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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 269-665-4 | CAS number: 68308-74-7
- 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
An in vitro assay for skin irritation potential (and a separate in vitro assay for assessing potential dermal corrosivity) and an older in vivo eye irritation study are available for the submission substance.
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:
- 21-18 February 2013
- 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:
- adopted 22 July 2010
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.46 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Model Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- SOURCE OF TEST MATERIAL
- Source and lot/batch No.of test material: Buckman Laboratories, Lot No. 12J46399
- Expiration date of the lot/batch: 01/10/2015
- Purity test date: 100%; certificate of analysis dated 05/11/2012
STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: room temperature in the dark
- Stability under test conditions: assumed stable for study duration - Test system:
- human skin model
- Source species:
- human
- Cell type:
- non-transformed keratinocytes
- Cell source:
- other: adult-human derived epidermal keratinocytes
- Details on animal used as source of test system:
- Not applicable - in vitro study
- Justification for test system used:
- RhE model specified in the OECD Guideline
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Details on test system:
- RECONSTRUCTED HUMAN EPIDERMIS (RHE) TISSUE
- Model used: EPISKIN RHE Model (skinEthic Laboratories, Lyon, France)
- Delivery date: 12/02/2013
- Date of initiation of testing: 12/02/2013
TEMPERATURE USED FOR TEST SYSTEM
- Temperature used during treatment / exposure: 37°C
REMOVAL OF TEST MATERIAL AND CONTROLS
-Volume and number of washing steps: At the end of exposure each tissue was removed from the well using forceps and rinsed using a wash bottle containing Dulbecco's phosphate buffered saline (DPBS). Rinsing was achieved by filling and emptying each tissue inert for approx. 40 seconds using a constant soft stream of DPBS to gently remove residual test material.
- Observable damage in the tissue due to washing: None.
MTT DYE USED TO MEASURE TISSUE VIABILITY AFTER TREATMENT / EXPOSURE
- MTT concentration: 0.3 mg/mL MTT solution
- Incubation time: 3 hours
- Spectrophotometer: Anthos 2001 microplate reader
- Wavelength: 540 nm
- Filter: none
NUMBER OF REPLICATE TISSUES: 3
CONTROL TISSUES USED IN CASE OF MTT DIRECT INTERFERENCE
- Fresh tissues / killed tissues: water-killed tissues
- Procedure used to prepare the killed tissues (if applicable): untreated EPISKIN tissues were placed in a 12-well plate containing 2.2 mL of sterile distilled water, then incubated at 37°C, 5% CO2 in air for 48±1 hours.
- Result : Negligible intereference due to reduction of MTT by the test material occurred therefore the results were not used for quantitative correction of results
NUMBER OF INDEPENDENT TEST SEQUENCES / EXPERIMENTS TO DERIVE FINAL PREDICTION: 1
PREDICTION MODEL / DECISION CRITERIA (choose relevant statement)
- The test substance is considered to be irritating to skin if the viability after 15 minutes exposure is less than or equal to 50%.
- The test substance is considered to be non-irritating to skin if the viability after 15 minutes exposure is greater than 50%. - Control samples:
- yes, concurrent negative control
- yes, concurrent positive control
- yes, concurrent MTT non-specific colour control
- Amount/concentration applied:
- The test material was used as supplied, 10 µL was applied to the surface of the epidermis.
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 15 minutes
- Duration of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):
- 42 hours
- Number of replicates:
- Tissues treated in triplicate
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- % tissue viability
- Value:
- 114.4
- Negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- The relative mean viability of the treated tissues was 114.4% after a 15 minute exposure period. The relative mean tissue viability for the positive control was 10.2% relative to the negative control and the standard deviation was 2.3%. The mean OD540 for the negative control was 0.834 and the standard deviation of the percent viability was 10.8%. The standard deviation calculated from individual percentage tissue viabilities of the three identically treated tissues was 8.5%. The acceptance criteria were therefore met for this assay.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: non irritating
- Conclusions:
- The test material was considered to be non-irritating as the relative mean tissue viability was > 50% (114.4%).
- Executive summary:
The skin irritating potential of DMATO was evaluated in the EPISKIN reconstructed human epidermis model, according to OECD Guideline 439 and GLP. Cell viability following exposure is measured by enzymatic reduction of the yellow MTT tetrazolium salt to a blue formazan salt (within the mitochondria of viable cells) in treated tissues compared to relative controls.
10 µL of the test material was applied undiluted to the tissues for a 15 minute exposure period, followed by a 42 hour post-exposure incubation period. The test material, positive and negative controls were tested in triplicate. At the end of the post-exposure incubation period each tissue was taken for MTT loading. After MTT loading a total biopsy of each epidermis was made and placed into tubes containing acidified isopropanol for extraction of formazan crystals out of the MTT loaded tissues. At the end of the formazan extraction period each tubed was mixed and duplicate 200 µL samples were transferred to a 96 -well plate. The optical density was measured at 540 nm. The percentage viability is calculated from the MTT reduction in treated tissues relative to the negative control.
The relative mean viability of the treated tissues was 114.4%. The relative mean tissue viability was greater than 50%, therefore the test material is considered to be non-irritating under the conditions of the study.
Reference
An assessment found the test material was able to directly reduce MTT. An additional procedure using water-killed tissues was performed during the determination of skin corrosivity potential. The results obtained showed negligible interference due to direct MTT reduction. It was therefore considered unnecessary to use the results of the water-killed tissues for quantitative correction of results or for reporting purposes.
