Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 605-399-0 | CAS number: 165252-70-0
- 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

Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 08/10/2001 - 16/01/2002
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: GLP, Guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 002
- Report date:
- 2002
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 850.4400 (Aquatic Plant Toxicity Test using Lemna spp. Tiers I & II))
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 221 (Lemna sp. Growth Inhibition Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- (RS)-1-methyl-2-nitro-3-(tetrahydro-3-furylmethyl)guanidine
- EC Number:
- 605-399-0
- Cas Number:
- 165252-70-0
- Molecular formula:
- C7H14N4O3
- IUPAC Name:
- (RS)-1-methyl-2-nitro-3-(tetrahydro-3-furylmethyl)guanidine
- Test material form:
- other: solid
- Details on test material:
- Purity 99.2%
Batch No. 2100910
Constituent 1
Sampling and analysis
- Analytical monitoring:
- yes
- Details on sampling:
- Duplicate samples of the fresh prepared test solutions were taken on days 0 and 4.
Duplicate samples of the old test solutions were taken on days 2 and 7.
All samples were stored at about -20°C.
Test solutions
- Vehicle:
- no
Test organisms
- Test organisms (species):
- Lemna gibba
- Details on test organisms:
- Species/strain: Lemna gibba G3
Source: Bayer AG, Crop Protection Institute for Environmental Biology, D-40789 Monheim, Germany
Age: more than two weeks
Study design
- Test type:
- semi-static
- Water media type:
- freshwater
- Limit test:
- no
- Total exposure duration:
- 7 d
- Post exposure observation period:
- 3 days
Test conditions
- Hardness:
- not determined
- Test temperature:
- 24 °C
- pH:
- 7.4 – 7.6 at start of test medium renewals
8.6 – 9.2 at the end of test medium renewals - Dissolved oxygen:
- Not reported
- Salinity:
- Not applicable
- Nominal and measured concentrations:
- See table below
- Details on test conditions:
- The Lemna colonies in each test vessel were inspected for changes in frond and colony number and appearance (discoloration, sinking root length or other abnormalities) on days 2, 4 and 7. The number of living and dead fronds and the number of colonies were counted. Fronds visibly projecting over the edge of the mother frond were counted as separate fronds.
Additionally, the dry weight of a sample of fronds identical to that used to inoculate the test vessels was determined at the start of the test. At test termination, the dry weight of all colonies per vessel was determined. The colonies were dried at approx. 60°C to constant weight. Inhibition of Lemna growth was determined from:
• mean frond numbers
• the average specific growth rates
• the area under the growth curves (AUC)
• the final biomass determined on the basis of dry weight (DW) - Reference substance (positive control):
- no
Results and discussion
Effect concentrations
- Duration:
- 7 d
- Dose descriptor:
- EC50
- Effect conc.:
- > 110 mg/L
- Nominal / measured:
- nominal
- Conc. based on:
- test mat.
- Basis for effect:
- other: mean frond numbers, average specific growth rate, area under growth curves, final biomass determined on the basis of dry weight
- Details on results:
- Dinotefuran concentration in the freshly prepared test medium of the highest test concentration of nominal 110 mg/L was 106% of the nominal value at the start of the first and last test medium renewal. At the end of the first and last test medium renewal, 92% and 99% of the nominal value were found after 48 and 72 hours, respectively. Test item mean concentration (calculated as the average over all measurements in the test medium) was 101% of the nominal value.
The growth of Lemna gibba was not inhibited up to and including the highest test concentration of 110 mg/L. The mean frond and colony number, the average specific growth rates (r), and the AUC after the test period of 7 days were not statistically significantly reduced compared to the control values at any concentration (results of Dunnett-tests, one-sided, α = 0.05). The dry weight of the plants after the test period of 7 days was statistically not significantly lower compared to the control at any concentration. The plants showed no mortality or other abnormalities at any concentration or in the control.
Dinotefuran did not inhibit the growth of Lemna gibba during the exposure period of 7 days up to and including 110 mg/L. As a result, this concentration was determined as the 7-day NOEC (highest concentration tested without toxic effects after a test period of 7 days). This value could be higher, but concentrations greater than 110 mg/L were not tested.
