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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 205-440-9 | CAS number: 140-90-9
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- other: published data
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Justification for type of information:
- Carbon disulphide is both a reagent in the manufacture, as well as a decomposition product of xanthates. SEX readily decomposes to carbon disulphide, especially in the presence of moisture/water. Therefore, the health effects of carbon disulphide (CS2) need to be considered in the assessment of Reaction mass of SEX. In addition, xanthates decompose on aging to form a number of byproducts, depending on the pH, temperature, etc. Risks associated with xanthate are, therefore, a function of the breakdown of the product or un-reacted raw materials remaining in the product.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- CBA
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS: Mice, CBA/CaOlaHsd
- Source: Harlan Laboratories B.V., Postbus 6174, 5960 AD Horst / The Netherlands
- Age at study initiation: 8 - 12 weeks (beginning of treatment)
- Weight at study initiation: 18.3 - 23.3 g
- Housing:single caging
- Diet: pelleted standard diet (Harlan Laboratories B.V., 5960 AD Horst / Netherlands), ad libidum
- Water: tap water, (Gemeindewerke, 64380 Rossdorf), ad libitum
- Bedding: granulated soft wood bedding (Rettenmaier & Söhne GmbH + Co. KG, 73494 Rosenberg)
- Acclimation period: At least 5 days prior to the start of dosing under test conditions after health examination. Only animals without any visible signs of illness were used for the study
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 +/- 2°C
- Humidity (%): relative humidity 45-65%
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): artificial light 6:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. - Vehicle:
- acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)
- Concentration:
- The highest test item concentration which can be technically used was 100% of the undiluted test item. The dilutions were formulated in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v).
In the pre-test, two mice were treated with test item concentrations of 50 or 100%.
The test item in the main study was assayed at 25, 50, and 100%. - No. of animals per dose:
- 4
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- Compound solubility: The highest test item concentration which can be technically used was 100% of the undiluted test item. The dilutions were formulated in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v).
In the pre-test, two mice were treated by topical application to the dorsal surface of each ear with test item concentrations of 50 or 100% once daily each on three consecutive days. At those concentrations the animals did not show signs of systemic toxicity or local irritation.
MAIN STUDY:
TOPICAL APPLICATION:
Each test group of mice was treated by topical (epidermal) application to the dorsal surface of each ear (left and right) with different test item concentrations of 25, 50, and 100% (w/v) in acetone:olive oil (4:1). The application volume, 25 µl, was spread over the entire dorsal surface (~ 8 mm) of each ear once daily for three consecutive days. A further group of mice was treated with an equivalent volume of the relevant vehicle alone (control animals).
ADMINISTRATION OF ³H-METHYL THYMIDINE AND DETERMINATION OF INCORPORATED ³H-METHYL THYMIDINE
Five days after the first topical application, all mice were intraveneously injected into a tail vein with radio-labelled thymidine (³H-methyl thymidine). Approximately five hours after treatment with ³HTdR all mice were sacrificed and the draining lymph nodes were excised and pooled per group. Single cell suspensions lymph node cells were prepared from pooled lymph nodes, which were subsequently washed with phosphate buffered saline and incubated with trichloroacetic acid overnight. The proliferative capacity of pooled lymph node cells was determined by the incorporation of ³H-methyl thymidine measured in a ß-scintillation counter.
INTERPRETATION OF RAW DATA
The proliferative response of lymph node cells is expressed as the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute per lymph node (DPM/node) and as the ratio of ³HTdR incorporated into lymph node cells of test lymph nodes relative to that recorded for control lymph nodes (stimulation index). Before DPM/node values were determined, mean scintillation-background DPM was subtracted from test and control raw data. A test item is regarded as a sensitiser in the LLNA if the following criteria are fulfilled:
- First, that exposure to at least one concentration of the test item resulted in an incorporation of ³HTdR at least 3-fold or greater than that recorded in control mice, as indicated by the stimulation index.
- Second, that the data are compatible with a conventional dose response, although allowance must be made (especially at high topical concentrations) for either local toxicity or immunological suppression.
