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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 230-386-8 | CAS number: 7085-19-0
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Skin Sensitisation In Vivo: Kirsch (1984)
Under the conditions of this study, the skin sensitising potential of the test material is inconclusive due to the high percentage of control animals that exhibit the same reactions as the test animals.
Skin Sensitisation In Vivo: Grundler (1984)
Under the conditions of this study, the test material was found to have no skin sensitising effect.
Skin Sensitisation In Vitro: Waiver
An in vitro skin sensitisation study does not need to be conducted because adequate data from in vivo skin sensitisation studies are available.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 17 August 1983 to 15 September 1983
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The study pre-dates the introduction of the LLNA method.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- TREATMENT OF TEST MATERIAL PRIOR TO TESTING
- Preparation of the test material formulations: Immediately before test material application with Ultraturrax or with a magnetic stirrer. Formulations of the test material were prepared gravimetrically. The test material was prepared in at appropriate concentrations in distilled water (aqua dest.), distilled water and paraffin oil or distilled water and Freund's adjuvant (FCA). - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Females nulliparous and non-pregnant: Not specified
- Weight at study initiation: 264 - 329 g
- Housing: Macrolon, type IV cages. 5 animals per cage.
- Diet: Ad libitum
- Water : Ad libitum, tap water; about 2 g of ascorbic acid per 10 L water was added to the drinking water twice a week.
- Acclimation period: At least 7 Days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 20 - 24 °C
- Humidity: 30 - 70 %
- Photoperiod: 12 hours light (6.00 - 18.00 hours) / 12 hours darkness (18.00 - 6.00 hours) - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 10 % w/w in paraffin oil/aqua dest. (1:1), FCA/ aqua dest (1:1)
- Day(s)/duration:
- Treatment on Day 1
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- Route:
- other: Percutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 50 % w/w (about 0.3 g)
- Day(s)/duration:
- Treatment 7 Days after indradermal induction for 48 hours
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- other: percutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 10 % w/w
- Day(s)/duration:
- Treatment 14 days after percutaneous application
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- other: percutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 10 % w/w
- Day(s)/duration:
- One week after first challenge
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- 20 animals per test group, 10 animals per control group
- Details on study design:
- PRETESTS:
2 x 2 cm filter paper strips were applied to the skin of the flanks under an occlusive dressing. In the case of liquids the test filter paper strip is soaked in the test material formulation; in the case of solid substances the paper strip is coated with an approx. 0.5 mm thick layer of the test material formulation; thus, the animals were exposed to about 0.15 g of the test material formulation. Exposure period was 24 Hours, there were four test animals per concentration and there were readings 24, 48 and 72 hours after the beginning of application.
In the pretest, with percutaneous occlusive application, a 25 % aqueous formulation of the test material was found to be the minimum irritant concentration and a 25 % aqueous test substance formulation the maximum non-irritant concentration. Since in an initial test with a challenge with 25 % aqueous test material concentration, unclear test results were obtained (skin reactions in control and test animals), the concentration of the challenge was reduced to 10 % in the present investigation.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Intradermal induction: 6 intradermal injections in groups of two per animal
- Exposure period: 48 Hours
- Test groups: (A) Front row: 2 injections each of 0.1 mL Freund's adjuvant without test material emulsified with water in a ratio of 1:1. (B) Middle row: 2 injections each of 0.1 mL of the test material formulation. (C) Back row: 2 injections each of 0.1 mL Freund's adjuvant / water (1:1) with test material
- Control group: The animals were given the same injections but without the test material, only with the formulating agent
- Site: Shoulder
- Readings: 24 hours after the beginning of application
- Percutaneous induction: 0.3 g of test material formulation was applied by means of 2 x 4 cm filter strip to the skin of the shoulder under an occlusive dressing.
- Exposure period: 48 hours
- Control groups: Control animals were not treated since the distilled water used as a formulating agent was not expected to influence the result of the study
- Site: Shoulder
- Readings: 48 hours after the beginning of application
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- Challenge 1: 0.15 g of test material formulation was applied by means of 2 x 2 cm filter strip to the skin of the flank under an occlusive dressing. Test group and control group one received treatment with test material formulation (control without test material), control group remained untreated.