After the 7 days test duration, the 7-day LOEC (lowest concentration tested with toxic effects) and the EC-values (EC5, EC10, EC50, and EC90) for the growth parameters could not be quantified due to the absence of a toxic effect of Dinotefuran up to and including the highest test concentration of 110 mg/L.
The doubling time (Td = In 2 / r) of Lemna growth in the control was determined to be 1.9 days. This shows that the growth of Lemna gibba was sufficiently high.
The pH values in the freshly prepared test media ranged from 7.4 to 7.6 at the start of the test medium renewal periods. Measured pH values were between 8.6 to 9.2 at the end of the test medium renewal periods. This increase of the pH during the test was caused by the CO2-consumption of the plants due to their rapid growth. All test media were clear solutions and remained clear throughout the test medium renewal periods.
See Tables 1 to 4. - Results with reference substance (positive control):
- Not applicable
- Reported statistics and error estimates:
- Frond number, growth rate (r), AUC, and dry weight were determined or calculated for each test vessel, followed by calculation of the arithmetic mean frond number, mean growth rate, mean area, and mean dry weight, respectively, per test concentration and control. For the growth of Lemna after the 7-day exposure period, the 7-day NOEC (highest concentration without toxic effects) and the LOEC (lowest concentration with toxic effects) were determined by testing the growth parameters (mean frond numbers, average specific growth rate (r), the AUC, and the mean dry weight of the plants) at the test concentrations on statistically significant differences to the control values by multiple Dunnett-tests. The EC values (EC5, EC10, EC50, and EC90) for the growth parameters could not be calculated since no toxic effect of the test item on the growth of the plants was determined up to and including the highest test concentration.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Table 1: Influence of the test item on Lemna gibba growth: growth rates (r) and percentage inhibition of r
Nominal test item concentration [mg/L] |
Growth rate r (1/day) and % inhibition of r |
|||||
0 – 48 h |
0 – 96 h |
0 – 168 h |
||||
r |
% |
r |
% |
r |
% |
|
Control |
0.35 |
0 |
0.36 |
0 |
0.36 |
0 |
11 |
0.32 |
8.0 |
0.34 |
4.3 |
0.34 |
4.8 |
20 |
0.35 |
0.2 |
0.37 |
-2.0 |
0.35 |
2.3 |
35 |
0.31 |
12.2 |
0.33 |
9.4 |
0.34 |
6.9 |
62 |
0.31 |
12.9 |
0.34 |
6.5 |
0.34 |
4.7 |
110 |
0.32 |
8.0 |
0.35 |
3.9 |
0.35 |
3.2 |
Growth rates (r) were not significantly lower than the corresponding control value at any test item concentration (Dunett-test, one-sided smaller, α = 0.05)
Table 2: Influence of the test item on Lemna gibba growth: areas under growth curves (AUC) and percentage inhibition of AUC
Nominal test item concentration [mg/L] |
Areas under the growth curve (AUC) and percentage inhibition |
|||||
0 – 48 h |
0 – 96 h |
0 – 168 h |
||||
AUC |
% |
AUC |
% |
AUC |
% |
|
Control |
296 |
0 |
1520 |
0 |
7952 |
0 |
11 |
264 |
10.8 |
1384 |
8.9 |
7060 |
11.2 |
20 |
296 |
0 |
1560 |
-2.6 |
7716 |
3.0 |
35 |
248 |
16.2 |
1272 |
16.3 |
6564 |
17.5 |
62 |
248 |
16.2 |
1320 |
13.2 |
6960 |
12.5 |
110 |
264 |
10.8 |
1392 |
8.4 |
7284 |
8.4 |
AUC was not significantly lower than the corresponding control value at any test item concentration (Dunett-test, one-sided smaller, α = 0.05)
Table 3: Final biomass on the basis of dry weight (mg per test vessel) of Lemna colonies after 7 days
Vessel No. |
Nominal test item concentration [mg/L] |
|||||
Control |
11 |
20 |
35 |
62 |
110 |
|
1 |
20.1 |
14.9 |
19.9 |
14.1 |
17.1 |
16.2 |
2 |
14.0 |
16.2 |
14.3 |
18.3 |
17.6 |
17.6 |
3 |
21.3 |
12.9 |
19.7 |
16.3 |
19.6 |
19.4 |
Mean* |
18.5 |
14.7 |
18.0 |
16.2 |
18.1 |
17.7 |
SD |
3.9 |
1.7 |
3.2 |
2.1 |
1.3 |
1.6 |
% inhibition#compared to control |
- |
21.5 |
2.9 |
12.9 |
2.3 |
4.3 |
Mean: arithmetic mean
SD: standard deviation
* all mean values not significantly lower than in control (Dunett-test, one sided, smaller, α = 0.05)
