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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 204-420-7 | CAS number: 120-72-9
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Genetic toxicity in vitro
Description of key information
Bacterial in vitro mutagenicity (Ames test) of the target Indole was estimated by using four predictors: Leadscope, ACD/Percepta, Vega and Toxtree decision rule system. The four predictors, which are based on different prediction methodologies (i.e., statistical and expert rule-based), were combined by expert judgment in order to complement each other and thus enhance the reliability of the predictions. In the combined assessment “not reliable” predictions were not considered. In the case of Indole, ACD/Percepta and Toxtree prediction were not taken into account due to the fact that ACD/Percepta prediction resulted to be undefined, while Toxtree predictions resulted to be not reliable. Leadscope and Vega were in agreement providing negative predictions of different level of confidence (borderline and moderate, respectively). Thus, based on Leadscope and Vega predictions, it was concluded that Indole was predicted as NEGATIVE for bacterial in vitro mutagenicity and the prediction was assessed as moderate reliable. It is highlighted that both positive and negative experimental Ames test results are available for the target compound Indole. In particular, negative results are reported for Salmonella strains TA97 and TA102, with and without metabolic activation, and TA100, without activation; positive results are reported for Salmonella strains TA98 and TA100, and E. coli WP2uvrA, with and without metabolic activation.
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
- Type of information:
- (Q)SAR
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2017
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- results derived from a valid (Q)SAR model and falling into its applicability domain, with adequate and reliable documentation / justification
- Justification for type of information:
- QSAR
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- QSAR: Bacterial in vitro mutagenicity (Ames test) of the target Indole was estimated by using four predictors: Leadscope, ACD/Percepta, Vega and Toxtree decision rule system. The four predictors, which are based on different prediction methodologies (i.e., statistical and expert rule-based), were combined by expert judgment in order to complement each other and thus enhance the reliability of the predictions. In the combined assessment “not reliable” predictions were not considered.
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 97
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 102
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 98
- Species / strain / cell type:
- E. coli WP2 uvr A
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 97
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 102
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 98
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- positive
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- positive
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Species / strain:
- E. coli WP2 uvr A
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- positive
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not specified
- Positive controls validity:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no mutagenic potential (based on QSAR/QSPR prediction)
- Conclusions:
- Bacterial in vitro mutagenicity (Ames test) of the target Indole was estimated by using four predictors: Leadscope, ACD/Percepta, Vega and Toxtree decision rule system. The four predictors, which are based on different prediction methodologies (i.e., statistical and expert rule-based), were combined by expert judgment in order to complement each other and thus enhance the reliability of the predictions. In the combined assessment “not reliable” predictions were not considered. In the case of Indole, ACD/Percepta and Toxtree prediction were not taken into account due to the fact that ACD/Percepta prediction resulted to be undefined, while Toxtree predictions resulted to be not reliable. Leadscope and Vega were in agreement providing negative predictions of different level of confidence (borderline and moderate, respectively). Thus, based on Leadscope and Vega predictions, it was concluded that Indole was predicted as NEGATIVE for bacterial in vitro mutagenicity and the prediction was assessed as moderate reliable. It is highlighted that both positive and negative experimental Ames test results are available for the target compound Indole. In particular, negative results are reported for Salmonella strains TA97 and TA102, with and without metabolic activation, and TA100, without activation; positive results are reported for Salmonella strains TA98 and TA100, and E. coli WP2uvrA, with and without metabolic activation
- Executive summary:
Bacterial in vitro mutagenicity (Ames test) of the target Indole was estimated by using four predictors: Leadscope, ACD/Percepta, Vega and Toxtree decision rule system. The four predictors, which are based on different prediction methodologies (i.e., statistical and expert rule-based), were combined by expert judgment in order to complement each other and thus enhance the reliability of the predictions. In the combined assessment “not reliable” predictions were not considered. In the case of Indole, ACD/Percepta and Toxtree prediction were not taken into account due to the fact that ACD/Percepta prediction resulted to be undefined, while Toxtree predictions resulted to be not reliable. Leadscope and Vega were in agreement providing negative predictions of different level of confidence (borderline and moderate, respectively). Thus, based on Leadscope and Vega predictions, it was concluded that Indole was predicted as NEGATIVE for bacterial in vitro mutagenicity and the prediction was assessed as moderate reliable. It is highlighted that both positive and negative experimental Ames test results are available for the target compound Indole. In particular, negative results are reported for Salmonella strains TA97 and TA102, with and without metabolic activation, and TA100, without activation; positive results are reported for Salmonella strains TA98 and TA100, and E. coli WP2uvrA, with and without metabolic activation.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (negative)
Additional information
Justification for classification or non-classification
Ames test negative. Need the chromosome aberration test, after it we can classify it.
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.