Table 1. Mean OD540 values and percentage viabilities
Item |
OD540 of tissues |
Mean OD540 of triplicate tissues |
± SD of OD540 |
Relative individual tissue viability (%) |
Relative mean viability (%) |
± SD of Relative mean viability (%) |
Negative Control |
0.752 |
0.834 |
0.090 |
90.2 |
100* |
10.8 |
0.819 |
98.2 |
|||||
0.930 |
111.5 |
|||||
Positive Control |
0.106 |
0.085 |
0.019 |
12.7 |
10.2 |
2.3 |
0.080 |
9.6 |
|||||
0.068 |
8.2 |
|||||
Test material |
0.912 |
0.954 |
0.071 |
109.4 |
114.4 |
8.5 |
0.913 |
109.5 |
|||||
1.036 |
124.2 |
SD = standard deviation; * = mean viability of the negative control 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 vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 1971
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Older proprietary study conducted prior to development of guidelines and GLP, limited information available on methods but adequate for the purposes of hazard classification.
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- In vivo eye irritation study in rabbits, conducted prior to development of the guidelines
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- study conducted prior to development of GLP
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- The animals were adult albino New Zealand White rabbits.
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- yes, concurrent no treatment
- Amount / concentration applied:
- 0.1 mL undiluted test material was applied
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- Not applicable - single treatment
- Observation period (in vivo):
- 72 hours
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- 9
- Details on study design:
- Rabbits were placed in a collar to prevent rubbing of the treated eye. The test substance (0.1 mL) was instilled into one eye, the other eye served as an untreated control. Reactions were assessed at 24, 48 and 72 hours after instillation. The test material was not washed from the eyes following instillation, however any test material residue/discharge was flushed from the eye prior to scoring. Reactions were evaluated according to the degree of damage caused to the cornea, iris and the bulbar and palpebral conjunctivae.
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- iris score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- conjunctivae score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0.3
- Reversibility:
- fully reversible within: 48h
- Irritation parameter:
- chemosis score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 24 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- cornea opacity score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- iris score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- conjunctivae score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritation parameter:
- chemosis score
- Basis:
- mean
- Remarks:
- 9 rabbits
- Time point:
- other: 48 hours
- Score:
- 0
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- A score of 1 was assigned to 3 rabbits for conjunctival redness at the 24 hour time point. No other reactions were observed at the 24 hour reading. At 48 hours all readings were negative. Scores were not presented for the 72 hour time point.
- Other effects:
- No other effects reported.
- Interpretation of results:
- not irritating
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Based on the results of this study the test material is considered to be non-irritating to the eye.
- Executive summary:
The eye irritation potential of DMAD was evaluated in 9 New Zealand White rabbits. A quantity of 0.1 mL test material was instilled into one eye of the rabbits, the other eye remained untreated to serve as a control. Ocular reactions were evaluated at 24, 48 and 72 hours post-instillation; any residual test material or discharge was flushed from the eye prior to evaluations. The test material caused minimal conjunctival irritation in 3 of the 9 rabbits at 24 hours post-instillation. No other reactions were observed, and no signs of irritation were observed at the 48 hour time point. Based on the results of this study, the test material is considered to be non-irritating to the eye.
Reference
No additional information available
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Additional information
The skin irritating potential of DMATO was evaluated in the EPISKIN reconstructed human epidermis model, according to OECD Guideline 439 and GLP. The relative mean tissue viability (assessed by MTT reduction) was greater than 50%, therefore the test material is considered to be non-irritating under the conditions of the study.
The skin corrosion potential of DMATO was evaluated in the EPISKIN in vitro Reconstructed Human Epidermis (RHE) Model according to OECD guideline 431 and GLP. Duplicate tissues were treated with the test material for exposure periods of 3, 60 and 240 minutes. Cell viability following exposure is measured by enzymatic reduction of the yellow MTT tetrazolium salt to a blue formazan salt (within the mitochondria of viable cells) in treated tissues compared to relative controls.Data were presented in the form of percentage tissue viability (MTT reduction in the test material treated tissues relative to negative control tissues). The relative mean viability of the test material was 97.9% after 240 minutes exposure; 110.6% after 60 minutes exposure, and 114.1% after 3 minutes exposure. The relative mean tissue viability for the positive control treated tissues was 6.3% relative to the negative control following the 240 minute exposure period. The mean OD540 for the negative control tissues was 0.811. Therefore, the test material was considered to be non-corrosive to the skin, and classification is not required.
The eye irritation potential of DMAD was evaluated in 9 New Zealand White rabbits. A quantity of 0.1 mL test material was instilled into one eye of the rabbits, the other eye remained untreated to serve as a control. Ocular reactions were evaluated at 24, 48 and 72 hours post-instillation; any residual test material or discharge was flushed from the eye prior to evaluations. The test material caused minimal conjunctival irritation in 3 of the 9 rabbits at 24 hours post-instillation. No other reactions were observed, and no signs of irritation were observed at the 48 hour time point. Based on the results of this study, the test material is considered to be non-irritating to the eye.
Justification for selection of skin irritation / corrosion endpoint:
In vitro assays for skin irritation and skin corrosivity both give negative results.
Justification for selection of eye irritation endpoint:
Only study available for this endpoint
Justification for classification or non-classification
Classification for skin or eye irritation according to the Dangerous Substances Directive (67/548/EEC) or the CLP Regulation (1272/2008) is not triggered by the results of the available studies.
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.