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: 203-904-5
CAS number: 111-75-1
used in an experiment which was conducted according to DIN 38412, part
15 (BASF AG, 1989). Since no mortality occurred up to the highest tested
concentration of 100 mg/L, the LC50(96h) is considered to be > 100 mg/L.
Thus, Butylaminoethanol can be considered as non-toxic to freshwater
the chemical safety assessment and due to animal welfare, no long-term
investigation is triggered. An allusion to long-term toxicity is given
by the prediction using ECOSAR v1.00 (Chemservice S.A., 2011). The
result revealed a Chronic Value (ChV, 30d) far above 10 mg/L, which is
the trigger value for a low toxicity concern. Taking into consideration
results from short-term toxicity tests on fish, Daphnia and algae, there
is a high probability that the most sensitive species (algae) has
already been examined and that a further long-term result from fish
would not be lower than the data already available.
the exposure levels estimated in all relevant scenarios do not exceed
the appropriate PNEC (all risk characterization ratios are under 1.0),
and the likelihood and severity of an event occurring due to the
physicochemical properties of the substance in the aquatic environment
to aquatic invertebrates
toxicity towardsDaphnia magnawas investigated according to OECD
Guideline 202 / EU Method C.2 (Muckle, 2013). Five nominal
concentrations were used as followed: 0 (control), 10, 22, 46, 100 and
220 mg/L. Measured concentrations at the end were in a range between 107
% and 122 % of the nominal concentration and in a range of 104 - 123 %
of the measured start concentration, respectively. The following results
were reported: EC50(48h): 180 mg/L and a NOEC(48h) of 52 mg/L. All
validity criteria were met with exception of a pH deviation, since the
pH at the beginning in the higher concentrated treatments was
untypically high. Thus might be caused by the test substance properties,
however, according to the applied guidelines, no pH adjustment was
performed.Toxic effects may be caused at least partly by a pH-shift
in the test solutions at concentrations above 46 mg/L.
Based on the
chemical safety assessment (CSA), no long-term toxicity investigations
are triggered in accordance to REACH, Annex IX, Section 9.1.5, column 2.The
exposure levels estimated in all relevant scenarios do not exceed the
appropriate PNEC, and the likelihood and severity of an event occurring
due to the physicochemical properties of the substance in the aquatic
environment are negligible.
to aquatic algae
toxicity to aquatic algae was tested according to OECD Guideline 201 and
EU Method C.3 withDesmodesmus subspicatusas test organism
(Muckle, 2013). Five test concentrations were used, ranging from 0.1 to
10 mg/L (nominal). Significant inhibition of algal growth was observed
at the concentrations of 1.0 mg/L, 3.2 mg/L and 10 mg/L. The measured
concentrations were in a range between 106 % and 143 % of the nominal
concentrations. Therefore the biological results were based on the
geometric mean of the measured concentrations. Based on the growth rate
(72h), an ErC10 of 2.4 mg/L[#], a NOErC of 0.39 mg/L[#], a LOErC of 1.2
mg/L and an ErC50 of 30 mg/L (extrapolated) are reported. With regard to
the AUC (72h, performed according to EU Method C.3), a NOEbC of 0.39
mg/L, a LOEbC of 1.2 mg/L and an EbC50 of 9.9 mg/L are determined. Based
on the yield (72h), a NOEyC of 0.39 mg/L, a LOEyC of 1.2 mg/L and an
EyC50 of 5.2 mg/L are reported.
the test substance concerning long-term toxicity to green algae a
ChV(4d) of 70.44 mg/L is predicted for baseline toxicity and a ChV(4d)
of 5.991 mg/L is predicted applying the SAR 'Aliphatic Amines',
indicating a moderate toxicity concern.
ErC10 instead of the NOErC was considered as the key value for the
chemical safety assessment. According to the Guidance on information
requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.10:
Characterisation of dose [concentration]-response for environment "an
EC10 for a long-term test which is obtained using an appropriate
statistical method (usually regression analysis) will be used
preferentially. [...] There has been a recommendation within OECD in
1996 to phase out the use of the NOEC, in particular as it can
correspond to large and potentially biologically important magnitudes of
effect. The advantage of regression method for the estimation of ECx is
that information from the whole concentration-effect relationship is
taken into account and that confidence intervals can be calculated.
These methods result in an ECx, where x is a low effect percentile (e.g.
5-20%). It makes results from different experiments more comparable than
NOECs." Therefore, the EC10 instead of the NOEC has been used to derive
(2013) investigated the toxicity towards aquatic microorganisms in an
experiment conducted according to OECD Guideline 209 / EU Method C.11.
The EC10(3h) is reported as 350 mg/L, EC50(3h) and EC80(3h) were > 1000
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.
Deze website maakt gebruik van cookies om het surfen zo aangenaam mogelijk te maken.
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