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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 260-398-9 | CAS number: 56836-93-2
- 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 corrosion: The substance is not corrosive based on absence of skin irritation.
Skin irritation (OECD TG 439): not irritating
Eye irritation (OECD TG 438): irritating
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 28 September 2016 - 3 October 2016
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 439 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method)
- Version / remarks:
- 28 July 2015
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.46 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Model Test)
- Version / remarks:
- 23 July 2009
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Test system:
- human skin model
- Source species:
- other: human
- Cell type:
- other: epidermal keratinocytes
- Cell source:
- other: SkinEthic Laboratories, Lyon, France
- Source strain:
- other: not applicable
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Details on test system:
- RECONSTRUCTED HUMAN EPIDERMIS (RHE) TISSUE
- Model used: EPISKIN TM
- Tissue batch number(s): 16-EKIN-039
- Production date/Shipping date: no data
- Delivery date: 27 September 2016
- Date of initiation of testing: 29 September 2016
TEMPERATURE USED FOR TEST SYSTEM
- Temperature used during treatment / exposure / post-treatment incubation: 37 °C
REMOVAL OF TEST MATERIAL AND CONTROLS
- Tissues were washed with phosphate buffered saline to remove residual test item.
MTT DYE USED TO MEASURE TISSUE VIABILITY AFTER TREATMENT / EXPOSURE
- MTT concentration: 0.3 mg/ml in PBS
- Incubation time: 3 hours at 37 °C
- Spectrophotometer: not specified
- Wavelength: 562 nm (without reference fildeter)
- Filter: no data
- Linear OD range of spectrophotometer: no data
NUMBER OF REPLICATE TISSUES: 3
CONTROL TISSUES USED IN CASE OF MTT DIRECT INTERFERENCE
Not required as no MTT colour interference expected (assessment done).
DECISION CRITERIA
- A test substance is considered irritant in the skin irritation test if: The relative mean tissue viability of three individual tissues after 15 minutes of exposure to the test substance and 42 hours of post incubation is ≤50% of the mean viability of the negative controls.
- A test substance is considered non-irritant in the in vitro skin irritation test if: The relative mean tissue viability of three individual tissues after 15 minutes of exposure to the test substance and 42 hours of post incubation is > 50% of the mean viability of the negative controls. - Control samples:
- yes, concurrent negative control
- yes, concurrent positive control
- Amount/concentration applied:
- - Applied volume: 10 μL
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 15 minutes
- Duration of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):
- 42 hours
- Number of replicates:
- 3
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- % tissue viability
- Run / experiment:
- Relative mean tissue viability compared to the negative control tissues (=100%)
- Value:
- 109.2
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks:
- 5.9% viability
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- OTHER EFFECTS:
- Direct-MTT reduction: No colour changes observed
- Colour interference with MTT: No colour changes observed
DEMONSTRATION OF TECHNICAL PROFICIENCY: No data
ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
-The relative mean tissue viability for the positive control treated tissues was 5.9% relative to the negative control treated tissues and the standard deviation value of the viability was 1.7%. The positive control acceptance criteria were therefore satisfied.
-The mean OD562 for the negative control treated tissues was 1.013 and the standard deviation value of the viability was 2.8%. The negative control acceptance criteria were therefore satisfied.
-The standard deviation calculated from individual tissue viabilities of the three identically test item treated tissues was 12.7%. The test item acceptance criterion was therefore satisfied. - Interpretation of results:
- other: not a skin irritant
- Remarks:
- in accordance with EU CLP (1272/2008 and its amendments)
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this test, the relative mean tissue viability for the test item determined to be 109.2%. This value is well above the 50% viability threshold for irritancy. Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that Muguesia is not an irritant to skin.
