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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 268-596-7 | CAS number: 68130-53-0
- 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
Toxicity to reproduction
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- screening for reproductive / developmental toxicity
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- June 15, 2017 to September 14, 2017
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
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:
- other: Internal Laboratory Standard Protocols
- Deviations:
- not specified
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of Smithers Avanza approved the study protocol and found it to be in accordance with provisions of the USDA Animal Welfare Act, the PHS Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, and the US Interagency Research Animal Committee Principles for the Utilization and Care of Research Animals.
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Limit test:
- no
- Justification for study design:
- The purpose of this study was to provide preliminary data on the potential maternal and/or developmental toxicity of Hatcol 1510 in pregnant Sprague Dawley rats when administered via oral gavage during the embryo-fetal development period. The data from this study was used to establish doses for the definitive prenatal developmental toxicity study.
Test material
- Test material form:
- liquid
- Details on test material:
- Name: Decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid, and trimethylolpropane
Synonym: Hatcol 1510
Lot No.: 2015189219 (TR269-131)
CAS No./EC#: 68130-53-0/268-596-7
Purity: 100%
Expiration Date: 15 April 2018
Upon receipt at Smithers Viscient, the test substance (SMV No. 8807) was stored at room temperature in a dark, ventilated cabinet in the original container.
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- No further details specified in the study report.
Test animals
- Species:
- rat
- Strain:
- Sprague-Dawley
- Details on species / strain selection:
- The rat was selected because it is a standard species for use in toxicology studies.
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- Animal Information
Species and Strain: Time-mated female Sprague Dawley Rats
Supplier: Charles River Breeding Labs; Raleigh, NC
Method of Identification: Ear tag/Cage card
Number of Animals Received: 26
Number Used on Study: 24
Age at First Dose: At least 7 weeks
Weight Range at Mating: 214 g – 246 g
Weight Range at First Dose: 230.3 g – 264.7 g
Disposition of Extra Animals: Euthanized
Animals were acclimated to laboratory conditions for at least three days prior to the first dose and released from acclimation by a staff veterinarian. During that time, animals were identified by a temporary number that was recorded on each cage label.
Husbandry Information
Feed: Certified Global Teklad Laboratory Diet 2018 (pellets) was provided ad libitum.
Water: Filtered water was provided ad libitum via an automatic watering system
Bedding: Certified Sani Chips hardwood bedding
Housing: Animals were individually housed in one room in polycarbonate cages suspended on stainless steel racks. Each cage was affixed with a cage card containing pertinent animal and study information.
Temperature Range: 20 to 26 °C
Humidity Range: 30 to 70%
Light Cycle: 12-hour light/12-hour dark, interrupted as necessary for study-related events
Air Changes: Minimum of 10 air changes per hour
The feed was analyzed by the manufacturer for concentrations of specified heavy metals, aflatoxin, chlorinated hydrocarbons, and organophosphates. The water is routinely analyzed for contaminants and specific microbes. The bedding was analyzed by the manufacturer for acceptable levels of heavy metals, aflatoxins, bacteria, yeasts, molds, and organophosphates prior to certification. No contaminants were known to be present in the feed, water, or bedding at levels that might have interfered with achieving the objectives of the study.
Administration / exposure
- Route of administration:
- oral: gavage
- Vehicle:
- peanut oil
- Details on exposure:
- The neat test and vehicle/control substance were considered 100% pure for formulation purposes.
The vehicle/control substance, peanut oil, was used as received; no formulations were necessary.
Formulations for Groups 2 (50 mg/mL), 3 (150 mg/mL), and 4 (500 mg/mL) were prepared three times throughout the study by adding the appropriate amount of test substance into a pre-calibrated beaker. The required amount of vehicle was added and the solution was mixed until visually uniform. Formulations were refrigerated at 5±3°C until used for further formulating or dosing. - Details on mating procedure:
- The vendor shipped 13 females that were bred on 06/14/17 (confirmed 06/15/17), and 13 females that were bred on 06/15/17 (confirmed 6/16/17). Dams should have been bred on 06/13/17 and 06/14/17, respectively. Thus, animals arrived approximately one gestational day early and were therefore dosed from GD 4 to 19 and necropsy was conducted on GD 20.