# % inhibition based on the increase in biomass (mean final dry weight minus starting dry weight).
Dry weight of three colonies with in total 12 fronds at test start: 0.86 mg
Table 4: Total number of fronds and colonies per test vessel at the counting dates
Nominal test item concentration |
Vessel No. |
Frond number (#F) and colony number (#C) per test vessel |
Inhibition of mean frond number* |
|||||||
0 h (Day 0) |
48 h (Day 2) |
96 h (Day 4) |
168 h (Day 7) |
|||||||
#F |
#C |
#F |
#C |
#F |
#C |
#F |
#C |
|||
Control |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
24 25 24 |
6 6 6 |
52 51 49 |
12 12 12 |
167 126 163 |
34 32 33 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
24.3 0.6 |
6.0 0.0 |
50.7 1.5 |
12.0 0.0 |
152.0 22.6 |
33.0 1.0 |
- |
|
11 |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
24 23 22 |
6 6 5 |
49 50 44 |
12 12 12 |
126 150 126 |
30 35 29 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
23.0 1.0 |
5.7 0.6 |
47.7 3.2 |
12.0 0.0 |
134.0 13.9 |
31.3 3.2 |
12.9% |
|
20 |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
23 24 26 |
6 6 7 |
47 53 57 |
12 12 12 |
142 128 158 |
34 28 34 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
24.3 1.5 |
6.3 0.6 |
52.3 5.0 |
12.0 0.0 |
142.7 15.0 |
32.0 3.5 |
6.7% |
|
35 |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
23 21 23 |
6 6 6 |
48 43 42 |
12 11 10 |
130 130 120 |
31 28 28 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
22.3 1.2 |
6.0 0.0 |
44.3 3.2 |
11.0 1.0 |
126.7 5.8 |
29.0 1.7 |
18.1% |
|
62 |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
19 24 24 |
6 6 5 |
40 51 48 |
10 12 11 |
120 133 150 |
28 33 35 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
22.3 2.9 |
5.7 0.6 |
46.3 5.7 |
11.0 1.0 |
134.3 15.0 |
32.0 3.6 |
12.6% |
|
110 |
1 2 3 |
12 12 12 |
3 3 3 |
22 24 23 |
6 6 6 |
45 46 53 |
11 12 12 |
125 140 154 |
29 28 35 |
|
Mean SD |
12.0 0.0 |
3.0 0.0 |
23.0 1.0 |
6.0 0.0 |
48.0 4.4 |
11.7 0.6 |
139.7 14.5 |
30.7 3.8 |
8.8% |
Mean: arithmetic mean
SD: standard deviation
* % inhibition of mean frond number compared to the control at the test end (after 168 hours)
Mean frond and colony numbers at the test end (after 168 hours) were not significantly lower than the control values at any test item concentration (according to Dunnett-tests, one-sided smaller, α = 0.05).
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Validity criteria fulfilled:
- yes
- Conclusions:
- Dinotefuran did not inhibit the growth of Lemna gibba during the exposure period of 7 days up to and including 110 mg/L. This concentration was determined as the 7-day NOEC (highest concentration tested without toxic effects after a test period of 7 days). Due to the absence of a toxic effect of dinotefuran up to and including the highest test concentration of 110 mg/L, the 7-day LOEC (lowest concentration tested with toxic effects) and the EC10 and EC50 values after the 7-day test period could not be quantified for the different growth parameters, nonetheless, these parameters were clearly higher than 110 mg/L.
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.