- Challenge 2: Amount applied and method of application was the same as challenge one. Test group and both control groups one and two received test material formulation (controls without test material)
- Days of challenge: Challenge 1 was 19 days after intradermal induction, challenge 2 began 26 days after intradermal induction.
- Exposure period: 24 Hours
- Site: intact clipped flanks
- Concentrations: 10 % (w/w) of test material in aqua dest.
- Readings: 24, 48 and 72 hours after the beginning of application
OTHER:
- Preparation of animals: Clipping of the test animals, if required, was completed 3 to 5 hours before each reading and before each test material application at the appropriate application sites.
- Clinical examinations: No detailed examinations; a check for sick animals and for those showing deteriorated general state each workday.
- Bodyweight: Animals were weighed before each test material application and before the end of the study
- Scoring:
Erythema and eschar formation:
No erythema = 0
Very slight erythema (barely perceptible) = 1
Well-defined erythema = 2
Moderate to severe erythema = 3
Severe erythema (beet redness) to slight eschar formation (injuries in depth) = 4
Oedema formation
No oedema = 0
Very slight oedema (barely perceptible) = 1
Slight oedema (edges of area well defined by definite raising) = 2
Moderate oedema (raised approximately 1 mm) = 3
Severe oedema (raised more than 1 mm and extending beyond the area of exposure) = 4 - Challenge controls:
- A formulating agent was used that was not expected to influence the result of the test.
- Positive control substance(s):
- no
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w in aqua dest.
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w in aqua dest.
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, and very slight edema
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10 % in aqua dest
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, thin scab-like layers
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w in aqua dest.
- No. with + reactions:
- 15
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, thin scab-like layers
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10 % in aqua dest.
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w in aqua dest.
- No. with + reactions:
- 14
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, and very slight edema
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w aqua dest
- No. with + reactions:
- 13
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, thin scab-like layers
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10 % w/w aqua dest
- No. with + reactions:
- 17
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- Very slight erythema, and very slight edema, thin scab-like layers
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not classified according to EU criteria
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, the skin sensitising potential of the test material is inconclusive due to the high percentage of control animals that exhibit the same reactions as the test animals.
- Executive summary:
The sensitising potential of the test material was investigated similar to OECD Test Guideline 406 and in accordance with GLP.
20 female guinea pigs were initially subjected to an intradermal induction, where they each received 6 injections in groups of two into the shoulder. Two injections contained 0.1 mL FCA without test material emulsified with water in a ratio 1:1, two injections contained 1 mL of the test material formulation (10 % (w/w) in distilled water), and finally two injections contained 0.1 mL FCA in water (1:1) with test material. After intradermal induction, distinct erythema and oedema were observed at the injection sites of the test animals and also in the case of the control animals that only received Freund's adjuvant or paraffin oil and aqua dest. (1:1) without test material; 11 test animals had necrotic skin changes. Percutaneous induction was carried out a week later, where 50 % w/w test material in distilled water was added to the same area of skin via a filter paper strip. The site was exposed for 48 hours. Percutaneous induction was only carried out in the case of the guinea pigs of the experiment group, incrustation being observed in addition to distinct erythema and oedema. No application was made to the control animals, since, with aqua dest., a vehicle was used that was not expected to influence the result of the test.
Two challenges were then undertaken, with the first beginning 19 days after the intradermal induction. The test material was applied to the clipped flank of the animals by percutaneous application (conc. 10 % w/w in aqua dest.), for 24 hours. In contrast to the percutaneous induction, the skin findings observed in the two challenges are almost without exception merely very slight, scarcely perceptible reactions: erythema and thin scab-like layers and in the 2nd challenge also isolated cases of oedema were observed.
At the readings after 48 hours the number of animals with skin findings in the test group is appreciably higher than that in control group 1. However, as a result of evidently delayed reactions, the ratio of guinea pigs with skin changes to the number of animals used is in the same range in the control groups as in the test group at the readings after 72 hours.