- Analytical verification of doses or concentrations:
- no
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- The animals were dosed daily on presumed GD 5 to 20 (day of confirmation of mating = GD 0)
- Frequency of treatment:
- Daily
- Details on study schedule:
- Not specified
Doses / concentrationsopen allclose all
- Dose / conc.:
- 0 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 100 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 300 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Dose / conc.:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- No. of animals per sex per dose:
- 6 animals per dose group
- Control animals:
- yes, concurrent vehicle
- Details on study design:
- The rat was selected because it is a standard species for use in toxicology studies.
This study was designed to use the fewest number of animals possible, consistent with the objective of the study, ant the scientific needs of the Sponsor, contemporary scientific standards.
The oral route was selected because it is the relevant route of exposure in humans.
The dose levels were selected based on the results from previous toxicology studies performed by the Sponsor at Smithers Avanza under study number 2386-13844.
Animals were initially accepted into the randomization pool based upon body weights collected on GD 3. The suitability of the randomized animals was determined using prestudy body weights and physical examinations. They were assigned to study groups using computer-generated random numbers such that the mean body weight for each group was not statistically different (p ≤ 0.05) from the control mean. Following randomization each study animal was assigned a unique number. - Positive control:
- Not required.
Examinations
- Parental animals: Observations and examinations:
- Animal Observations/Measurements
Physical Examinations: GD 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 and 21
Cageside Observations: ≥ 2 times daily
Body Weights: GD 5, 8, 11, 14, 17 and 21
Food Consumption: GD 5-8, 8-11, 11-14, 14-17 and 17-21
Cageside observations included observation for mortality, moribundity, general health, and signs of toxicity. Physical examinations included evaluation of skin and fur characteristics, eye and mucous membranes, respiratory, circulatory, autonomic, and central nervous systems, and somatomotor and behavior patterns. - Oestrous cyclicity (parental animals):
- Not examined
- Sperm parameters (parental animals):
- Not examined
- Litter observations:
- All live fetuses were individually weighed, identified, sexed, and examined for external malformations and variations.
- Postmortem examinations (parental animals):
- Termination
On presumed GD 21, all surviving dams were euthanized via carbon dioxide inhalation followed by exsanguination and examined as described below.
Although animals were assumed GD 21 at termination, fetal weights (GD 21) were not within historical control range. It was determined that time-mated pregnant animals arrived from the vendor were bred a day earlier than requested. Thus, all dams were actually necropsied on GD 20 rather than GD 21.
Necropsy
Animals were necropsied as soon as possible after the time of death. A gross necropsy, which included examination of the external surface of the body, all orifices, injection site, the cranial, thoracic, and abdominal cavities, and their contents was performed, with special emphasis on structural abnormalities or pathologic changes which might have influenced the pregnancy.
Uterine Examination
The skin was opened with a ventral midline incision to examine mammary tissue and locate any subcutaneous masses. The abdominal cavity was opened, the uterus was excised, and the gravid uterine weight was recorded. Beginning at the distal end of the left uterine horn, the location of viable and nonviable fetuses, early and late resorptions for each uterine horn, and the number of total implantations were recorded. The number of corpora lutea on each ovary was also recorded. The embryonic membrane of each fetus was gently removed. The fetuses were removed from the uterus and the placentae were grossly examined. Each implant was categorized as viable, nonviable, late resorption, or early resorption.
Uteri from females that appeared to be nongravid were opened and placed in 10% ammonium sulfide solution for detection of implantation sites. The foci, if detected, were considered early resorptions, and data from these females were not included in mean calculations and statistics. If no foci were seen, the female was considered to be nonpregnant and data from these females were also not included in mean calculations or statistics. - Postmortem examinations (offspring):
- Following completion of the external examination of all fetuses in the litter, each fetus was euthanized via an oral dose of Euthasol® solution (0.01 – 0.05 mL/fetus) and identified individually.