- Executive summary:
The possible skin irritation potential of Muguesia was tested in vitro using a human skin model through topical application for 15 minutes. The study procedures described in this report were according to OECD TG 439 guideline and GLP principles. Skin tissue was treated by topical application of 10 μL undiluted test substance. After 42 hours incubation period, determination of the cytotoxic (irritancy) effect was performed. Cytotoxicity is expressed as the reduction of mitochondrial dehydrogenase activity measured by formazan production from (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) MTT at the end of treatment. Skin irritation is expressed as the remaining cell viability after exposure to the test substance. Reliable negative and positive controls were included. The positive control had a mean cell viability of 5.9% after 15 minutes exposure. The standard deviation value of the percentage viability of three tissues treated identically was less than 18%, indicating that the test system functioned properly. Under the conditions of this test, the relative mean tissue viability for the test item determined to be 109.2%. This value is well above the 50% viability threshold for irritancy. Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that Muguesia is not an irritant to skin.
Reference
Mean OD562Values and Viabilities for the Negative Control Item, Positive Control Item and Test Item
Item | OD562 of tissues |
Mean OD562 of triplicate tissues |
± SD of OD562 |
Relative individual tissue viability (%) |
Relative mean viability (%) |
± SD of Relative mean viability (%) |
Negative Control Item |
0.981 / 1.031 / 1.028 | 1.013 | 0.028 | 96.8 / 101.8 / 101.5 | 100* | 2.8 |
Positive Control Item |
0.078 / 0.045 / 0.058 | 0.060 | 0.017 | 7.7 / 4.4 / 5.7 | 5.9 | 1.7 |
Test Item | 1.242 / 0.986 / 1.090 | 1.106 | 0.129 | 122.6 / 97.3 / 107.6 | 109.2 | 12.7 |
OD=Optical Density
SD=Standard deviation
*=The mean viability of the negative control tissues is set at 100%
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 12-08-2016 to 21-09-2016
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 438 (Isolated Chicken Eye Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- Triskelion B.V., Utrechtseweg 48, 3700 AV, Zeist
- Species:
- other: eyes of male or female chickens (ROSS, spring chickens)
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- SOURCE OF COLLECTED EYES
- Source: Slaughterhouse v.d. Bor, Nijkerkerveen, The Netherlands
- Characteristics of donor animals: Approximately 7 weeks old, male or female chickens, body weight range approximately 1.5-2.5 kg, were used as eye donors.
- Storage, temperature and transport conditions of ocular tissue: Heads of the animals were cut off immediately after sedation of the animals by electric shock and incision of the neck for bleeding, and before they reached the next station on the process line. The heads were placed in small plastic boxes on a bedding of paper tissues moistened with isotonic saline. Next, they were transported to the testing facility. During transportation, the heads were kept at ambient temperature.
- Time interval prior to initiating testing: Within 2 hours after kill, eyes were carefully dissected and placed in a superfusion apparatus.
- Indication of any existing defects or lesions in ocular tissue samples: No
- Indication of any antibiotics used: No - Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Details on study design:
- SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF ISOLATED EYES
Within 2 hours after kill, eyes were carefully dissected and placed in a superfusion apparatus using the following procedure: First the eye-lids were carefully removed without damaging the cornea and a small drop of Fluorescein sodium 2.0% w/v was applied to the corneal surface for a few seconds and subsequently rinsed off with isotonic saline at ambient temperature. Next, the head with the fluorescein-treated cornea was examined with a slit-lamp microscope (Slit-lamp 900 BP, Haag-Streit AG, Liebefeld-Bern, Switzerland) to ensure that the cornea was not damaged. If undamaged (e.g., fluorescein retention and corneal opacity scores of ≤ 0.5), the eye was further dissected from the head without damaging the eye or cornea. Care was taken to remove the eye-ball from the orbit without cutting off the optical nerve too short. The enucleated eye was placed in a stainless steel clamp with the cornea positioned vertically and transferred to a chamber of the superfusion apparatus. The clamp holding the eye was positioned in such a way that the entire cornea was supplied with isotonic saline from a bent, stainless steel tube, at a target rate of 0.10-0.15 mL/min. The chambers of the superfusion apparatus as well as the saline were temperature controlled at approximately 32 °C (water pump set at 36.4 °C). After placing in the superfusion apparatus, the eyes were examined again with the slit-lamp microscope to ensure that they were not damaged. An accurate measurement was taken at the corneal apex of each eye. Eyes with a corneal thickness deviating more than 10% of the average corneal thickness of the eyes, eyes showing opacity (score higher than 0.5), or were unacceptably stained with fluorescein (score higher than 0.5) indicating the cornea to be permeable, or eyes that showed any other signs of damage, were rejected as test eyes and replaced.
