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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 235-762-5 | CAS number: 12672-27-4
- 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
Bioaccumulation: aquatic / sediment
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
Description of key information
For Cobalt, BCF/BAF values in the range of 7.4 to 3110 L/kg were reported (mean 878, median 720). Further data demonstrates that Co, like other essential elements, shows homeostatic control by organisms.
For Aluminium, the available evidence shows the absence of aluminium biomagnification across trophic levels both in aquatic and terrestrial food chains. The existing information suggests not only that aluminium does not biomagnify, but rather that it tends to exhibit biodilution at higher trophic levels in the food chain. More detailed information can be found in the attached document (White paper on waiving for secondary poisoning for Al & Fe compounds final report 02-02-2010. pdf).
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Additional information
No data on aquatic bioaccumulation are available for the test substance cobalt aluminium oxide. However, there are reliable data available for different structurally analogue substances.
The environmental fate pathways and ecotoxicity effects assessments for cobalt metal and cobalt compounds as well as for aluminium metal and aluminium compounds is based on the observation that adverse effects to aquatic, soil- and sediment-dwelling organisms are a consequence of exposure to the bioavailable ion, released by the parent compound. The result of this assumption is that the ecotoxicological behaviour will be similar for all soluble cobalt and aluminium substances used in the ecotoxicity tests.
As cobalt aluminium oxide has shown to be highly insoluble with regard to the results of the transformation/dissolution test protocol (pH 6, 28 d), it can be assumed that under environmental conditions in aqueous media, the components of the substance will be present in a bioavailable form only in minor amounts, if at all. Within this dossier all available data from cobalt and aluminium substances are pooled and used for the derivation of ecotoxicological and environmental fate endpoints, based on the cobalt ion and aluminium ion. For cobalt, only data from soluble substances were available and for aluminium, both soluble and insoluble substance data were available. All data were pooled and considered as a worst-case assumption for the environment. However, it should be noted that this represents an unrealistic worst-case scenario, as under environmental conditions the concentration of soluble Co2+ and Al3+ ions released is negligible.
Cobalt
Information taken from Environment Canada (2011):
Considering all aquatic data, 31 acceptable bioaccumulation factors were reported for various species of algae, invertebrates, fish, and zooplankton. These values ranged from 7.4 to 3110 L/kg, with a mean value of 878 L/kg and a median value of 720 L/kg. Five biota-to-sediment accumulation factors (BSAF-sed.) were reported. BSAF-sed values ranged from 0.091 to 0.645, with a mean value of 0.232 and a median value of 0.138 (Environment Canada, 2011).
If marine and freshwater data are pooled, then for aquatic invertebrates, 16 BCF and BAF values were obtained, ranging from 21.8 to 2280 L/kg with an average value of 724 L/kg and a median value of 441 L/kg (wet weight). In comparison, values for fish (n=11) ranged from 7.4 to 3110 L/kg, with an average value of 1010 L/kg and a median value of 849 L/kg. Many studies have noted that homeostatic mechanisms likely exist to regulate cobalt accumulation, due to the fact that it is an essential element (Environment Canada, 2011).
One study, done by Norwood et al. (2006), was unique in its use of a mechanistically-based saturation model for the bioaccumulation of cobalt. The test organism was the freshwater amphipod Hyalella azteca. The wet-weight BCF was calculated according to the equation: BCF = (max)(DW-1)1000K-1, where max is the maximum above-background accumulation of the metal in the organism, measured in nmol/g, DW-1 is the mean dry-to-wet weight ratio for the organism, and K is the half saturation constant (i.e. the metal concentration in the water at which the concentration in the organism is halfway between the maximum and the background accumulations), measured in nmol/L. So, it is seen that this model estimates a BCF based on background-corrected metal accumulation at low aqueous concentrations; thus, unlike with other approaches, background contaminant concentrations will not dictate the BCF values observed. In this case, the wet-weight BCF for Hyalella azteca was found to be 515 L/kg.
In the study carried out by El-Shenawy (2004), metal concentrations were measured in the bivalve Ruditapes decussatus, and in surrounding waters at two different contaminated sites for the calculation of BAFs ranging from 227.1 to 365.7. A lower BAF was observed at the site with a higher ambient cobalt concentration. This inverse relationship between BAF and ambient cobalt concentration provides evidence for the existence of regulation mechanisms in this invertebrate, as previously explained.