- Statistics:
- Quantitative data from the treated groups were compared statistically to the data of the control group using one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) techniques. A Shapiro-Wilk test was used to test for normality, followed by the Levene’s test to test the hypothesis of homogeneity of variances. If either the normality or homogeneity test failed (as indicated by a Shapiro-Wilk or Levene’s test p-value ≤ 0.01), the data were transformed using log-transformed values and both the Shapiro-Wilk and Levene’s tests were repeated with the log-transformed values. If the results from either the Shapiro-Wilk or Levene’s test on the log-transformed data failed, the analysis of the data continued using rank-transformed data using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA. If both the Shapiro-Wilk or Levene’s test were not statistically significant, the ANOVA was performed on the untransformed or log-transformed data, respectively. The Dunnett’s t-test was used to determine which groups differed from the control group. Group comparisons were evaluated at the 0.05 (two-tailed) probability level.
Some quantitative data were analyzed using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test for normality, the Levene Median test for equal variance, and by one-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA). If either the normality or equal variance test failed, then the analysis was continued using the non-parametric Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA on rank-transformed data. For parametric data, if the ANOVA indicated statistical significance among experimental groups then the Dunnett’s t-test was used to delineate which groups differed from the control. For non-parametric data, if the ANOVA indicated statistical significance among experimental groups then the Dunn’s test was used to delineate which groups differed from the control. The probability value of less than 0.05 (two-tailed) was used as the critical level of significance for all tests. Statistical analysis for these data was conducted using SigmaStat™ Statistical Software, Version 1. - Reproductive indices:
- An analysis of covariance was performed on mean male fetal weight per litter, mean female fetal weight per litter, and mean combined fetal weight per litter (sexes pooled), with the total number of fetuses per litter used as the covariate in all analyses. All tests were conducted at the 0.05 level of significance using the SAS Statistical Analysis System, Version 9 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).
- Offspring viability indices:
- Not examined
Results and discussion
Results: P0 (first parental generation)
General toxicity (P0)
- Clinical signs:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Treatment with Hatcol 1510 had no effect on physical examinations, or cageside observations. No abnormalities were observed throughout the study.
- Dermal irritation (if dermal study):
- not examined
- Mortality:
- no mortality observed
- Description (incidence):
- Treatment with Hatcol 1510 had no effect on mortality. All animals survived until the scheduled termination.
- Body weight and weight changes:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Treatment with Hatcol 1510 had no effect on body weights, body weight changes, or body weight changes adjusted for gravid uterine weight.
No significant differences were noted in mean body weights and body weight changes; means were comparable across groups. Group 4 had a significantly higher mean body weight when adjusted for the gravid uterine weight. No differences were noted in total or percent change when adjusted for the gravid uterine weight. - Food consumption and compound intake (if feeding study):
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- No significant differences were noted; mean food consumption was comparable across groups throughout the study.
- Food efficiency:
- not examined
- Water consumption and compound intake (if drinking water study):
- not examined
- Ophthalmological findings:
- not examined
- Haematological findings:
- not examined
- Clinical biochemistry findings:
- not examined
- Urinalysis findings:
- not examined
- Behaviour (functional findings):
- not examined
- Immunological findings:
- not examined
- Organ weight findings including organ / body weight ratios:
- not examined
- Histopathological findings: non-neoplastic:
- not examined
- Histopathological findings: neoplastic:
- not examined
- Other effects:
- not specified
Reproductive function / performance (P0)
- Reproductive function: oestrous cycle:
- not examined
- Reproductive function: sperm measures:
- not examined
- Reproductive performance:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Treatment with Hatcol 1510 had no effect on uterine data. No significant differences were noted in number of corpora lutea, number of implantations, pre-implantation loss, number of intra-uterine deaths, post-implantation loss, or number of live fetuses.
Effect levels (P0)
- Key result
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEL
- Effect level:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- female
- Basis for effect level:
- other: no effect on maternal mortality, physical examinations, cageside observations, body weights, body weight changes, or food consumption.
Target system / organ toxicity (P0)
- Key result
- Critical effects observed:
- no
Results: F1 generation
General toxicity (F1)
- Clinical signs:
- not examined
- Dermal irritation (if dermal study):
- not examined
- Mortality / viability:
- no mortality observed
- Body weight and weight changes:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- No statistically significant differences were observed among Group 1 and the other treatment groups for male, female, or combined male and female fetal weight.