OBSERVATIONS
In addition to the sensitising reactions the following observations and data were recorded during the test and observation period:
- Mortality / Viability: Once daily (week day) from experimental start to necropsy.
- Body weights: In the pre-test prior to the first application and prior to sacrifice; in the main experiment prior to the first application and prior to treatment with 3HTdR.
- Clinical signs (local / systemic): In the pre-test clinical signs were recorded within 1 hour and 24 ± 4 hours after each application as well as on day 7. In the main experiment clinical signs were recorded within 1 hour each application, and 24 ± 4 hours after the first and second application as well as on the day of preparation. Especially the treatment sites were observed carefully. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- The mean values and standard deviations were calculated in the body weight tables.
- Positive control results:
- Experiment performend in November 2009:
5, 10, and 25% alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde in acetone:olibe oil (4:1) yielded a S.I. of 1.78, 2.54, and 4.88, respectively. The EC3 value calculated was 12.9%.
The positive control substance alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde was found to be a skin sensitizer under the described conditions, demonstrating the validity of the study. - Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- In this study Stimulation Indices of 1.22, 0.99, and 3.46 were determined with the test item at concentrations of 25, 50, and 100% in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v), respectively. A conventional dose response curve could not be established and an EC3 value was not calculated because of the odd dose response.
- Parameter:
- other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
- Remarks on result:
- other: As depicted in the table below.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Based on the numerical values of the stimulation indices one of which is slightly above 3, the test item Carbon disulfide has to be considered a skin sensitizer under the test condidions of this study. However, a conventional dose-response curve could not be established. An EC3 value was not calculated because of the odd dose-response.These factors contribute also in determining whether a borderline result shall be deemed as positive. In the opinion of the applicant this is a false positive and CS2 cannot be considered as a skin sensitizer base don this study.
Carbon disulphide is both a reagent in the manufacture, as well as a decomposition product of xanthates.SEX readily decomposes to carbon disulphide, especially in the presence of moisture/water. Therefore, the health effects of carbon disulphide (CS2) need to be considered in the assessment of SEX. - Executive summary:
In this study carbon disulfide dissolved in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v) was assessed for its possible contact allergenic potential. For this purpose a local lymph node assay according to OECD guideline 429 was performed using test item concentrations of 25, 50, and 100%. All treated animals survived the scheduled study period and no signs of systemic toxicity or local irritation were observed. A test item is regarded as a sensitiser in the LLNA if the exposure to one or more test concentration results in a 3-fold or greater increase in incorporation of ³HTdR compared with concurrent controls, as indicated by the Stimulation Index (S.I.). The estimated concentration of test item required to produce a S.I. of 3 is referred to as the EC3 value. In this study Stimulation Indices of 1.22, 0.99, and 3.46 were determined with the test item at concentrations of 25, 50, and 100% in acetone/olive oil (4:1). Based on the numerical values of these stimulation indices, the test item carbon disulfide has to be considered a skin sensitizer under the test conditions of this study. However, a conventional dose-response curve could not be established. An EC3 value was not calculated because of the odd dose-response. These factors contribute also in determining whether a borderline result shall be deemed as positive. In the opinion of the applicant this is a false positive and CS2 cannot be considered as a skin sensitizer base don this study.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Justification for type of information:
- Sodium hydroxide is both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate . Therefore, sodium hydroxide need to be considered in the assessment of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Patch testing for 24 hours with visual scoring being recorded by the subjective evaluation method and by the transepidermal water loss method. After the seventh day reading sodium hydroxide (0.125%) was re-applied to all pretested sites and reading was performed on the next day.
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- not specified
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Patch testing for 24 hours with visual scoring being recorded by the subjective evaluation method and by the transepidermal water loss method. After the seventh day reading sodium hydroxide (0.125%) was re-applied to all pretested sites and reading was performed on the next day.
