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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 223-225-8 | CAS number: 3775-29-9
- 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
Genetic toxicity: in vitro
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
- Remarks:
- Type of genotoxicity: gene mutation
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- This study was conducted between 19 February 2013 and 18March 2013
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Reliability 1 is assigned because the study is conducted according to OECD TG 471, in compliance with GLP, without deviations that influence the quality of the results.
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 013
- Report date:
- 2013
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 471 (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- (1997)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.13/14 (Mutagenicity - Reverse Mutation Test Using Bacteria)
- Version / remarks:
- EC No. 440/2008
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.5100 - Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test (August 1998)
- Version / remarks:
- 1998
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: US Food and Drug Administration. Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Ingredients (Redbook 2000): IV.C.1.a. Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test.
- Deviations:
- no
- Guideline:
- JAPAN: Guidelines for Screening Mutagenicity Testing Of Chemicals
- Version / remarks:
- Official notice ofMHLW, ME TT and MOE (31 March 2011) YAKUSHOKUHATSU0331 No7 SETKYOKU No 5 KANPOKTHATSUNo 110331009
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of assay:
- bacterial reverse mutation assay
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- 2-methylenepropane-1,3-diyl diacetate
- EC Number:
- 223-225-8
- EC Name:
- 2-methylenepropane-1,3-diyl diacetate
- Cas Number:
- 3775-29-9
- Molecular formula:
- C8H12O4
- IUPAC Name:
- 2-[(acetyloxy)methyl]prop-2-en-1-yl acetate
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Identity: 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate
Lot number: 1210
Expiry: December 2017
Appearance: Colour less liquid
Storage conditions: Room temperature, in the dark
Purity/ Assay: >99%
Date received: 31 January 2013
Method
- Target gene:
- - S. typhimurium: Histidine gene
- E. coli: Tryptophan gene
Species / strainopen allclose all
- Species / strain / cell type:
- E. coli WP2 uvr A pKM 101
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 98 and TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- Rat liver S9-mix induced by a combination of phenobarbital and 5,6-benzoflavone
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- - First Test:
The following dose levels were used (all strains): 5, 15, 50, 150, 500, 1500, 5000 µg/plate
- Experiment 2:
All strains: 50, 150, 500, 1500, 5000 µg/plate - Vehicle / solvent:
- The Sponsot indicated that 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate was insoluble in water but that dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO) was a suitable solvent DMSO (HPLC grade) was, therefore, used as the vehicle for this study.
The highest concentration of2-Methylene-l,3-ptopanediol diacetate tested in this study was 50 mg/mL in the chosen vehicle, which provided a final concentrntion of 5000 µg/plate .. This is the standard limit concentration recommended in the regulatmy guidelines that this assay follows .. The highest concentration in each test was diluted with DMSO to produce a series of lower concentrations, separated by apptoximately half-log10 intervals.
All concentrations cited in this repott ate expressed in terms of the 2-Methylene-1,3propanediol diacetate sample as received.
Controls
- Untreated negative controls:
- no
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- Remarks:
- 100 µL/plate DMSO
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: see section "Any other information on materials and methods incl. tables"
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- S9 metabolizing system
Preparation of S9 fraction
S9 fraction, prepared from male Sprague-Dawley derived rats, dosed i.p. with phenobarbital sodium (30 mg/kg 4 days before killing and 60 mg/kg I, 2 & 3 days before killing) and 5,6benzoflavone (80 mg/kg 2 days before killing) to stimulate mixed-function oxidases in the liver, was purchased from a commercial source and stored at approximately -80°C. The quality control statement relating to each batch of S9 preparation used is included in the raw data
Lot No .. : 2946 (Date of preparation: 25 May 2012)
Preparation of S9 mix
The S9 mix contained: S9 fraction (10% v/v), MgCh (8 mM), KCl (33 mM), sodium phosphate buffer pH 7.4 (100 mM), glucose-6-phosphate (5 mM), NADPH (4 mM) and NADH (4 mM) in water.. All the cofactors were filter-sterilised befote use
Mutation test procedure
First test
Aliquots ofO I mL ofthe test substance solutions (seven concentrations up to 5000 µg/plate), positive control 01 vehicle control were placed in glass tubes. The vehicle control was DMSO. S9 mix (0.5 mL) or 0 1 M pH 7 4 phosphate buffer (0.5 mL) was added, followed by 0.1 mL ofa 10-hour bacterial culture and 2 ml of agar containing histidine (0 05 mM), biotin (0 .. 05 mM) and tryptophan (0 .. 05 mM).. The mixture was thoroughly shaken and overlaid onto previously prepared Petli dishes containing 25 mL minimal agar. Each Petri dish was individually labelled with a unique code, identifying the contents of the dish Three Petri dishes were used for each treatment Plates were also prepated without the addition of bacteria in order to assess the sterility ofthe test substance, S9 mix and sodium phosphate buffer. All plates were incubated at approximately 37°C for ca 72 hours .. After this period, the appearance of the background bacterial lawn was exainined and revertant colonies counted using an automated colony counter (Perceptive Instruments Sorcerer)
Any toxic effects of the test substance may be detected by a substantial reduction in mean revertant colony counts, by a sparse or absent background bacterial lawn, or both. In the absence of any toxic effects, the maximum concentration selected for use in the second test is the same as that used in the first If toxic effects are observed, a lower concentration might be chosen, ensuring that signs of bacterial inhibition are present at this maximum concentration .. Ideally, a minimum of four non-toxic concentrations should be obtained .. If precipitate is observed on the plates at the end of the incubation period, at least one precipitating concentration should be included in the second test, unless otherwise justified by the Study Director
Second test
As a cleat negative response was obtained in the fast test, a vaiiation to the test procedure was used for the second test The variation used was the pre-incubation assay in which the tubes, which contained mixtures of bacteria, buffer or S9 mix and test dilution, were incubated at 37°C for 30 minutes with shaking before the addition ofthe agar overlay. The maximum concentration chosen was again 5000 µg/plate, but only five concentrations were used.
