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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: - | CAS number: -
- 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 sensitisation: not sensitising (modified OECD 429; method according to Ehlings et al. 2005; GLP compliant)
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2012-05-14 to 2012-07-05
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- 2010-07-22
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- modified OECD 429 ,method according to Ehlings et al. 2005
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The test was performed in accordance with the method according to Ehling et al (2005): An european inter-laboratory validation of alternative endpoints of the murine local lymph node assay: first round, Toxicology 212 (2005) 60-68 and Ehling et al (2005): An european inter-laboratory validation of alternative endpoints of the murine local lymph node assay: 2nd round, Toxicology 212 (2005) 69-79.
Threshold values of the stimulation indices of lymph node cell count and ear weight were calculated by dividing the average values per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. Values above 1.4 (cell count) or 1.1 (ear weight) are considered positive
(these values were fixed empirically during the inter-laboratory validation of this method). In addition, the lymph node weights were determined for concentration related properties. - GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- signed 2009-11-12
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: at room temperature, kept dry in closed container - Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- NMRI
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River Laboratories, Research Models and Services, Germany GmbH, Sandhofer Weg 7, 97633 Sulzfeld, Germany
- Age at study initiation: 63 days
- Weight at study initiation: 26 - 36 g
- Housing: before application the animals were housed in groups in MAKROLON cages (type III) with a basal surface of approx. 39 cm x 23 cm and a height of approx. 15 cm. After application the animals were housed singly in order to prevent their licking off the test item from the ears of the other animals. Granulated textured wood (Granulat A2, J. Brandenburg, 49424 Goldenstedt, Germany) was used as bedding material for the cages.
- Diet (ad libitum): commercial diet ssniff® R/M-H V1534 (ssniff Spezialdiäten GmbH, 59494 Soest, Germany)
- Water (ad libitum): tap water
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 22°C ± 3°C (maximum range)
- Relative humidity: 55% ± 15% (maximum range)
- Air changes: 12 - 18 times per hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12 - Vehicle:
- other: Acetone / olive oil (3+1, v/v)
- Concentration:
- 10 %, 25% and 50% (w/w) of zirconium iron pink zircon
- No. of animals per dose:
- 6 female mice
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
A preliminary experiment was carried out in 3 animals to examine the irritating potential and handling/application of the test item in order to select the appropriate concentrations. Three concentrations of 10, 25 and 50% of zirconium iron pink zircon (Pigment red 232) in acetone/olive oil (3+1, v/v) were examined. Possible clinical signs would have been recorded.
Zirconium iron pink zircon (Pigment red 232) was a red powder. Hence, a 50% suspension was the highest feasible concentration of zirconium iron pink zircon (Pigment red 232) in acetone/olive oil (3+1, v/v).
Results:
No pronounced irritating properties were observed in this preliminary experiment at concentrations of 10%, 25% or 50%, no differences in ear weight and ear thickness were noted. No clinical signs were recorded.
MAIN STUDY
The experimental schedule of the assay was as follows:
Day 1:
The weight of each animal and possible clinical signs were individually identified and recorded. In addition, ear swelling measurements were carried out at the helical edge of both ears using an Oditest micrometer.
Open application of 25 μL of the appropriate dilution of the test item, the vehicle alone or the positive control (as appropriate) were administered to the dorsum of each ear.
Days 2 and 3:
The application procedure carried out on day 1 was repeated.
Day 4 (24 hours after the last application the animals were sacrificed under ether anaesthesia by cutting the aorta abdominalis):
Ear swelling measurements (immediately before sacrificing the mice) were carried out at the helical edge of both ears using an Oditest micrometer.
Punch biopsies of 8 mm in diameter of the apical area of both ears were prepared and immediately weighed on an analytical balance.
Lateral pairs of auricular lymph nodes draining the ear tissue were excised, carefully separated from remaining fatty tissue and weighed on an analytical balance immediately following preparation. The lymph nodes were then stored on ice in PBS/0.5% BSA and subjected to the preparation of single cell suspensions by mechanical tissue disaggregation. The cells were counted automatically in a cell counter.
OBSERVATIONS
The following observations were made during the course of the study:
- Clinical signs: animals were observed once daily for any clinical signs of local systemic irritation at the application site or of systemic toxicity. Observations were recorded for each individual animal. Cageside observations included skin/fur, eyes, mucous membranes, respiratory and circulatory systems, somatomotor activity and behaviour patterns. The onset, intensity and duration of any signs observed were recorded.