- Species:
- human
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- male
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- HUMAN VOLUNTEERS
- Age at study initiation: between 20 and 25 - Route:
- other: no data
- Vehicle:
- no data
- Concentration / amount:
- Concentrations used for induction: 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
- Route:
- other: no data
- Vehicle:
- no data
- Concentration / amount:
- Concentrations used for induction: 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
- No. of animals per dose:
- Number of volunteers: 15 without any previous history of atopy
- Details on study design:
- MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Control group: yes, distilled water and empty chambers
- Site: back
- Duration: 24 hours (induction and challenge)
- Concentrations: 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: on day 7, NaOH was reapplied
- Day(s) of challenge: 1
- Concentrations: 0.125% - Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- The irritant response was well correlated to the concentration of the irritant. However, increased response was not observed when subclinical doses were rechallenged on the previously patch tested sites.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: The irritant response was well correlated to the concentration of the irritant. However, increased response was not observed when subclinical doses were rechallenged on the previously patch tested sites..
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50 µl, 1.0, 0.5, 0.25, 0.125 and 0.063%
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Sodium hydroxide is both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate . Therefore, sodium hydroxide need to be considered in the assessment of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate .
The irritant response was well correlated to the concentration of the irritant. However, increased response was not observed when subclinical doses were rechallenged on the previously patch tested sites. - Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Study period:
- 1988
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Justification for type of information:
- Sodium hydroxide is both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate . Therefore, sodium hydroxide need to be considered in the assessment of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate
- Qualifier:
- no guideline available
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Mouse ear swelling test. Substance applied to mouse ear with adjuvant with measure of subsequent swelling used to indicate hypersensitivity.
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- mouse ear swelling test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- An ear swelling study was used to examine the skin sensitising potential of ethanol. Ethanol was applied twice on the right ear after an induction procedure involving two scapular subcutaneous injection of adjuvant and multiple topical ethanol applications to the abdomen over a period of 14 days.
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- Swiss
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: IFFA-CREDO, L'Arbresle, France
- Age at study initiation: 6 - 8 weeks
- Housing: polyethylene cages
- Food and water ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 7 days - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- neat
- Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- neat
- No. of animals per dose:
- 23
- Details on study design:
- MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Anaesthetised animals received subcutaneous injection of 0.05ml of ethanol and complete Freund' adjuvant (CFA) into scapular region plus topical application to shaved abdomen (amount not specified - referred to as day 0).
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 7
- Day(s) of challenge: days 3, 5, 7, 10, 12 and 14 and 27
- Topical application on the shaved abdomen (amount not specified) on days above and a 2nd subcutaneous injection of CFA (0.05ml) on day 7 only.
OTHER: Mice were allowed to rest between days 14-26. On day 26, the thickness of the ear was measured before another topical application of the test substance to both sides of the ear. Ear thickness was measured again on days 27 and 28 (24 and 48 hours later). Thickness measurements were carried out with a mobile-disk dial caliper with an accuracy of 0.01mm. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- Penicillin, paraphenylene diamine and nickel chloride
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Classification: not sensitizing.Ethanol/ Ethyl Alcohol is both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate . Therefore, Ethanol/ Ethyl Alcohol need to be considered in the assessment of Reaction mass of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate
- Executive summary:
An ear swelling study was used to examine the skin sensitising potential of ethanol. Ethanol was applied twice on the right ear after an induction procedure involving two scapular subcutaneous injection of adjuvant and multiple topical ethanol applications to the abdomen over a period of 14 days. The degree of contact hypersensitivity is deduced from easr swelling measured 24 and 48 hours after application. Ethanol was found not to cause any statistical increase in ear swelling, in contrast to 3 positive controls which all caused a statistically significant increase.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in chemico
- Data waiving:
- study scientifically not necessary / other information available
- Justification for data waiving:
- other:
Referenceopen allclose all
Calculation and results of individual data; Vehicle: acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)
Test item concentration % (w/v) |
Group |
Measurement DPM |
Calculation |
Result |
||
DPM-BGa) |
number of lymph nodes |
DPM per lymph nodeb ) |
S.I. |
|||
--- |
BG I |
17 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
BG II |
17 |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
--- |
1 |
3517 |
3500 |
8 |
437.5 |
--- |
25 |
2 |
4282 |
4265 |
8 |
533.1 |
1.22 |
50 |
3 |
3479 |
3462 |
8 |
432.8 |
0.99 |
100 |
4 |
12129 |
12112 |
8 |
1514.0 |
3.46 |
VIABILITY / MORTALITY
No deaths occurred during the study period.
