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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 809-911-5 | CAS number: 1431329-07-5
- 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
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- in vitro cytogenicity / chromosome aberration study in mammalian cells
- Remarks:
- Type of genotoxicity: chromosome aberration
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From 12 Jun to 20 Aug 2014
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Study run to a method comparable with current guidelines and to GLP.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 473 (In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of assay:
- in vitro mammalian chromosome aberration test
- Species / strain / cell type:
- lymphocytes: human
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- S9 mix
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- Cytogenetic assay 1A:
Without and with S9-mix: 10, 50, 70, 90, 110 and 130 μg/mL culture medium
Second cytogenetic assay:
Without S9-mix : 5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55 and 65 μg/mL culture medium - Vehicle / solvent:
- - Vehicle(s)/solvent(s) used: DMSO
- Justification for choice of solvent/vehicle: Solubility in vehicle: >90 mg/mL - Untreated negative controls:
- no
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- mitomycin C
- Remarks:
- In the absence of S9 mix
- Untreated negative controls:
- no
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- cyclophosphamide
- Remarks:
- In the presence of S9 mix
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- Test system
Cultured peripheral human lymphocytes were used as test system. Peripheral human lymphocytes are recommended in international guidelines (OECD, EC).
Blood was collected from healthy adult, non-smoking, male volunteers. The Average Generation Time (AGT) of the cells and the age of the donor at the time the AGT was determined (December 2013) are presented below:
Dose range finding test / first cytogenetic assay: age 31, AGT = 13.5 h
Cytogenetic assay 1A: age 35, AGT = 13.2 h
Second cytogenetic assay: age 26, AGT = 13.1 h
Dose range finding test / First cytogenetic assay
Lymphocytes (0.4 mL blood of a healthy male donor was added to 5 mL or 4.8 mL culture medium, without and with metabolic activation respectively and 0.1 mL (9 mg/mL) Phytohaemagglutinin) were cultured for 48 h and thereafter exposed to selected doses of test substance for 3 h, 24 h and 48 h in the absence of S9-mix or for 3 h in the presence of S9-mix. A negative control was included at each exposure time.
Cytogenetic assay 1A
Lymphocytes were cultured for 48 ± 2 h and thereafter exposed in duplicate to selected doses of test substance for 3 h in the absence and presence of S9-mix. After 3 h exposure, the cells were separated from the exposure medium by centrifugation (5 min, 365 g). The supernatant was removed and the cells were rinsed once with 5 mL HBSS (Hanks’ Balanced Salt Solution). After a second centrifugation step, HBSS was removed and cells were resuspended in 5 mL culture medium and incubated for another 20 - 22 h (24 h fixation time). Appropriate negative and positive controls were included in the first cytogenetic assay.
Second cytogenetic assay
Lymphocytes were cultured for 48 ± 2 h and thereafter exposed in duplicate to selected doses of test substance for 24 h and 48 h in the absence of S9-mix.
The cells were not rinsed after exposure but were fixed immediately after 24 h and 48 h (24 h and 48 h fixation time). Appropriate negative and positive controls were included in the second cytogenetic assay.
SPINDLE INHIBITOR (cytogenetic assays): colchicine
NUMBER OF CELLS EVALUATED: at least 1000 cells (with a maximum deviation of 5%)
DETERMINATION OF CYTOTOXICITY
- Method: mitotic index
Analysis of slides for chromosome aberrations
To prevent bias, all slides were randomly coded before examination of chromosome aberrations and scored. An adhesive label with WIL Research Europe study identification number and code was placed over the marked slide. One hundred metaphase chromosome spreads per culture were examined by light microscopy for chromosome aberrations. In case the number of aberrant cells, gaps excluded, was ≥ 25 in 50 metaphases, no more metaphases were examined. Only metaphases containing 46 ± 2 centromeres (chromosomes) were analysed. The number of cells with aberrations and the number of aberrations were calculated. - Evaluation criteria:
- A test substance was considered positive (clastogenic) in the chromosome aberration test if:
a) It induced a dose-related statistically significant (Chi-square test, one-sided, p < 0.05) increase in the number of cells with chromosome aberrations.
b) A statistically significant and biologically relevant increase in the frequencies of the number of cells with chromosome aberrations was observed in the absence of a clear dose-response relationship. - Statistics:
- The incidence of aberrant cells (cells with one or more chromosome aberrations, gaps included or excluded) for each exposure group outside the laboratory historical control data range was compared to that of the solvent control using Chi-square statistics:
X2=(N-1) (ad-bc)2/((a+b) (c+d) (a+c) (b+d))
where b = the total number of aberrant cells in the control cultures.
d = the total number of non aberrant cells in the control cultures.
n0 = the total number of cells scored in the control cultures.
a = the total number of aberrant cells in treated cultures to be compared with the control.
c = the total number of non aberrant cells in treated cultures to be compared with the
control.
n1 = the total number of cells scored in the treated cultures.
N = sum of n0 and n1
If P [X2 >(N-1) (ad-bc)2/ ((a+b) (c+d) (a+c) (b+d))](one-tailed) is small (p< 0.05) the hypothesis that the incidence of cells with chromosome aberrations is the same for both the treated and the solvent control group is rejected and the number of aberrant cells in the test group is considered to be significantly different from the control group at the 95% confidence level. - Species / strain:
- lymphocytes: human
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Additional information on results:
- Dose range finding test / first cytogenetic assay:
No dose levels could be selected for scoring of chromosome aberrations since the highest tested concentration was too toxic for scoring. The experiment was repeated in cytogenetic assay 1A.
Cytogenetic assay 1A:
Both in the absence and presence of S9-mix, the test substance did not induce a statistically significant or biologically relevant increase in the number of cells with chromosome aberrations.
Both in the absence and presence of S9-mix, the test substance did not increase the number of polyploid cells and cells with endoreduplicated chromosomes.
Second cytogenetic assay:
Test substance did not induce a statistically significant or biologically relevant increase in the number of cells with chromosome aberrations.
Test substance did not increase the number of polyploid cells and cells with endoreduplicated chromosomes.
COMPARISON WITH HISTORICAL CONTROL DATA:
The number of cells with chromosome aberrations found in the solvent control cultures was within the laboratory historical control data range. The number of polyploid cells and cells with endoreduplicated chromosomes in the solvent control cultures was within the laboratory historical control data range. The positive control chemicals (MMC-C and CP) both produced statistically significant increases in the frequency of aberrant cells. It was therefore concluded that the test conditions were adequate and that the metabolic activation system (S9-mix) functioned properly. - Remarks on result:
- other: all strains/cell types tested
- Remarks:
- Migrated from field 'Test system'.
- Conclusions:
- Interpretation of results (migrated information):
negative
Finally, it is concluded that this test is valid and that the test substance is not clastogenic in human lymphocytes under the experimental conditions described in this report.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (negative)
Additional information
Two in vitro studies are available.
Ames test conducted according to OECD Guideline 471 under GLP (Verspeek-Rip, 2014).
The test substance is not mutagenic in the Salmonella typhimurium reverse mutation assay and in the Escherichia coli reverse mutation assay.
Chromosome aberration test conducted according to OECD Guideline 473 under GLP (Buskens, 2014).
It is concluded that this test is valid and that the test substance is not clastogenic in human lymphocytes under the experimental conditions described in this report.
Justification for selection of genetic toxicity endpoint
In vitro Mammalian Chromosome aberration test selected as higher level study.
Justification for classification or non-classification
In vitro studies gave negative result.
Therefore in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 Table 3.5.1, this substance should not be classified for this endpoint.
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.