EQUILIBRATION AND BASELINE RECORDINGS
Each eye provided its own baseline values for corneal swelling, corneal opacity and fluorescein retention. For that purpose, after an equilibration period of 45-60 minutes, the corneal thickness of the eyes was measured again to determine the zero reference value for corneal swelling calculations.
NUMBER OF REPLICATES
Negative control: 1
Positive control: 3
Test group: 3
NEGATIVE CONTROL USED
Physiological saline
POSITIVE CONTROL USED
Benzalkonium Chloride 5%
APPLICATION DOSE AND EXPOSURE TIME
30 μL for 10 seconds
OBSERVATION PERIOD
240 minutes
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Volume and washing procedure after exposure period: 20 mL saline. After rinsing, each eye in the holder was returned to its chamber.
- Indicate any deviation from test procedure in the Guideline: none
METHODS FOR MEASURED ENDPOINTS:
- Corneal opacity: Slit-lamp microscope examination
- Damage to epithelium based on fluorescein retention: Slit-lamp microscope examination
- Swelling: measured with optical pachymeter on a slit-lamp microscope; slit-width setting: set at 0.095 mm
- Others: After the final examination, the test substance treated eyes, the negative and positive control eyes were preserved in a neutral aqueous phosphate-buffered 4% solution of formaldehyde. The corneas were embedded in paraffin wax, sectioned at ca 4 μm and stained with PAS (Periodic Acid-Schiff). The microscopic slides were subjected to histopathological examination.
SCORING SYSTEM:
Defined scoring scales were used for each parameter to define the severity of effects into four categories (I-IV).
- Mean corneal swelling (%): According to OECD 438 guideline. Examination of the eyes after 0, 30, 75, 120, 180, and 240 minutes
- Mean maximum opacity score: According to OECD 438 guideline. Examination of the eyes after 0, 30, 75, 120, 180, and 240 minutes
- Mean fluorescein retention score at 30 minutes post-treatment: According to OECD 438 guideline.
DECISION CRITERIA: According to OECD 438 guideline - Irritation parameter:
- percent corneal swelling
- Run / experiment:
- slit-lamp examination
- Value:
- 4
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: maximum mean values
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Run / experiment:
- slit-lamp examination
- Value:
- 2
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: maximum mean values
- Irritation parameter:
- fluorescein retention score
- Run / experiment:
- slit-lamp examination
- Value:
- 2
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not applicable
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- Slit-lamp examination: The test substance caused corneal effects consisting of very slight corneal swelling (mean of 4%), moderate opacity (mean score of 2.0) and moderate fluorescein retention (mean score of 2.0).
The negative control eye did not show any corneal effect and demonstrated that the general conditions during the tests were adequate.
The positive control BAC 5% caused severe corneal effects and demonstrated the ICE test valid to detect severe eye irritants.
Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the test substance revealed very slight or slight erosion, slight or moderate necrosis, and very slight or slight vacuolation of the epithelium.
Microscopic examination of the cornea treated with the negative control (saline) did not reveal any abnormalities. Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the positive control BAC 5% revealed slight or severe erosion and slight or moderate vacuolisation of the epithelium, the epithelium partly detached from the basement membrane (two corneas), and endothelial necrosis (two corneas). - Interpretation of results:
- other: Category 2 (irritating to eyes)
- Remarks:
- in accordance with EU-CLP (1272/2008 and its amendments)
- Conclusions:
- Under the test conditions (OECD 438 and GLP) the test substance is considered to be an eye irritant.