- Food consumption and compound intake (if feeding study):
- not examined
- Food efficiency:
- not examined
- Water consumption and compound intake (if drinking water study):
- not examined
- Ophthalmological findings:
- not examined
- Haematological findings:
- not examined
- Clinical biochemistry findings:
- not examined
- Urinalysis findings:
- not examined
- Sexual maturation:
- not examined
- Organ weight findings including organ / body weight ratios:
- not examined
- Gross pathological findings:
- no effects observed
- Description (incidence and severity):
- Treatment with Hatcol 1510 had no effect on external examinations. No variations or malformations were observed.
- Histopathological findings:
- not examined
- Other effects:
- not specified
Developmental neurotoxicity (F1)
- Behaviour (functional findings):
- not examined
Developmental immunotoxicity (F1)
- Developmental immunotoxicity:
- not examined
Effect levels (F1)
- Key result
- Dose descriptor:
- NOEL
- Generation:
- F1
- Effect level:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Based on:
- test mat.
- Sex:
- male/female
- Basis for effect level:
- other: There were no effects on fetal development. There was no difference between the control and treated groups in male and female fetal body weights or in external findings.
Target system / organ toxicity (F1)
- Key result
- Critical effects observed:
- no
Overall reproductive toxicity
- Key result
- Reproductive effects observed:
- no
- Lowest effective dose / conc.:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)
- Treatment related:
- no
Any other information on results incl. tables
Individual Animal Disposition and Physical Examinations
Day Numbers Relative to Mating Date |
|||||||||
Group |
Sex |
Animal |
Clinical Sign |
5 |
6 |
11 |
14 |
17 |
21 |
1 |
F |
22113 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
22114 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22115 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22116 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22117 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22118 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
2 |
F |
22119 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
22120 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22121 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22122 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22123 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22124 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
3 |
F |
22125 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
22126 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22127 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22128 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22129 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22130 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
4 |
F |
22131 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
22132 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22133 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22134 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22135 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
||
22136 |
No abnormalities Detected Terminal Kill |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X - |
X X |
Nominal Dose: Group 1 – 0 mg/kg Group 2 – 100 mg/kg Group 3 – 300 mg/kg Group 4 – 1000 mg/kg
Individual Body Weights (g)
Day Numbers Relative to Mating Date |
||||||||
Group |
Sex |
Animal |
5 |
8 |
11 |
14 |
17 |
21 |
1 |
F |
22113a 22114 22115 22116 22117 22118 |
253.9 230.5 248.3 250.4 248.6 252.1 |
269.4 247.2 272.1 256.9 258.3 266.5 |
279.0 258.1 279.6 281.1 286.4 288.9 |
279.5 273.6 302.5 298.2 294.3 316.8 |
278.9 292.0 322.1 319.2 320.3 340.8 |
289.1 348.1 383.6 380.2 384.8 406.9 |
Mean S.D. N |
245.98 8.79 5 |
260.20 9.55 5 |
278.82 12.19 5 |
297.08 15.64 5 |
318.88 17.43 5 |
380.72 21.06 5 |
||
2 |
F |
22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 |
250.4 237.8 252.8 238.6 251.6 243.8 |
281.9 261.6 271.1 247.8 261.6 259.6 |
299.0 275.3 296.0 270.9 279.9 277.5 |
315.2 299.2 314.1 286.0 302.7 298.1 |
339.1 314.3 335.1 311.7 320.0 325.9 |
406.7 364.8 405.4 356.1 374.6 379.7 |
Mean S.D. N |
245.83 6.69 6 |
263.93 11.52 6 |
283.10 11.58 6 |
302.55 10.94 6 |
324.35 11.09 6 |
381.22 20.88 6 |
||
3 |
F |
22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 |
250.2 250.8 233.0 253.9 230.3 240.3 |
273.0 270.2 257.6 268.4 241.0 246.1 |
289.7 280.0 274.8 289.5 255.7 269.2 |
277.7 295.7 296.8 316.5 276.5 281.9 |
320.3 314.5 315.8 334.9 296.0 300.7 |
374.9 359.3 373.6 393.0 342.3 357.0 |
Mean S.D. N |
243.08 10.00 6 |
259.38 13.43 6 |
276.48 12.99 6 |
290.85 15.33 6 |
313.70 14.00 6 |
366.68 17.61 6 |
||
4 |
F |
22131 22132 22133 22134 22135 22136 |
236.5 264.7 251.6 253.3 238.0 247.9 |
256.2 287.6 271.3 264.4 243.0 258.9 |
267.5 306.2 284.6 290.2 261.4 281.7 |
284.7 330.4 301.2 316.9 271.5 305.6 |
299.9 355.8 319.9 331.8 281.6 323.9 |
355.2 421.9 368.8 390.3 309.3 376.2 |
Mean S.D. N |
248.67 10.48 6 |
263.57 15.08 6 |
281.93 16.09 6 |
301.72 21.31 6 |
318.82 25.72 6 |
370.28 37.55 6 |
aAnimal was not pregnant and values were excluded from the mean.