CLINICAL SIGNS
No symptoms of local toxicity at the ears of the animals and no systemic findings were observed during the study period.
BODY WEIGHTS
The body weight of the animals, recorded prior to the first application and prior to treatment with 3HTdR, was within the range commonly recorded for animals of this strain and age.
The irritant response was well correlated to the concentration of the irritant. However, increased response was not observed when subclinical doses were rechallenged on the previously patch tested sites.
Measurements of 94 untreated mice showed an ear thickness of 0.214 mm with a typical variation of 0.002 mm.
Results on sensitisation and challenge with ethanol:
Sex |
Number |
Before |
24 hour |
48 hour |
Male |
9 |
26.94 +/-1.02 |
27.22 +/-1.58 (101.0%) |
27.78 +/-1.86 (103.1%) |
Female |
10 |
24.30 +/-1.38 |
24.95 +/-1.44 (102.7%) |
23.55 +/-1.46 (96.9%) |
Known moderate and strong sensitizers applied as controls produced significant swelling in this study.
Induction and challenge with the three positive controls all produced statistically significant increases in ear thickness.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Skin sensitisation
No evidence of sensitisation in the study of of Vogel 2010.Based on the numerical values of the stimulation indices one of which is slightly above 3, the test item Carbon disulfide has to be considered a skin sensitizer under the test condidions of this study.
However, a conventional dose-response curve could not be established. An EC3 value was not calculated because of the odd dose-response.These factors contribute also in determining whether a borderline result shall be deemed as positive. In the opinion of the applicant this is a false positive and CS2 cannot be considered as a skin sensitizer base don this study.
Because carbon disulphide is both a reagent in the manufacture, as well as a decomposition product of xanthates. SEX readily decomposes to carbon disulphide, especially in the presence of moisture/water.Therefore, the health effects of carbon disulphide (CS2) need to be considered in the assessment of SEX .
This result can be reliably be read across to the substance SEX
Synopsis
Not sensitising
-In other study Ethyl Alcohol was tested for skin sensitisation .
Ethanol/ Ethyl Alcohol is both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate Therefore, Ethanol/ Ethyl Alcohol need to be considered in the assessment of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate .
Ethanol was applied twice on the right ear after an induction procedure involving two scapular subcutaneous injection of adjuvant and multiple topical ethanol applications to the abdomen over a period of 14 days. The degree of contact hypersensitivity is deduced from easr swelling measured 24 and 48 hours after application. Ethanol was found not to cause any statistical increase in ear swelling, in contrast to 3 positive controls which all caused a statistically significant increase.
Synopsis
Not sensitising
-In other study Sodium Hydroxide was tested for skin sensitisation
Sodium hydroxideis both reagents used in the manufacture of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate . Therefore,sodium hydroxide need to be considered in the assessment of sodium O-ethyl dithiocarbonate
The irritant response was well correlated to the concentration of the irritant. However, increased response was not observed when subclinical doses were rechallenged on the previously patch tested sites.
Synopsis
Not sensitising
Migrated from Short description of key information:
No evidence of skin sensitisation. It is concluded that the substance SEX does not meet the criteria to be classified for human health hazards for Inhalation - local effect: skin sensitisation.
Respiratory sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- respiratory sensitisation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- other: published data
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Justification for type of information:
- SEX are related compound to PAX
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- A 30-day repeated inhalation study for potassium amyl xanthate was conducted in 1976. Animals were exposed to potassium amyl xanthate as an aqueous aerosol. Attempts at dust exposure were unsuccessful as potassium amyl xanthate is hygroscopic.
Animals were exposed to concentrations of 0, 100 and 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate. These concentrations were equivalent to actual doses of 0, 23 and 252 mg/m3. Analysis of the particle size indicated that all the particles at the lower dose of 100 mg/m3 were less than 10μm in diameter while approximately 80% of the particles had a diameter of 10μm or less at a dose of 800 mg/m3. It is not possible to state from the description of the exposure method whether air flow was dynamic or static. - GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Species:
- rat
- Strain:
- Sprague-Dawley
- Sex:
- male
- Route of induction exposure:
- inhalation
- Route of challenge exposure:
- inhalation
- Vehicle:
- other: aqueous aerosol
- Concentration:
- 10 male Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to concentrations of 0, 200 or 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate, 6 hrs daily for 10 exposures in 2 weeks.
