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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 232-694-8 | CAS number: 9007-13-0
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Study was conducted according to OECD Guideline 406 and GLPs.
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 1 995
- Report date:
- 1995
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- Stability, homogeneity, and achieved concentration of test substance in vehicle were not determined by analysis. These GLP deviations did not impact the outcome of the study.
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The test method is similar to that described by Buehler (1965).
Reference: Buehler EV. 1965. Delayed contact hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Arch. Derm. 91:171-177. - GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- Buehler test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The test method is similar to that described by Buehler (1965). Reference: Buehler EV. 1965. Delayed contact hypersensitivity in the guinea pig. Arch. Derm. 91:171-177.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde
- EC Number:
- 293-659-0
- EC Name:
- Rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde
- Cas Number:
- 91081-53-7
- Molecular formula:
- Unspecified
- IUPAC Name:
- Rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde
- Details on test material:
- -Identity (according to study report): UNITAC 70
-Source: Union Camp Chemicals Limited
-Lot/Batch: 95040211
-Date of receipt: May 1995
-Physical state: Pelleted amber-colored solid
-CTL test substance reference number: Y09049/001
-Purity: 100% (data provided by Sponsor)
-Acid value: 131.6 mg KOH/g (data provided by Sponsor)
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- other: Crl(HA)BR
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS:
-Source: Charles River UK Limited, Margate, Kent, UK
-Number of animals: 20 test and 10 control animals
-Age: young adults
-Acclimation period: at least 6 days
-Weight at study initiation: 376-495 g
-Housing: individually in suspended stainless-steel, wire mesh cages
-Diet: RGP Diet, supplied by Labsure, Manea, Cambridgeshire, UK, available ad libitum
-Water: Main water (automatic system) available ad libitum
-Identification: unique number written on a small area of clipped flank using a black waterproof marker pen and on the cage card identifying the contained animal
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS:
-Room temperature (°C): 17 ± 2
-Relative humidity (%): 55 ± 15
-Air changes: Approximately 25-30 changes/hour
-Lighting Cycle: Artificial, 12 hours light/12 hours dark
STUDY DATES:
The study was performed between June 1995 and July 1995.
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Inductionopen allclose all
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- Topical induction: 30% (w/v) in corn oil
Challenge application: 3% and 10% (w/v) in corn oil
Challengeopen allclose all
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- Topical induction: 30% (w/v) in corn oil
Challenge application: 3% and 10% (w/v) in corn oil
- No. of animals per dose:
- Test substance: 20 females
Control: 10 females - Details on study design:
- SIGHTING STUDY:
The dose levels for the induction and challenge stages of this study were determined by a sighting study. Based on the results of this study, a 30% w/v preparation was chosen for the induction phase of the main study and 3% and 10% w/v preparations were chosen for the challenge phase of the main study.
INDUCTION PHASE:
An area (5 cm x 5 cm) on the scapular region of each animal was clipped free of hair. The test animals were administered a topical application of 0.4 mL of a 30% (w/v) preparation of the test substance in corn oil. The control animals received 0.4 mL of corn oil only. The preparations were applied to a lint patch (2 cm x 2 cm), placed on the application site and covered with adhesive tape. The patches were held in place by an elastic bandage (20-30 cm x 5 cm) and secured by a piece of PVC tape. The occlusive dressing was left in place for 6 hours. The induction procedure was repeated at the same site for the next two weeks, giving a total of three 6-hour exposures. The interval between each exposure was 7 days. The irritation response was noted approximately 1 day after the removal of each patch and before application of each subsequent patch. Animals were re-clipped prior to each of the applications. The animals were left untreated for two weeks following the last induction exposure.
CHALLENGE PHASE:
Two weeks after the last (third) induction, an area (15 cm x 5 cm) on both flanks of each animal were clipped free of hair. An occlusive dressing was prepared which consisted of two lint patches (1 cm x 2 cm) stitched to a piece of rubber sheeting (5 cm x 12 cm). A 10% (w/v) preparation of the test sample in corn oil (0.1-0.2 mL) was applied to one lint patch and a 3% (w/v) of the test substance in corn oil (0.1-0.2 mL) was applied to the remaining lint patch. The dressing was placed on the guinea pig so that the 10% preparation was on the left flank and the 3% preparation was on the right flank. The dressing was held in place by adhesive impermeable polyethylene tape for 6 hours. The dressings were removed and reactions were quantified at 24 and 48 hours after termination of exposure.
