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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 234-294-9 | CAS number: 11071-47-9
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: GLP compliant, guideline study, available as unpublished report, no restrictions, fully adequate for assessment
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: David Hall, Darley Oaks, Newchurch, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, England
- Age at study initiation: 6-8 weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 329-394 g (males); 303-372 g (females)
- Housing: No more than 5/sex/cage in stainless steel cages
- Diet: Guinea pig FDI (Special Diets Services Limited, Witham, Essex, England) ad libitum
- Water: Tap water ad libitum
- Acclimatisation period: between 6-16 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 19-24°C
- Humidity: 41-74%
- Air changes: 10 per hour
- Photoperiod: 12 hrs dark / 12 hrs light
IN-LIFE DATES: From: 3 June 1996 To: 4 July 1996 - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- paraffin oil
- Concentration / amount:
- 50% v/v for intradermal injections and 100% (as supplied) for epicutaneous application
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- paraffin oil
- Concentration / amount:
- 50% v/v for intradermal injections and 100% (as supplied) for epicutaneous application
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10/sex (test group) 5/sex (negative control group)
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: A primary skin irritation screen was used to determine the concentration of test material used during the main study. The maximum practicable concentration of the test material in the chosen vehicle was taken as 50% v/v for injection administration and as supplied (100%) for topical applications.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Three pairs of intradermal injections of Freunds Complete Adjuvant, 50% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil and 50% v/v 2,4,4,-trimethyl pentene in the adjuvant were made on Day 1.
Seven days later the same area of skin was treated by topical application of 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene as supplied and the test site was covered by an occlusive dressing for 48 hours.
The same induction procedures were carried out on a contemporaneous control group of five male and five female animals, except that the test material was replaced by vehicle in all doses.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
On Day 22, all animals were challenged by occluded application of paraffin oil to the left flank and 75% and 30% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil to two sites on the right flank. The occlusive dressings were removed on the following day and the condition of the test sites was assessed approximately 24 and 48 hours later. - Challenge controls:
- The same induction procedures were carried out on a contemporaneous control group of five male and five female animals, except that the test material was replaced by vehicle in all doses.
Challenge was identical as for test animals.
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Statistics:
- Not applicable
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 6
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 75%. No with. + reactions: 6.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 9
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 75 %. No with. + reactions: 9.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 75%. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 75%. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 30%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 30%. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 30%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 30%. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information
- Conclusions:
- Repeated administration of 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene had, at most, a low potential to cause delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea-pigs. It does not require classification as a dermal sensitiser according to the EU classification system.
- Executive summary:
Under the conditions of this study, repeated administration of 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene had, at most, a low potential to cause delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea-pigs. The incidence of significant response was below the EEC limit value (30%) to classify the test material as a dermal sensitizer.
Reference
Intradermal injection of 50% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in adjuvant gave rise to moderate erythema, pallor and eschar formation; no dermal reaction resulted from a similar administration of 50% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil.
Occluded topical application of 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene as supplied caused slight erythema and exfoliation.
Challenge application of 75% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil gave rise to a positive response (slight erythema or a more marked reaction) in nine test and three control animals.
Challenge application of 30% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil caused a positive response in three test animals and one control animal.
Challenge application of paraffin oil alone caused a positive response in four test animals.
A significant response (a reaction more severe than the most marked amongst the controls) was evident in three test animals following challenge application of 75% v/v 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene in paraffin oil and in no test animals following challenge application of the 30% formulation.
It was concluded that, under the conditions of this study, repeated administration of 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene had, at most, a low potential to cause delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea-pigs. The incidence of significant response was below the EEC limit value (30%) to classify the test material as a dermal sensitizer.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Non human data
Skin sensitisation
There is no specific study on isooctene but read-across to the C8 branched olefin, 2,4,4 -trimethylpentene is considered valid. This substance was not a dermal sensitiser when tested in a OECD TG 406 guinea pig maximisation test (HLS, 1997; supporting study). A test group of 20 guinea pigs received 50% 2,4,4-trimethylpentene (in paraffin oil) and Freund’s complete adjuvant for intradermal induction, followed by topical application of undiluted 2,4,4-trimethylpentene under occlusive dressing for 48 hours. In the challenge, 0.03 ml of a 75% and 30% solution of 2,4,4-trimethylpentene (in paraffin oil) was applied to the intact skin for 24 hours under an occlusive dressing. The challenge application of 75% solution resulted in a positive response in 9 treated animals (45%) and 3 control animals (15%); the challenge application of 30% solution resulted in positive response in 3 treated animals (15%) and 1 control animal (5%). Although some response was seen, it was concluded 2,4,4-trimethyl pentene had, at most, a low potential to cause delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea-pigs and the incidence of significant response was below the EEC limit value (30%) to classify the test material as a dermal sensitiser.
Human data
No data available
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Based on read across to the C8 branched olefin (2,4,4 -trimethylpentene), the evidence indicates that that isooctene is not a skin sensitiser.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Additional information:
No data have been sourced concerning respiratory sensitisation and there are no indications that isooctene is a respiratory allergen.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
There are no specific data on respiratory sensitisation.
Justification for classification or non-classification
There are sufficient data (by read-across) to indicate that isoctene is not a skin sensitiser and no classification is warranted for this end-point under DSD or CLP.
Although there are no specific data on respiratory sensitisation, there is no evidence that classification is warranted for this end-point under DSD or CLP.
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.