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10
- Details on study design:
- Animals were exposed to concentrations of 0, 100 and 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate. These concentrations were equivalent to actual doses of 0, 23 and 252 mg/m3. Analysis of the particle size indicated that all the particles at the lower dose of 100 mg/m3 were less than 10μm in diameter while approximately 80% of the particles had a diameter of 10μm or less at a dose of 800 mg/m3. It is not possible to state from the description of the exposure method whether air flow was dynamic or static.
Exposure levels for the study were established by a preliminary experiment. In the preliminary experiment, three groups of 10 male Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to concentrations of 0, 200 or 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate, 6 hrs daily for 10 exposures in 2 weeks. - Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Negative control substance(s):
- not specified
- Results:
- The results of the study (Dow Chemical Company 1976) indicate that Sodium ethyl xanthate (the result was read across from potassium amyl xanthate) has an adverse effect at concentration of 252mg/m3 on the central nervous system and liver in mice, the liver and kidneys in rats and the liver in dogs. Only Signs of irritation of respiratory tract and Nasal effects were observed in rats as reddish nasal discharge but not respiratory sensitisation.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitising
- Conclusions:
- The results of the study (Dow Chemical Company 1976) indicate that SEX (the result was read across from potassium amyl xanthate) has an adverse effect at concentration of 252mg/m3 on the central nervous system and liver in mice, the liver and kidneys in rats and the liver in dogs. Only Signs of irritation of respiratory tract and Nasal effects were observed in rats as reddish nasal discharge but not respiratory sensitisation.
- Executive summary:
In the 30-day study, three groups of animals, each consisting of 10 male Swiss-Webster mice, 10 male Sprague-Dawley rats, 4 male New Zealand White rabbits and 2 male beagle dogs were exposed to either filtered room air or to concentrationsof 100 or 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate. Whole body exposure was for 6 hrsdaily, 5 days a week for a total of 20 exposures in 1 month.
Ten mice of the 800 mg/m3group died along with 5/6 replacement mice.
The animals were observed during the exposures and body weights were recordedthree times a week throughout the experiment. Body weight data, organ to bodyweight ratios and clinical laboratory parameters were analysed statistically usinganalysis of variance and Dunnett’s test.
Most of the mice died when exposed to 800 mg/m3. Five of the 16 mice that diedshowed convulsions and hyperactivity prior to death. The adverse effects produced by the two doses of potassium amyl xanthate are shown in Table1.
The results of the study (Dow Chemical Company 1976) indicate that SEX (the result was read across from potassium amyl xanthate) has an adverse effect at concentration of 252mg/m3 on the central nervous system and liver in mice, the liver and kidneys in rats and the liver in dogs.
Only Signs of irritation of respiratory tract and Nasal effects were observed in rats as reddish nasal discharge but not respiratory sensitisation.
- Endpoint:
- respiratory sensitisation: in chemico
- Data waiving:
- other justification
- Justification for data waiving:
- other:
Referenceopen allclose all
Table 5 Results of repeated inhalation study with potassium amyl xanthate in laboratory animals
|
|
Dogs (2 animals)
|
Rabbits (4 animals)
|
Rats (10 animals)
|
Mice (10,6 animals)
|
100 mg/m3
|
Eyes
|
No irritation
|
No irritation
|
No irritation
|
No irritation
|
|
Nasal effects and irritation of respiratory tract
|
No effects
|
No effects
|
No effects
|
No effects
|
|
Hair coat
|
Yellow brown staining.
|
Progressive yellow brown staining
|
Yellow brown stainingof the hair coat of the rats.
|
No staining
|
|
Other effects
|
Staining of the appendages and scrotum; ulceration of the skin in the scrotal region.