Nominal Dose: Group 1 – 0 mg/kg Group 2 – 100 mg/kg Group 3 – 300 m/kg Group 4 – 1000 mg/kg
Individual Gross Pathology Observations
Day Numbers Relative to Mating Date |
||||
Animal No. |
Mode of Death |
Death |
Observation(s) |
|
Day |
(Week) |
|||
Group: 1 Sex: Female |
||||
22113
22114 22115 22116
22117 22118 |
Terminal Kill
Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill
Terminal Kill Terminal Kill |
21
21 21 21
21 21 |
(3)
(3) (3) (3)
(3) (3) |
Uterus: IMPLANT SITES NOT EVIDENT, UTERI STAINED IN 10% AMMONIUM SULFIDE Any remaining protocol required tissues, which have been examined, have no visible lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions Animal id: ear tag reads “21073” Any remaining protocol tissues, which have been examined, have no visible lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions |
Group: 2 Sex: Female |
||||
22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 |
Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill |
21 21 21 21 21 21 |
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) |
No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions |
Group: 3 Sex: Female |
||||
22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 |
Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill |
21 21 21 21 21 21 |
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) |
No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions |
Group: 4 Sex: Female |
||||
22131 22132 22133 22134 22135 22136 |
Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill Terminal Kill |
21 21 21 21 21 21 |
(3) (3) (3) (3) (3) (3) |
No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions No Visible Lesions |
Nominal Dose: Group 1 – 0 mg/kg Group 2 – 100 mg/kg Group 3 – 300 mg/kg Group 4 – 1000 mg/kg
Individual Uterine Data
Day 21 Relative to Start Date |
|||||||||||||||
Dam Number |
Number of Corpora Lutea |
Number of Implantations |
Percent Pre-imp Loss |
--Number of Intra-Uterine Deaths-- |
Percent Post-imp Loss |
Number of Live Fetuses |
Live Fetuses as Percent of Imp |
||||||||
L |
R |
L |
R |
Late Resorption |
Early Resorption |
Total Deaths |
L |
R |
|||||||
L |
R |
L |
R |
L |
R |
||||||||||
Group 1: |
|||||||||||||||
22113 (NP) 22114 22115 22116 22117 22118 |
6 8 4 7 7 |
5 6 12 8 9 |
6 8 3 7 6 |
5 6 12 8 9 |
0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 6.3 |
0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 1 |
0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 1 |
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 |
6 8 3 7 6 |
5 6 13 8 8 |
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.3 |
|
32 |
41 |
30 |
41 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
30 |
40 |
|
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
73 14.6 2.3 5 |
71 14.2 1.9 5 |
2.4 |
0
5 |
1 0.2 0.4 5 |
1 0.2 0.4 5 |
1.3 |
70 14.0 1.9 5 |
98.7 |
||||||
Group 2: |
|||||||||||||||
22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 |
10 5 8 6 6 2 |
10 6 7 6 5 7 |
9 3 8 6 6 2 |
9 6 6 6 5 7 |
10.0 18.2 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 1 0 0 |
1 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 1 0 0 |
5.6 0.0 0.0 8.3 0.0 0.0 |
8 3 8 6 6 2 |
9 6 6 5 5 7 |
94.4 100.0 100.0 91.7 100.0 100.0 |
|
37 |
41 |
34 |
39 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
33 |
38 |
|
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
78 13.0 3.9 6 |
73 12.2 3.4 6 |
5.8 |
0
6 |
2 0.3 0.5 6 |
2 0.3 0.5 6 |
2.3 |
71 11.8 3.1 6 |
97.7 |
||||||
Group 3 |
|||||||||||||||
22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 |
8 5 9 6 7 3 |
5 6 6 8 7 10 |
8 5 9 6 7 3 |
5 6 6 8 7 10 |
