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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 232-191-3 | CAS number: 7789-80-2
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Genetic toxicity in vitro
Description of key information
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- in vitro DNA damage and/or repair study
- Remarks:
- Type of genotoxicity: DNA damage and/or repair
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other:
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Cells were exposed for 3 h to concentrations of the test compounds of 0.625, 1.25, 2.5, 5 and 10 mM. Tests compound was dissolved in the culture medium. Etoposide (0.5 µg/ ml) was dissolved in DMSO.
After cells exposure to the test compounds for 3 h, the culture medium was discarded and replaced by fresh medium. Cells were incubated for 0.5, 1 or 24 h and DNA damage was measured at each sampling time by the alkaline comet assay. - GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of assay:
- comet assay
- Target gene:
- no data
- Species / strain / cell type:
- Chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
- Details on mammalian cell type (if applicable):
- Chinese hamster ovary (CHO-K1) cells were purchased from Eurobio (France). They were routinely maintained from stocks stored in liquid nitrogen. CHO cells were grown at 37 C in a humidified atmosphere at 5% CO2 in air, in HAM’S F12 medium with l-glutamine supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (FCS), penicillin (50 UI/ml) and streptomycine (50 µg/ml). Cells were subcultured 24 h before treatment.
- Additional strain / cell type characteristics:
- not specified
- Metabolic activation:
- not specified
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- 0.625, 1.25, 2.5, 5 and 10 mM
- Vehicle / solvent:
- culture medium
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- not specified
- True negative controls:
- not specified
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: Etoposide (0.5 µg/ml)
- Species / strain:
- Chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
- Metabolic activation:
- not specified
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Remarks:
- The results showed that the comet assay failed to detect the presence of DNA damage after a treatment of cells by potassium iodate for concentrations up to 10 mM.
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: strain/cell type: Chinese hamster ovary (CHO-K1) cells
- Remarks:
- Migrated from field 'Test system'.
- Conclusions:
- Interpretation of results (migrated information):
negative
Potassium iodate did not induce DNA damage in CHO cells when tested at concentrations up to 10 mM in alkaline comet assay. - Executive summary:
Potassium iodate did not induce DNA damage in CHO cells when tested at concentrations up to 10 mM in alkaline comet assay.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (negative)
Additional information
Genetic toxicity :
Based on the various studies available with Klimish rating 4 for read across substances considering weight of evidence approach.
The results is summarized as follows
Sr. No |
End point |
Effect |
Species
|
Remarks |
1 |
DNA damage and repair
|
negative
|
Chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
|
Data is from publication for CAS NO 7758-05-6 |
2 |
chromosome aberration
|
negative
|
chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
|
Data is from publication for CAS NO 7758-05-6 |
3 |
Gene mutation
|
negative |
mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
Mammalian cell line Balb/c 3T3 cells
|
Data is from publication for CAS NO 7681-11-0 |
4 |
Radiation-sensitizing effects on DNA |
negative |
Marbourg strains of Bacillus subtilis |
Data is from publication for CAS NO 7681-11-0 |
By applying weight of evidence approach to the studies summarized in the above table it can be concluded that the substanceCalcium iodate is not likely to exhibit positive genetic toxicity effect. Thus calcium iodate is considered to be non-mutagenic substance as per the CLP criteria.
Justification for selection of genetic toxicity endpoint
Potassium iodate did not induce DNA damage in CHO cells when tested at concentrations up to 10 mM in alkaline comet assay.
Justification for classification or non-classification
From the results obtained for calcium iodate it can be concluded that the substance Calcium iodate is not likely to exhibit positive genetic toxicity effect
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.