Stability, homogeneity and formulation analysis
The stability of 2-Methylene-l,3-propanediol diacetate and the stability and homogeneity of 2-Methylene-1,3-prnpanediol diacetate in the vehicle were not determined as part of this study. Analysis of achieved concentration was not performed as part of this study.
Analysis of data
The mean number and standard deviation of revertant colonies were calculated for all groups. The “fold-increases” relative to the vehicle controls were calculated in order to compare the means for all treatment groups with those obtained for the vehicle control groups.
Criteria for assessing mutagenic potential
If exposure to a test substance produces a reproducible increase in revertant colony numbers of at least twice (three times in the case of strains TA1535 and TA1537) that of the concunent vehicle controls, with some evidence of a positive concentration-response telationship, it is considered to exhibit mutagenic activity in this test system.
If exposure to a test substance does not prnduce a reproducible increase in revertant colony numbers, it is considered to show no evidence of mutagenic activity in this test system No statistical analysis is pet fmmed.
If the 1esults obtained fail to satisfy the criteria for a clear "positive" OJ "negative" response, even after additional testing, the test data may be subjected to analysis to determine the statistical significance of any increases in revertant colony numbers .. The statistical prncedures used are those described by Mahon et al (1989) and are usually Dunnett's test followed, if apprnpriate, by trnnd analysis .. Biological impmtance will be considered along with statistical significance. In general, treatment-associated increases in revertant colony numbers below two or three times those of the vehicle cont10ls (as described above) are not considered biologically important. It should be noted that it is acceptable to conclude an equivocal response if no clear results can be obtained - Evaluation criteria:
- Acceptance criteria
For a test to be considered valid, the mean of the vehicle control revertant colony numbers for each strain should lie within or close to the current historical control range for the laboratory unless otherwise justified by the Study Director. The historical range is maintained as a rolling record over a maximum of five years. Also, the positive control compounds must induce an increase in mean revertant colony numbers of at least twice (three times in the case of strains TA1535 and TA1537, which have relatively low spontaneous reversion rates) that of the concurrent vehicle controls. Mean viable cell counts in the 10-hour bacterial cultures must be at least 10^9/mL.
Results and discussion
Test resultsopen allclose all
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1535
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1537
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 98
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Species / strain:
- E. coli WP2 uvr A pKM 101
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Additional information on results:
- The absence of colonies on sterility check plates confirmed the absence of microbial contamination of the S9 mix, buffer and test substance formulation
The mean revertant colony counts for the vehicle controls were within or close to the current historical control range for the laboratory.. Appropriate positive control chemicals (with S9 mix where requiied) induced substantial increases in revertant colony numbers with all strains in all repmted tests, confirming sensitivity of the cultures and activity of the S9 mix
First test
No evidence of toxicity was obtained following exposure to 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate. A maximum exposure concentration of 5000 µg/plate was, therefore, selected for use in the second test.
No substantial increases in revertant colony numbers over control connts were obtained with any of the tester strains following exposure to 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate at any concentration up to and including 5000 µg/plate in either the presence or absence of S9 mix.
Second test
No evidence of toxicity was obtained following exposure to 2-Methylene-l, 3-propanediol diacetate.
No substantial increases in revertant colony numbers over control counts were obtained with any of the tester strains following exposure to 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate at any concentration up to and including 5000 µg/plate in either the presence 01 absence of S9 mix - Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- no evidence of mutagenic activity
Any other information on results incl. tables
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- It was concluded that 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate showed no evidence of mutagenic activity in this bacterial system under the test conditions employed
- Executive summary:
In this in vitro assessment of the mutagenic potential of 2-Methylene-l,3-propanediol diacetate, histidine-dependent auxotrophic mutants of Salmonella typhimurium, strains IA1535, IA1537, IA98andIA100, and a t1yptophan-dependent mutant of Escherichia coli, strain WP2 uvrA (pKMIOI), were exposed to 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate diluted in dimethyl sulphoxide (DMSO). DMSO was also used as a vehicle control.
Two independent mutation tests were performed in the presence and absence oflive1 preparations (S9 mix) from rats treated with phenobarbital and 5,6-benzoflavone. The first test was a standard plate incorporation assay; the second included a pre-incubation stage.
Concentrations of2-Methylene-l,3-propanediol diacetate up to 5000 µg/plate were tested. This is the standard limit concentration recommended in the regulatory guidelines that this assay follows. Other concentrations used were a series of ca half-log10 dilutions of the highest concentration.
No signs of toxicity towards the teste1 strains were observed in either mutation test following exposure to 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate.
No evidence ofmutagenic activity was seen at any concentration of2-Methylene-l,3propanediol diacetate in either mutation test
The concurrent positive controls ve1ified the sensitivity of the assay and the metabolising activity of the liver preparations The mean revertant colony counts for the vehicle controls were within or close to the current historical control range for the laboratmy
It was concluded that 2-Methylene-1,3-propanediol diacetate showed no evidence of mutagenic activity in this bacterial system under the test conditions employed
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.