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 |
0 0 0 1 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 1 2 1 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 2 2 1 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 14.3 7.7 |
8 5 9 4 5 2 |
5 6 6 8 7 10 |
100.0 100.0 100.0 85.7 85.7 92.3 |
|
38 |
42 |
38 |
42 |
|
1 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
|
33 |
42 |
|
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
80 13.2 1.4 6 |
80 13.3 1.4 6 |
0.0 |
1 0.2 0.4 6 |
4 0.7 0.8 6 |
5 0.8 1.0 6 |
6.0 |
75 12.5 1.4 6 |
94.0 |
||||||
Group 4 |
|||||||||||||||
22131 22132 22133 22134 22135 22136 |
9 8 3 7 4 9 |
6 10 9 7 6 6 |
9 7 3 6 2 8 |
5 10 9 6 6 5 |
6.7 5.6 0.0 14.3 20.0 13.3 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 0 0 |
0 0 0 0 2 0 |
0 0 0 0 1 0 |
0 0 0 0 2 0 |
0 0 0 0 1 0 |
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 37.5 0.0 |
9 7 3 6 0 8 |
5 10 9 6 5 5 |
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 62.5 100.0 |
|
40 |
44 |
35 |
41 |
|
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
33 |
40 |
|
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
84 14.0 2.8 6 |
76 12.7 2.9 6 |
10.0 |
0
6 |
3 0.5 1.2 6 |
3 0.5 1.2 6 |
6.3 |
73 12.2 4.0 6 |
93.8 |
(NP) = Not Pregnant. These dams are excluded from all group summary calculations
Nominal Dose: Group 1 – 0 mg/kg Group 2 – 100 mg/kg Group 3 – 300 mg/kg Group 4 – 1000 mg/kg
Mean Fetal Weight per Dam
Day 21 Relative to Start Date |
||||||||
Dam Number |
--Number of Live Fetuses-- |
% Live Male Fetuses |
Litter Weight (g) |
--Mean Fetal Weight (g)-- |
||||
Total |
Males |
Females |
Overall |
Males |
Females |
|||
Group 1 |
||||||||
22113 (NP) 22114 22115 22116 22117 22118 |
11 14 16 15 14 |
5 6 9 8 10 |
6 8 7 7 4 |
45.5 42.9 56.3 53.3 71.4 |
42.2144 52.6816 64.4874 57.5168 57.4989 |
3.83767 3.76297 4.03046 3.83445 4.10706 |
3.85290 3.78620 4.10857 3.97090 4.18762 |
3.82498 3.74555 3.93004 3.67851 3.90568 |
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
70 14.0 1.9 5 |
38 7.6 2.1 5 |
32 6.4 1.5 5 |
53.9 |
54.87982 8.23656 5 |
3.91452 0.14646 5 |
3.98124 0.16839 5 |
3.81695 0.10605 5 |
Group 2 |
||||||||
22119 22120 22121 22122 22123 22124 |
17 9 14 11 11 9 |
6 5 8 8 6 5 |
11 4 6 3 5 4 |
35.3 55.6 57.1 72.7 54.5 55.6 |
60.0439 36.3199 56.4570 44.5799 42.3252 32.4305 |
3.53199 4.03554 4.03264 4.05272 3.84775 3.60339 |
3.80777 4.07892 4.11985 4.09495 3.93530 3.62590 |
3.38157 3.98133 3.91637 3.94010 3.74268 3.57252 |
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
71 11.8 3.1 6 |
38 6.3 1.4 6 |
33 5.5 2.9 6 |
55.1 |
45.35940 10.93137 6 |
3.85067 0.23273 6 |
3.94378 0.19582 6 |
3.75622 0.23809 6 |
Group 3 |
||||||||
22125 22126 22127 22128 22129 22130 |
13 11 15 12 12 12 |
8 9 7 5 6 4 |
5 2 8 7 6 8 |
61.5 81.8 46.7 41.7 50.0 33.3 |
51.3679 46.3479 56.6603 48.8336 45.9274 36.5772 |
3.95138 4.21345 3.77735 4.06947 3.82728 3.04810 |
4.02796 4.26233 3.91691 4.14382 3.94605 2.86098 |
3.82884 3.99345 3.65524 4.01636 3.70582 3.14166 |
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
75 12.5 1.4 6 |
39 6.5 1.9 6 |
36 6.0 2.3 6 |
52.5 |
47.61905 6.68840 6 |
3.81450 0.40788 6 |
3.85968 0.50583 6 |
3.72401 0.32036 6 |
Group 4 |
||||||||
22131 22132 22133 22134 22135 22136 |
14 17 12 12 5 12 |
8 9 3 7 3 5 |
6 8 9 5 2 8 |
57.1 52.9 25.0 58.2 60.0 38.5 |
44.5179 64.2901 46.6073 44.7658 20.0582 47.5946 |
3.17985 3.78177 3.88394 3.73048 4.01164 3.66112 |
3.27755 3.89286 4.05513 3.81910 4.04953 3.81596 |
3.04958 3.65680 3.82688 3.60642 3.95480 3.56435 |
TOTAL Litter Mean S.D. N |
72 12.2 4.0 6 |
35 5.8 2.6 6 |
38 6.3 2.6 6 |
48.6 |
44.63898 14.16349 6 |