Several of the studies used field observations to calculate relevant values. While these data are environmentally realistic, the presence of multiple contaminants, especially other metals, likely influenced the BAF values observed for cobalt. Along these lines, one laboratory experiment by Fraysse et al. (2002) investigated the effect of the presence of cadmium and/or zinc on cobalt accumulation. Two species of freshwater bivalves (Dreissena polymorpha and Corbicula fluminea) were exposed to either cobalt alone, cobalt plus cadmium, cobalt plus zinc, or cobalt plus cadmium and zinc. For D. polymorpha, a BCF of 1100 was determined for whole body wet weight (17 for whole soft body), while for C. fluminea, a BCF of 530 was reported for whole body wet weight (10 for whole soft body). In the end, maximum concentration factors were observed when organisms were exposed to cobalt alone; and, the addition of zinc alone had the greatest inhibitory effect on cobalt uptake (though cadmium and cadmium plus zinc treatments also had an inhibitory affect). Thus, it is important to consider both polymetallic field exposures and controlled laboratory exposures when evaluating cobalt accumulation data.
Biomagnification
Additionally, a study done by Baudin and Fritsch (1989) is referenced. Here, when the carp Cyprinus carpio received cobalt from contaminated food (the mollusc Lymnea stagnalis), the biomagnification factor was reported to have been in the order of 10-2 (though the actual value was not reported). Additionally, it was concluded that water is the dominant pathway for cobalt uptake, and that accumulation from food and water is additive.
Ikemoto et al. (2008) considered the freshwater food web of the Mekong Delta in South Vietnam, examining phytoplankton, snails, five species of crustaceans, and fifteen species of fish. A TMF (trophic magnification factor) for cobalt of 0.95 resulted, but again there was no statistical significance (r2=0.013, p=0.506). Thus the results showed no biomagnification or biodilution of cobalt through the food chain.
There are several lines of evidence to suggest that the bioaccumulation potential of cobalt in natural ecosystems is relatively low. First of all, low BAFs have been reported in eight laboratory (steady state) studies and four field studies; five BSAF-sediment values have been found to be well below 1; and, four (out of four) average BSAF-soil values have been reported to be well below 1. In addition, results from six field investigations plus two laboratory studies indicate the absence of biomagnification of cobalt in natural food webs. Finally, cobalt is an essential micro-nutrient, the uptake of which is expected to be regulated to some extent by many organisms (Environment Canada, 2011).
References:
Environment Canada. Health Canada (2011). Screening Assessment for the Challenge. Cobalt, cobalt chloride, cobalt sulfate.
Aluminium
Bioconcentration factors (BCF) and/or bioaccumulation factors (BAF) are typically calculated in order to estimate bioaccumulation and biomagnification. However, it has recently been demonstrated that unlike many organic substances, the BCF/BAF is not independent of exposure concentration for many metals (Brix and Deforest, 2000 and Mc Geer et al., 2003). Rather it is inversely related (i. e., decreasing BCF/BAFs with increasing exposure concentration) to exposure concentration. Metal concentrations in tissue based on a range of exposure concentrations may be quite similar but the BCFs will be quite variable reflecting an inverse relationship (i. e., higher BCFs at lower exposure concentrations and lower BCFs at higher exposure concentrations) between metal concentrations and the corresponding BCF (Brix et al, 2001). From the above it is clear that any conclusion based on the application of classical concepts (e. g., use of bioconcentration factors; BCF -biomagnification factors; BMF) to metals as they are applied to organic substances should be treated with caution. As a result, use of a simple ratio Cbiota/Cwateror Cbiota/Csedimentsas an overall approach for estimating bioconcentration factors for aluminium body burdens is not appropriate.
References:
Brix KV, DK DeForest (2000). Critical review of the use of bioconcentration factors for hazard classification of metals and metal compounds. OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) Aquatic Hazards Extended Workshop Meeting, May 15, Paris, France.
Brix, K. V., DeForest, D. K. and Adams, W. J. (2001). Assessing acute and chronic copper risks to freshwater aquatic life using species sensitivity distributions for different taxonomic groups. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 20: 1846–1856.
Herrmann and Frick (1995). Do Stream Invertebrates Aluminium at low pH conditions? Water, Air and Soil Pollution 85: 407-412.
McGeer et al. (2003). Inverse relationship between bioconcentration factor and exposure concentration for metals; implications for hazard assessment of metals in the aquatic environment. Env. Tox. and Chem. 22, No 5.
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.