GRADING OF SKIN REACTIONS:
Each challenge site was examined 24 and 48 hours after removal of the patch. Reactions were scored according to the following scale:
Skin reaction
0 - No reaction
1 - Scattered mild redness
2 - Moderate and diffuse redness
3 - Intense redness and swelling
SENSITIZATION POTENTIAL:
Sensitization potential was determined by subtracting the percentage of animals responding in the control group from the percentage of animals responding in the test group, to give a net percentage response. The net response was compared using the following scheme:
0 = Not a sensitizer
1-8 = Weak sensitizer
9-28 = Mild sensitizer
29-64 = Moderate sensitizer
65-80 = Strong sensitizer
80-100 = Extreme sensitizer
BODY WEIGHTS:
Body weights were recorded on the day prior to dosing and at termination of the study. - Challenge controls:
- Ten guinea pigs assigned to a control group received exposure doses of vehicle (at induction) and test material (at challenge) as described in details on study design.
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- A positive control study using undiluted hexylcinnamaldehyde was carried out within 6 months of this study to ensure the test system continued to respond to a known sensitizer.
Results and discussion
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 3% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No skin reactions were evident.
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Challenge: 3% test substance. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: No skin reactions were evident..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 3% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No skin reactions were evident.
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Challenge: 3% test substance. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: No skin reactions were evident..
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 10% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Moderate diffuse redness was noted in 2 of the 10 control animals and scattered mild redness was noted in 5 of the 10 control animals.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Challenge: 10% test substance. No with. + reactions: 7.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Moderate diffuse redness was noted in 2 of the 10 control animals and scattered mild redness was noted in 5 of the 10 control animals..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 10% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 5
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Moderate diffuse redness was noted in 1 of the 10 control animals and scattered mild redness was noted in 4 of the 10 control animals.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Challenge: 10% test substance. No with. + reactions: 5.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Moderate diffuse redness was noted in 1 of the 10 control animals and scattered mild redness was noted in 4 of the 10 control animals..
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 3% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness was noted in 1 of the 20 test animals.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Challenge: 3% test substance. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Scattered mild redness was noted in 1 of the 20 test animals..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 3% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- No skin reactions were evident.
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Challenge: 3% test substance. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: No skin reactions were evident..
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 10% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 12
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness was noted in 12 of the 20 test animals.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Challenge: 10% test substance. No with. + reactions: 12.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Scattered mild redness was noted in 12 of the 20 test animals. .
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Challenge: 10% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 5
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness was noted in 5 of the 20 test animals.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Challenge: 10% test substance. No with. + reactions: 5.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Scattered mild redness was noted in 5 of the 20 test animals..
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Under conditions of this study, Rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde (CAS No. 91081-53-7) is not considered to be a sensitizer in female guinea pigs when tested using a method based on that described by Buehler (1965).
Under Directive 67/548/EEC, the EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, and the UN Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) guidelines, a response of 15% is required to consider a substance as positive when testing guinea pigs using a non-adjuvant test method. There were no signs of skin irritation in any animal during the induction phase of the study. When test animals and controls were challenged with a 10% w/v preparation of the test material, the response in control animals was greater than that seen in test animals. The net percentage response when animals were challenged with a 3% w/v preparation of the test material was 5%. Based on the results of this study, Rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde (CAS No. 91081-53-7) is not classifiable for skin sensitization according to UN Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) or EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008. - Executive summary:
In a skin sensitization study performed using the method described by Buehler (1965), a group of 20 female guinea pigs was induced three times (once/week for 6 hours) by topical application of a 30% w/v preparation of UNITAC 70 (rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde) in a corn oil vehicle. A group of 10 female guinea pigs served as study controls and received only the vehicle during the three induction applications. All animals were challenged topically with concentrations of 3 and 10% w/v of the test material in the vehicle for an exposure period of 6 hours. Skin examinations at 24 and 48 hours after the completion of the challenge exposure indicated the test substance elicited an irritant response at the 10% challenge sites in both control and test animals. Since the response in control animals was greater than that observed in the test animals, this was considered to be an irritant rather than a sensitization response. At the 3% challenge sites, only a single test animal (1/20) had a slight skin response and no skin reactions were evident in the control group of animals. Under the conditions of this study, UNITAC 70 (rosin, reaction products with formaldehyde) was not considered to be a skin sensitizer in guinea pigs.
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.