3.70813 0.28644 6 |
3.81836 0.28549 6 |
3.60981 0.31122 6 |
(NP) = Not Pregnant
Nominal Dose: Group 1 – 0 mg/kg Group 2 – 100 mg/kg Group 3 – 300 mg/kg Group 4 – 1000 mg/kg
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- Oral gavage administration of decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) at doses up to 1000 mg/kg/day from implantation through the end of gestation had no effect on maternal mortality, physical examinations, cageside observations, body weights, body weight changes, or food consumption.
There were no effects on fetal development. There was no difference between the control and treated groups in male and female fetal body weights or in external findings.
Decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) given orally at doses up to 1000 mg/kg/day to pregnant female Sprague Dawley rats during prenatal development did not result in any adverse effects on the development of the embryo/fetus.
Based on these results, the dose levels of 100, 300, and 1000 mg/kg/day were considered appropriate for the decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) definitive prenatal developmental toxicity study in rats. - Executive summary:
Decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510): Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Dose Range Finder Study in Pregnant Female Sprague Dawley Rats
The purpose of this study was to provide preliminary data on the potential maternal and/or developmental toxicity of decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) in pregnant Sprague Dawley rats when administered via oral gavage during the embryo-fetal development period. The data from this study was used to establish doses for the definitive prenatal developmental toxicity study.
Twenty-four time-mated female Sprague Dawley rats were randomly assigned to four groups (6 females/group). Animals were administered control substance (peanut oil) or decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) at 0, 100, 300, or 1000 mg/kg once daily via oral gavage from presumed gestational day (GD) 5 to 20. Animals were subjected to a full gross necropsy on presumed GD 21.
Parameters evaluated during the study included mortality, physical examinations, cageside observations, body weights, body weight changes, food consumption, gross pathology findings, uterine data, and fetal examination data (external exams).
Treatment with Hatcol 1510 at doses up to 1000 mg/kg/day had no effect on mortality, physical examinations, cageside observations, body weights, body weight changes, food consumption, gross pathology findings, uterine data, or fetal examination data (external exams).
There were no differences between the control and treated groups in male and female fetal body weights or in external findings.
Decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) given orally at doses up to 1000 mg/kg/day to pregnant female Sprague Dawley rats during prenatal development did not result in any adverse effects on the development of the embryo/fetus.
Based on these results, the dose levels of 100, 300, and 1000 mg/kg/day were considered appropriate for the decanoic acid, mixed esters with heptanoic acid, octanoic acid and trimethylolpropane (Hatcol 1510) definitive prenatal developmental toxicity study in rats.
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.
Although ECHA is providing a lot of online material in your language, part of this page is only in English. More about ECHA’s multilingual practice.
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.
the-echa-website-uses-cookies
find-out-more-on how-we-use-cookies