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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 238-405-1 | CAS number: 14433-76-2
- 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 sensitization: Guinea Pig (Buehler) study, comparable OECD 406,GLP
Mixture of N,N-dimethyldecanamide and N,N-dimethyloctanamide, (Stepan, 1990): not sensitising
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:
- March - April 1990
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study
- Remarks:
- Study according to Buehler protocol which satisfies the citeria of toxic control act (40 CFR) and the OECD Guideline, GLP, well documented
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- Buehler test
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- Buehler test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The LLNA method was not established yet by the time the study was conducted.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- SOURCE OF TEST MATERIAL
- Lot/batch No.of test material: not specified
STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: room temperature
FORM AS APPLIED IN THE TEST (if different from that of starting material): diluted in 80% ethanol/ 20% distilled water (induction) or in acetone (challenge) - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Remarks:
- albino
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Murphy
- Weight: 374-623g
- Housing: individually
- Diet: ad libitum, PURINA GUINEA PIG CHOW
- Water: ad libitum
- Acclimation period: at least four days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 / 12 - Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: 80/20 ethanol/dest water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% (in 80/20 ethanol/dest water)
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 2.5% (in acetone)
- No. of animals per dose:
- Main study test group: 10 males and 10 females
Main study control group: 5 males and 5 females - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Irritation screening tests (pilots) with 8 male and 8 female animals were conducted. The several concentrations of the test substance (diluted in the same vehicle as used in the main study) were applied to the clipped skin of the animals backs (occlusive coverage). After approx. 6 h the chambers with the test solution were removed. 24 and 48 h after the treatment, the animals were examined for any irritating effects. Based on the results of these pilots a concentration of 5% test substance in 80% ethanol/ 20% distilled water, which caused slight to moderate patchy erythema, was used for the induction phase of the main study. As concentration for the challenge exposure, 2.5% test substance in acetone (highest non-irritating dose) was chosen.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 3
- Exposure period: approx. 6 h
- Frequency of applications: once a week
- Concentration: 5%
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: 12 - 16 days after last induction exposure
- Exposure period: 6 h
- Test groups: 10 animals per gender
- Control group: 5 animals per gender
- Concentrations: 2.5%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24hr + 48hr - Challenge controls:
- 5 animals per gender were used as control, no positive control is reported
- Positive control substance(s):
- no
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Only slight reactions comparable to the controls were observed. The test substance is considered to be not sensitising.
- Executive summary:
The potential of the test substance, as a 5% w/v formulation in 80% ethanol/20% distilled water, to produce delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea pigs was evaluated using an adaptation of the method of Ritz and Buehler simialr to the OECD guideline 406
Following primary challenge, there were no grades of 1 produced in the test or control animals. The incidence of slight responses in the test group (13 of 20) was compared to that of the naive control group (7 of 10). The incidence and severity of these responses in the test group were essentially comparable to those produced by the naive control group indicating that sensitization had not been induced.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Justification for type of information:
- see attached RA justification
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across source
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Only slight reactions comparable to the controls were observed. The test substance is considered to be not sensitising.
- Executive summary:
The potential of a "analog test substance", as a 5% w/v formulation in 80% ethanol/20% distilled water, to produce delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea pigs was evaluated using an adaptation of the method of Ritz and Buehler simialr to the OECD guideline 406
Following primary challenge, there were no grades of 1 produced in the test or control animals. The incidence of slight responses in the test group (13 of 20) was compared to that of the naive control group (7 of 10). The incidence and severity of these responses in the test group were essentially comparable to those produced by the naive control group indicating that sensitization had not been induced.
Referenceopen allclose all
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
There are no valid in vivo studies of the skin sensitising potential for pure N,N-dimethyldecanamide. Nevertheless skin sensitisation was tested with a mixture of N,N-dimethyldecanamide and N,N-dimethyloctanamide (with traces of N,N-dimethyl-dodecanamide and N,N-dimethyl-hexanamide). Due to the fact that a high amount in the mixture was N,N-dimethyl-decanamide and the rest of the mixture are homologues with a lower and higher molecular weight which can be assumed to have a similar toxicological behaviour it is concluded that the mixture has an nearly similar toxicological behaviour like pure N,N-dimethyldecanamide, further details can be found in the attached RA justification in chapter 13.
Skin sensitisation:
A test with a mixture of N,N-dimethyldecanamide and N,N-dimethyloctanamide (with traces of N,N-dimethyldodecanamide and N,N-dimethylhexanamide) for skin sensitisation was done using an adaptation of the method of Ritz and Buehler* (Stepan 1990, J.J Kreuzmann). The test substance was used as 5% w/v formulation in 80% ethanol/20% distilled water for induction and as 2.5% formulation in acetone for challenge and epicutanueous occlusive applied to 20 guinea pigs. There were no grades of 1 produced in the test or control animals. The incidence of grade + responses in the test group (14 of 20) was compared to that of the naive control group (7 of 10). The incidence and severity of these responses in the test group were essentially comparable to those produced by the naive control group indicating that sensitization had not been induced. Therefore the mixture was classified as not sensitising.
* Study according to Buehler protocol which satisfies the criteria of toxic control act (40 CFR) and the OECD 406 Guideline, GLP.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
- Additional information:
Migrated from Short description of key information:
no information available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Skin sensitisation:
Skin sensitisation was observed in a skin sensitisation guinea pig study (buehler protocol; mixture of dimethylalkylamides): The scores obtained from the study led to no classification for skin sensitisation according to GHS (Regulation (EU) 1272/2008) and also to no classification according to EU-criteria DSD (67/548/EEC). This classification was also supposed for the pure N,N-dimethyldecanamide as a large portion of the mixture was N,N-dimethyldecanamide (see discussion).
Respiratory sensitisation:
There are no data available to classify N,N-dimethyldecanamide as a sensitizer to respiratory system.
Labelling skin/respiratory sensitisation:
GHS: no classification
DSD: no classification
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.