Under the conditions of this study, the skin sensitising potential of the test material is inconclusive due to the high percentage of control animals that exhibit the same reactions as the test animals.- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vitro
- Data waiving:
- study scientifically not necessary / other information available
- Justification for data waiving:
- an in vitro skin sensitisation study does not need to be conducted because adequate data from an in vivo skin sensitisation study are available
- Justification for type of information:
- An in vitro skin sensitisation study does not need to be conducted because adequate data from in vivo skin sensitisation studies are available.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- An Open Epicutaneous Test (OET) was performed to assess the skin sensitising potential of the test material investigated in a test model that takes greater account of the concentration dependence and also permits a practice-related assessment.
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- open epicutaneous test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The study pre-dates the inception of the LLNA guideline.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Concentration / amount:
- 50, 15, 5 and 1.5 % (w/w)
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Concentration / amount:
- 50, 15, 5 and 1.5 % (w/w)
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- 8 animals per dose in control groups
- Details on study design:
- MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Exposure period: Four weeks
- Concentrations: 50, 15 5 and 1.5 %
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE:
- Concentrations: 50, 15, 5 and 1.5 %
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24, 48 and 72 hours - Positive control substance(s):
- no
- Dose level:
- 1.5 %
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Dose level:
- 5 %
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not classified according to EU criteria
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, the test material was found to have no skin sensitising effect.
- Executive summary:
The skin sensitising potential of the test material was investigated using the Open Epicutaneous Test (OET).
The test material concentration selected for the induction and challenge tests were 50, 15, 5 and 1.5 %. During the induction, skin changes only occurred at the two highest concentrations of test material formulation (50 and 15 %) after several applications and did not show an appreciable increase in intensity during the four-week treatment period. After the two challenges, scarcely any qualitative or quantitative differences were found between the control and test groups. Test reactions were observed in very isolated cases at the 5 % challenge and in both pre-treated and non-pretreated animals at higher concentrations, therefore it can be concluded that the test material does not exhibit sensitising potential in the OET.
Under the conditions of this study, the test material was found to have no skin sensitising effect.
Referenceopen allclose all
The Number of Animals with Skin Findings in Challenge Trials
1st challenge | 2nd challenge | |||
10 % in aqua dest. | ||||
48 h after application | 72 h after application | 48 h after application | 72 h after application | |
Control group 1 | 0/10 | 8/10 | 3/10 | 6/10 |
Control group 2 | untreated | 0/10 | 7/10 | |
Test group* | 3/19 | 15/19 | 14/19 | 17/19 |
x/y: Number of skin changes/number of guinea pigs tested
*1/20 animals died from pneumonia 20 days after the intradermal injection
Induction:
The skin changes during induction that only occurred after several applications and were caused mainly by 50 and 15 % test material formulations, did not exhibit any appreciable increase in intensity during the 4-week period of treatment (maximally slight erythema, very slight scarcely perceptible oedema and in some cases scale formation). In the case of a contact allergen an intensification of the findings would have been expected in the course of the 20 applications of the test material.
First challenge:
At the 1st challenge no animal showed any reaction 24 hour after application.
48 hours after application, in the case of the animals challenged with 50 and 15 %, the number of guinea pigs with skin reactions in the control group was lower than in the pretreated groups, which reacted in the same way qualitatively and quantitatively independently of the induction concentration.
At the reading after 72 hours, however, the number of guinea pigs with skin changes in the control group had increased to 7 out of 8 animals at the 50 % challenge concentration and to 4 out of 8 at the 15 % one.
Second challenge:
At the second challenge slight skin reactions occurred even 24 hours after application at the 50 % concentration and in some cases also at the 15 % challenge concentrations in the animals that had already been challenged. This applies equally to the animals of control group 1 and to all test groups pretreated at the various concentrations. Only control group 2, in which the animals had not previously been contacted with the test material, showed no reaction.
48 hours after the 2nd challenge, a skin reaction was also detectable
in most of the animals of control group 2 in the same way as the treated
animals and control group 1 at the 50 and 15 % challenge concentrations.
