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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Toxicological information

Eye irritation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
eye irritation
Adequacy of study:
other information
Reliability:
3 (not reliable)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: 3a: Significant methodological deficiences

Data source

Referenceopen allclose all

Reference Type:
secondary source
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2003
Report date:
2003
Reference Type:
grey literature
Title:
Safety Data Sheet, 31 Jan. 1972
Author:
Union Carbide
Year:
1972
Bibliographic source:
(cited from HSDB, 2003)
Report date:
1972
Title:
Vol 2A - 2F, 4th ed., J. Wiley & Sons, N.Y., 1993-1994 (cited from HSDB 2003)
Author:
Clayton, G.D. and Clayton F.E. (eds.):
Year:
2003
Report date:
2003
Reference Type:
secondary source
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2002
Report date:
2002
Reference Type:
review article or handbook
Title:
Aliphatic Carboxylic Acids, Saturated
Author:
Cragg ST
Year:
2001
Bibliographic source:
Bingham E, Cohrssen B, and Powell CH (eds.) Patty´s Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology (2005) John Wiley & Sons, N.Y., USA
Report date:
2001

Materials and methods

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Isovaleric acid
EC Number:
207-975-3
EC Name:
Isovaleric acid
Cas Number:
503-74-2
Molecular formula:
C5H10O2
IUPAC Name:
3-methylbutanoic acid
Details on test material:
IUCLID4 Test substance: no data

Test animals / tissue source

Species:
rabbit

Test system

Amount / concentration applied:
undiluted
Amount applied: 0.94 other: mg
Duration of treatment / exposure:
unspecified
Details on study design:
Comment: no data

Results and discussion

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
slightly irritating
Remarks:
Migrated information
Executive summary:

According to HSDB (2003) 940 µg were applied; whereas this was 940 mg according to Cragg (2005; Patty's Toxicology, electronic version). Though there might have been typos, the method applied and the result obtained remain at present unclear.