicator of the activity of the Nrf2 transcription factor in cells following exposure to electrophilic substances.
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- The EC1.5 values for the positive control were 20.81 and 9.54 µM in Repetitions 1 and 2, respectively. The average induction in the two replicates for the positive control at 64 µM was 3.09 and 6.40 in Repetitions 1 and 2, respectivley.
In vitro / in chemico
Results
- Key result
- Parameter:
- other: The four conditions specified in the prediction model were not met in either repetition. The test article was therefore considered to be negative in the ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test.
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- The four conditions specified in the prediction model were not met in either repetition. The test article was therefore considered to be negative in the ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Calculation of Imax and EC1.5 Values
Luminescence readings and fold increases are given in the attached Table 10.1 and Table 10.2.
The maximal fold increases (Imax) were 0.94 and 3.79 for Repetitions 1 and 2, respectively.
There was no EC1.5 value for Repetition 1 as there were no statistically significant increases in induction.
The EC1.5 value for Repetition 2 was 0.78 mM.
Viability
MTT-absorbance readings are given in the attached Table 10.3 and Table 10.4.
This measurement was not applicable for Repetition 1 as there was no EC1.5 determining concentration.
Cell viability was 21.51% at the EC1.5 determining concentration in Repetition 2.
In Repetition 1, there was no apparent overall dose response for lucipherase and the dose response curve was not biphasic.
In Repetition 2 the dose response curve for luciferase induction was biphasic.
Assay Acceptance
Luciferase activity induction obtained with the positive control was statistically significant above the threshold of 1.5 at concentrations of 32 and 64 µM in Repetition 1 and at concentrations of 16 to 64 µM in Repetition 2.
The EC1.5 values for the positive control were 20.81 and 9.54 µM in Repetitions 1 and 2, respectively. The average induction in the two replicates for the positive control at 64 µM was 3.09 and 6.40 in Repetitions 1 and 2, respectivley.
The average coefficient of variation of the luminescence reading for the negative control (DMSO) was 6.56% and 11.62% in repetitions 1 and 2, respectively.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The four conditions specified in the prediction model were not met in either repetition. The test article, was therefore considered to be negative in the ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test.
- Executive summary:
The study was conducted to investigate the potential of the test item to induce genes that are regulated by the antioxidant response element (ARE). The data may be used as part of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) to support the discrimination between skin sensitisers and non-sensitisers for the purpose of hazard classification and labelling.
The test article was dissolved in Isopropanol to the final concentration (200 mM). Serial dilutions were then made using Isopropanol to obtain 12 master concentrations of the test article (0.098, 0.196, 0.391, 0.781, 1.563, 3.125, 6.25, 12.5, 25, 50, 100 and 200 mM).
The master concentrations were then further diluted 25 fold into culture medium containing serum and finally used for treatment with a further 4 fold dilution factor so that the final concentrations ranged from 0.98 to 2000 µM.
Aliquots of 50 µL of each of the final concentrations were transferred to each of three luciferase plates and a single viability plate. Each plate was sealed using a plate sealer and then incubated at 37±1¿C, 5% (v/v) CO2 in air, in a humidified environment for 48±1 hours.
After the 48-hour exposure period, the medium in the luciferase plates was replaced with fresh medium containing 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT). The plate was sealed and incubated for 4 hours at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2. The MTT medium was then removed and SDS (at 10% w/v) added per well. The plate was sealed and placed into an incubator at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2 in air and left overnight. After the overnight incubation, the plate was shaken to ensure homogeneity of the solution in the wells and then absorption read at 600 nm using a SpectraMax M2e.
After the 48-hour exposure period, the cells in the viability plate were washed with phosphate buffered saline and lysis buffer for luminescence readings was added to each well. The plates were then incubated for 20 to 22 minutes at 25±2°C, loaded into the luminescence plate reader and read.
The results are summarised as follows:
Condition Rep 1 Rep 2 IMAX (fold increase)
0.94 3.79 Cell Viability at the EC1.5 (%)
N/A 21.51 EC1.5 (mg/mL)
N/A 0.78 Dose response for luciferase Induction
No Yes The four conditions specified in the prediction model were not met in either repetition. The test article, was therefore considered to be negative in the ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test.
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.