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Body weight
|
No change
|
No change
|
No change
|
No change
|
|
Organ weight
|
No change
|
No change
|
No change
|
Higher liver to body weight ratio than controls
|
|
Liver enzyme changes
|
Marked elevation of serum alanine aminotransferase and alkaline phosphatase activities
|
No change
|
No change
|
No change
|
|
Histopathology changes
|
Hepatocellular degeneration, necrosis and inflammation
|
No treatment related change
|
No treatment related change
|
No treatment related change
|
|
Deaths
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
800 mg/m3
|
Eye changes
|
Excessive lacrimation
|
Conjunctival redness
|
No irritation
|
No changes
|
|
Nasal effects and irritation of respiratory tract
|
None
|
None
|
Reddish nasal discharge
|
None
|
|
Hair coat
|
Yellow brown staining
|
A more intense yellow brown
|
Yellow brown staining
|
No effects
|
|
Skin
|
Ulceration of the skin
|
No effect
|
No effect
|
No effect
|
|
Body weight
|
No effect
|
No effect
|
No effect
|
No effect
|
|
Organ weight
|
No change
|
No change
|
Higher liver to body weight ratio than controls
|
Higher liver to body weight ratio than controls
|
|
Liver enzyme changes
|
Marked elevations of serum alanine aminotransferase and alkaline phosphatase activities.
|
No changes
|
High serum alanine aminotransferase activity
|
No changes
|
|
Histopathology changes
|
Hepatocellular degeneration, necrosis and inflammation
|
No changes
|
Microscopically visible granular degeneration
|
No changes
|
|
Deaths
|
None
|
None
|
One, but not related to exposure
|
10 from the original group and 5/6 replacement animals died. Convulsions hyperactivity in 5/16 prior to death.
|
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Respiratory sensitisation.
In the 30-day study, three groups of animals, each consisting of 10 male Swiss-Webster mice, 10 male Sprague-Dawley rats, 4 male New Zealand White rabbitsand 2 male beagle dogs were exposed to either filtered room air or to concentrationsof 100 or 800 mg/m3 of potassium amyl xanthate. Whole body exposure was for 6 hrsdaily, 5 days a week for a total of 20 exposures in 1 month.
Ten mice of the 800 mg/m3group died along with 5/6 replacement mice.
The animals were observed during the exposures and body weights were recordedthree times a week throughout the experiment. Body weight data, organ to bodyweight ratios and clinical laboratory parameters were analysed statistically usinganalysis of variance and Dunnett’s test.
Most of the mice died when exposed to 800 mg/m3. Five of the 16 mice that diedshowed convulsions and hyperactivity prior to death.
The results of the study (Dow Chemical Company 1976) indicate that SEX
(the result was read across from potassium amyl xanthate) has an adverse effect at concentration of 252mg/m3 on the central nervous system and liver in mice, the liver and kidneys in rats and the liver in dogs.
Only Signs of irritation of respiratory tract and Nasal effects were observed in rats as reddish nasal discharge but not respiratory sensitisation.
Synopsis
Not Sensitising
Migrated from Short description of key information:
The results of the study (Dow Chemical Company 1976) indicate that Reaction mass of SEX (the result was read across from potassium amyl xanthate) has an adverse effect at concentration of 252mg/m3 on the central nervous system and liver in mice, the liver and kidneys in rats and the liver in dogs. Only Signs of irritation of respiratory tract and Nasal effects were observed in rats as reddish nasal discharge but not respiratory sensitisation.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the hazard assessment of SEX section 2.1 and 2.2. in IUCLID 6., available data for the substance and following the “Guidance on Information Requirement and Chemical Safety Assessment R.8. Characterisation of dose [concentration]- response for human health” andaccording to the criteria described in Directive 67/548 and in the CLP Regulation:
Directive 67/548 |
Respiratory Sensitisation Xn R42 May cause sensitization by inhalation Respiratory Irritation Xi R37 irritating to respiratory system |
CLP |
Respiratory Sensitisation H334 Resp. Sens. 1 May cause allergy or asthma symptoms or breath-ing difficulties if inhaled Respiratory Irritation H335 STOT SE 3 May cause respiratory irritation |
It is concluded that the substance SEX does notmeet the criteria to be classified for human health hazards for Inhalation - local effect: respiratory sensitisation
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.