In addition, animals were checked regularly throughout the working day from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. On Saturdays and Sundays animals were checked regularly from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon with a final check performed at approximately 4:00 p.m., if applicable.
- Body weight: the weight of each mouse was recorded at the time of allocation of animals to groups (test day 1) and at the time of necropsy (test day 4).
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The so-called stimulation (or LLN-) indices to determine the sensitising potential were calculated by dividing the average absolute lymph node weight or lymph node cell counts per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones.
Thus, in case of no stimulating effect the index for the lymph node cell count is always below 1.4 (cut-off value). An index above 1.4 is considered positive.
For lymph node weight significance at p ≤ 0.01 is considered positive (U-test according to MANN and WHITNEY). A possible concentration-response-relationship for the lymph node weight in order to determine a possible sensitising potential was examined by linear regression analysis employing PEARSON's correlation coefficient. Outliers would have been determined according to the Nalimov test.
In addition, the acute inflammatory skin reaction (irritating potential) was measured by ear weight determination of circular biopsies of the ears and ear thickness measurements on test day 1 and test day 4 to identify skin irritation properties of the test item employing the U-test according to MANN and WHITNEY by comparing the test groups to the vehicle control.
The stimulation indices were calculated by dividing the average ear weight and average ear thickness on test day 4 per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. The cut-off threshold value for ear weight was set at 1.1. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- Please refer to "details on study design"
- Positive control results:
- The positive control group caused the expected increases in lymph node cell count and lymph node weight (statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01). The values for the stimulation index of lymph node cell count and lymph node weight were 1.820 and 1.589, respectively. Therefore, the study can be regarded as valid.
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- lymph node cell count
- Value:
- 0.838
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 0.946 (lymph node weight)
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- ear weight
- Value:
- 1.012
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 1.047 (ear thickness)
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- lymph node cell count
- Value:
- 0.949
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 1.036 (lymph node weight)
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- ear weight
- Value:
- 1.03
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 1.082 (ear thickness)
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- lymph node cell count
- Value:
- 1.141
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 1.143 (lymph node weight)
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- ear weight
- Value:
- 0.939
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50 % (w/w) test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: SI: 1.082 (ear thickness)
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- lymph node cell count
- Value:
- 1.82
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks:
- ear weight
- Value:
- 1.116
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- DETAILS ON STIMULATION INDEX CALCULATION
Threshold values of the stimulation indices of lymph node cell count and ear weight were calculated by dividing the average values per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. Values above 1.4 (cell count) or 1.1 (ear weight) are considered positive (these values were fixed empirically during the inter-laboratory validation of this method).
RESULTS ON SKIN SENSITISATION
In the main study treatment with zirconium iron pink zircon (Pigment red 232) at concentrations of 10%, 25% or 50% did not reveal statistical significantly increased values for lymph node cell count. The stimulation indices of the lymph node cell count did not exceed the threshold level of 1.4. Hence, the test item is classified as not sensitising.
The threshold level for the ear weight of 1.1 was not exceeded and no increase of ear thickness was observed, i.e. no irritating properties were noted.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS:
No signs of local or systemic intolerance were recorded.
BODY WEIGHTS:
The animal body weight was not affected by the treatment. - Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Under the present test conditions, zirconium iron pink zircon (Pigment red 232) at concentrations of 10%, 25% or 50% (w/w) in acetone/olive oil (3+1 v/v) did not reveal any sensitising properties in the local lymph node assay and therefore should not be classified and labelled according to Regulation (EC) No.: 1272/2008 and its subsequent regulations.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Skin sensitisation
One reliable animal study described in Haferkorn (2013) (modified OECD 429; method according to Ehlings et al. 2005; GLP compliant) is considered to be reliable without restrictions. The substance was determined not to be a skin sensitiser.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
zirconium zircon with encapsulated hematite does not show respiratory sensitising properties in exposure related observations in humans.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Skin sensitisation
zirconium zircon with encapsulated hematite has no skin sensitisation potential and does not require classification as skin sensitiser according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 and subsequent regulations.
Respiratory sensitisation
There is no evidence on specific respiratory hypersensitivity of zirconium zircon with encapsulated hematite during long-year industrial practice. No cases of hypersensitivity were observed till now by workers exposed exclusively to the test item.
Thus, the classification criteria acc. to regulation (EC) 1272/2008 as respiratory sensitiser are not met.
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.