- Executive summary:
In accordance to OECD guideline 438 and GLP, the test substance was examined for its in vitro eye irritating potential using the Isolated Chicken Eye (ICE) Test. In the ICE test, 3 eyes were exposed to 30 µL test substance for 10 seconds. In addition, one negative control eye (30 µL saline) and three positive control eyes (30 µL Benzalkonium Chloride (BAC)) were tested. After the exposure the eyes were rinsed with 20 mL saline and were examined at approximately 0, 30, 75, 120, 180, and 240 minutes after treatment. The test substance caused corneal effects consisting of very slight corneal swelling (mean of 4%), moderate opacity (mean score of 2.0) and moderate fluorescein retention (mean score of 2.0). The negative control eye did not show any corneal effect and demonstrated that the general conditions during the tests were adequate. The positive control BAC 5% caused severe corneal effects and demonstrated the ICE test valid to detect severe eye irritants. Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the test substance revealed very slight or slight erosion, slight or moderate necrosis, and very slight or slight vacuolisation of the epithelium. Microscopic examination of the cornea treated with the negative control (saline) did not reveal any abnormalities. Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the positive control BAC 5% revealed slight or severe erosion and slight or moderate vacuolation of the epithelium, the epithelium partly detached from the basement membrane (two corneas), and endothelial necrosis (two corneas). Under the test conditions (OECD 438 and GLP), the test substance is considered to be an eye irritant.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (irritating)
Additional information
Skin irritation in vitro
The possible skin irritation potential of Muguesia was tested in vitro using a human skin model through topical application for 15 minutes. The study procedures described in this report were according to OECD TG 439 guideline and GLP principles. Skin tissue was treated by topical application of 10 μL undiluted test substance. After 42 hours incubation period, determination of the cytotoxic (irritancy) effect was performed. Cytotoxicity is expressed as the reduction of mitochondrial dehydrogenase activity measured by formazan production from (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) MTT at the end of treatment. Skin irritation is expressed as the remaining cell viability after exposure to the test substance. Reliable negative and positive controls were included. The positive control had a mean cell viability of 5.9% after 15 minutes exposure. The standard deviation value of the percentage viability of three tissues treated identically was less than 18%, indicating that the test system functioned properly. Under the conditions of this test, the relative mean tissue viability for the test item determined to be 109.2%. This value is well above the 50% viability threshold for irritancy. Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that Muguesia is not an irritant to skin.
Eye irritation in vitro
In accordance to OECD guideline 438 and GLP, the test substance was examined for its in vitro eye irritating potential using the Isolated Chicken Eye (ICE) Test. In the ICE test, 3 eyes were exposed to 30 µL test substance for 10 seconds. In addition, one negative control eye (30 µL saline) and three positive control eyes (30 µL Benzalkonium Chloride (BAC)) were tested. After the exposure the eyes were rinsed with 20 mL saline and were examined at approximately 0, 30, 75, 120, 180, and 240 minutes after treatment. The test substance caused corneal effects consisting of very slight corneal swelling (mean of 4%), moderate opacity (mean score of 2.0) and moderate fluorescein retention (mean score of 2.0). The negative control eye did not show any corneal effect and demonstrated that the general conditions during the tests were adequate. The positive control BAC 5% caused severe corneal effects and demonstrated the ICE test valid to detect severe eye irritants. Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the test substance revealed very slight or slight erosion, slight or moderate necrosis, and very slight or slight vacuolisation of the epithelium. Microscopic examination of the cornea treated with the negative control (saline) did not reveal any abnormalities. Microscopic examination of the corneas treated with the positive control BAC 5% revealed slight or severe erosion and slight or moderate vacuolation of the epithelium, the epithelium partly detached from the basement membrane (two corneas), and endothelial necrosis (two corneas). Under the test conditions (OECD 438 and GLP), the test substance is considered to be an eye irritant.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the results found in the EpiSkin test, Muguesia is not considered to be a skin irritant and should therefore not need to be classified as such in accordance with the criteria outlined in EU-CLP (1272/2008/EC and its amendments).
Based on the positive results found in the in vitro eye irritation test, Muguesia is considered to cause eye irritation. In accordance with the criteria outlined EU-CLP Regulation (1272/2008/EC and its amendments), this results in a Category 2 classification for this endpoint (H319 / Causes serious eye irritation).
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.