72 hours after the 2nd challenge the number of guinea pigs with skin changes had increased further in several test groups and in the 2nd control group at the 15 % challenge concentration.
Overall:
As a rule the challenge with 5 and 1 .5 % test material formulations
proceeded without any apparent reaction. Merely some control and test
animals exhibited scarcely perceptible erythema at the 5 % challenge.
On the basis of the reduction of the reaction threshold in pretreated
animals in comparison with control animals that have not had any contact
with the test material, it is the aim of the OET to demonstrate a
sensitisation in dependence on the induction and challenge
concentrations. Since in this test reactions were observed in very
isolated cases at the 5 % challenge and in both pretreated and
non-pretreated animals at higher concentrations, the test material did
not exhibit a sensitising potential in the OET. Furthermore, conclusions
about a possible sensitising potential of the test material may also be
drawn from the course of the reactions during induction in the OET.
Contact allergens cause an appreciable increase in skin reactions from
the 3rd week of induction onward.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Skin Sensitisation: Kirsch (1984)
The sensitising potential of the test material was investigated similar to OECD Test Guideline 406 and in accordance with GLP. The study was awarded a reliability score of 2 in accordance with the criteria set forth by Klimisch et al. (1997).
20 female guinea pigs were initially subjected to an intradermal induction, where they each received 6 injections in groups of two into the shoulder. Two injections contained 0.1 mL FCA without test material emulsified with water in a ratio 1:1, two injections contained 1 mL of the test material formulation (10 % (w/w) in distilled water), and finally two injections contained 0.1 mL FCA in water (1:1) with test material. After intradermal induction, distinct erythema and edema were observed at the injection sites of the test animals and also in the case of the control animals that only received Freund's adjuvant or paraffin oil and aqua dest. (1:1) without test material; 11 test animals had necrotic skin changes. Percutaneous induction was carried out a week later, where 50 % w/w test material in distilled water was added to the same area of skin via a filter paper strip. The site was exposed for 48 hours. Percutaneous induction was only carried out in the case of the guinea pigs of the experiment group, incrustation being observed in addition to distinct erythema and oedema. No application was made to the control animals, since, with aqua dest., a vehicle was used that was not expected to influence the result of the test.
Two challenges were then undertaken, with the first beginning 19 days after the intradermal induction. The test material was applied to the clipped flank of the animals by percutaneous application (conc. 10 % w/w in aqua dest.), for 24 hours. In contrast to the percutaneous induction, the skin findings observed in the two challenges are almost without exception merely very slight, scarcely perceptible reactions: erythema and thin scab-like layers and in the 2nd challenge also isolated cases of oedema were observed.
At the readings after 48 hours the number of animals with skin findings in the test group is appreciably higher than that in control group 1. However, as a result of evidently delayed reactions, the ratio of guinea pigs with skin changes to the number of animals used is in the same range in the control groups as in the test group at the readings after 72 hours.
Under the conditions of this study, the skin sensitising potential of the test material is inconclusive due to the high percentage of control animals that exhibit the same reactions as the test animals.Skin Sensitisation: Grundler (1984)
The skin sensitising potential of the test material was investigated using the Open Epicutaneous Test (OET). The study was awarded a reliability score of 2 in accordance with the criteria set forth by Klimisch et al. (1997).
The test material concentration selected for the induction and challenge tests were 50, 15, 5 and 1.5 %. During the induction, skin changes only occurred at the two highest concentrations of test material formulation (50 and 15 %) after several applications and did not show an appreciable increase in intensity during the four-week treatment period. After the two challenges, scarcely any qualitative or quantitative differences were found between the control and test groups. Test reactions were observed in very isolated cases at the 5 % challenge and in both pre-treated and non-pretreated animals at higher concentrations, therefore it can be concluded that the test material does not exhibit sensitising potential in the OET.
Under the conditions of this study, the test material was found to have no skin sensitising effect.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
In accordance with the criteria for classification as defined in Annex I, Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, the substance does not require classification with respect to skin sensitisation.
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.