2-methylaminoethanol

Bioaccumulation: aquatic / sediment

Link to relevant study record(s)

Reference

Reference 1

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

results derived from a valid (Q)SAR model, but not (completely) falling into its applicability domain, with adequate and reliable documentation / justification

Justification for type of information:

1. SOFTWARE
OASIS Catalogic v5.11.19

2. MODEL (incl. version number)
BCF baseline model v.02.09 – June 2016

3. SMILES OR OTHER IDENTIFIERS USED AS INPUT FOR THE MODEL
See section 'Test Material'.

4. SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OF THE (Q)SAR MODEL
See attached QMRF.

5. APPLICABILITY DOMAIN
See attached QPRF.

6. ADEQUACY OF THE RESULT
- The model is scientifically valid (see attached QMRF).
- The model estimates the bioconcentration factor (BCF) as required information point under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 [REACH], Annex IX, 9.3.2 Bioaccumulation in aquatic species, preferably fish (see also attached QPRF).
- See attached QPRF for reliability assessment.

Principles of method if other than guideline:

Calculation using Catalogic v.5.11.19, BCF base-line model v.02.09

GLP compliance:

no

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: OASIS Catalogic v5.11.19 [BCF base line model - v.02.09]

Type:

BCF

Value:

2.34

Remarks on result:

other: considering all mitigating factors; The substance is not within the applicability domain of the model.

Type:

BCF

Value:

9.35

Remarks on result:

other: without considering any mitigating factors; The substance is not within the applicability domain of the model.

DOMAIN APPLICABILITY

With regard to the parametric, structural and mechanistic domain, the test substance is not within thestructural applicabilitydomain of the model. Therefore, the estimation is not reliable.

 

MOLECULE SIZE (Maximum diameter)

Minimum: 7.528 Å

Maximum: 8.472 Å

Mean: 7.939 Å

EFFECTS OF MITIGATING FACTORS

Mitigation factor	Predicted value		Magnitude of effect*
	BCF	log BCF	(as log BCF)
Without mitigation	9.35	0.971	-
Combination of all factors	2.34	0.37± 0.122	-
Acids			0.0000
Metabolism			0.01635
Phenols			0.0000
Molecular size			0.001647
Water Solubility			0.938

* The magnitude of the effect on the BCF by the single mitigating factors should be regarded as tentative information as the factors influence each other. The effect of individual mitigating factors (e.g. metabolism) is calculated as:

Mitigating effect of metabolism = logBCFcorrected(all factors except for metabolism) – logBCF corrected(all factors)

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The BCF base-line model estimates the BCF to be 2.34 (log BCF = 0.37) taking all mitigating factors into consideration. The maximum BCF was calculated to be 9.35 (log BCF = 0.971). Mitigating factors like metabolism, molecular size and the water solubility were considered by the model. Water solubility had the highest mitigating effect on the bioaccumulation potential.

According to the OECD 305 technical guidance document, the degree of transformation of the parent is decisive for the effect of metabolism (i.e. the reproduction of subsequent steps is less critical for the prediction of the BCF).

Water solubility and molecular size are discussed within the literature whether certain threshold values are suitable as cut-off criteria for indication of limited bioaccumulation. Regarding molecular size, the PBT working group on hazardous substances discussed a maximum diameter of > 17.4 Å (Comber et al., 2006). However, the mean diameter is lower than the critical value 7.939 Å).

 

CONCLUSIONS

- Water solubility had the highest mitigating effect on the bioaccumulation potential.

- The substance is not expected to exhibit a significant bioaccumulation potential.

- The substance is not in the applicability domain of the model.

Reference 2

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Well documented QSAR model for prediction of BCF; the substance is within the applicablility domain of the estimation model.

Justification for type of information:

QSAR prediction

Principles of method if other than guideline:

Read-Across for fish BCF, based on the similarity index developed in VEGA. The read-across is performed on a dataset of 860 compounds, extending the original BCF dataset contained in the CAESAR model.

GLP compliance:

no

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: BCF Read-Across model v1.0.2 (VEGANIC v1.1.1)

Type:

other: log BCF

Value:

0.1 dimensionless

Type:

BCF

Value:

1 L/kg

Prediction report:

Compound: 1

Compound SMILES: OCCNC

Experimental value: -

Prediction: 0.1 [log(L/kg)]

Prediction: 1 [L/kg]

ALogP: -0.76 [log units]

MLogP: -0.53 [log units]

Reliability: Compound is in model Applicability Domain

Remarks for the prediction: none

Model assessment:

Model assessment: Read-Across prediction is logBCF = 0.1, the result appears reliable.

Reliabilibity: 3 out of 3 stars.

Applicability domain:

Global AD Index

AD Index = 0.841

Explanation: read-across seems to be reliable.

 

Highest similarity found for similar compounds

Highest similarity = 0.867

Explanation: the highest similarity value found for similar compounds is adequate for a reliable read-across.

 

Lowest similarity found for similar compounds

Lowest similarity = 0.802

Explanation: the lowest similarity value found for similar compounds is adequate for a reliable read-across.

Reference 3

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Well documented QSAR model for prediction of BCF but the substance could be out of the applicability domain of the estimation model.

Justification for type of information:

QSAR prediction

Principles of method if other than guideline:

QSAR model for fish BCF, based on Meylan approach, as implemented in EPI Suite. Full reference to this model can be found in the EPI Suite help (http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm) and in the original paper from Meylan (see reference above). Model developed inside the VEGA platform (http://vega-qsar.eu/).

GLP compliance:

no

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS INFORMATION
- Measured/calculated logPow: calculated

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: VegaNIC v1.1.1, BCF Meylan model v1.0.2
- Result based on calculated log Pow of: -1.15

Type:

other: log BCF

Value:

0.5 dimensionless

Type:

BCF

Value:

3 L/kg

Prediction report:

Compound: 1

Compound SMILES: OCCNC

Experimental value: -

Prediction: 0.5 [log(L/kg)]

Prediction: 3 [L/kg]

logP: 4 -0.53 [log units]

logP reliability: moderate

Ionic: no

Reliability: Compound could be out of model Applicability Domain

Remarks for the prediction: none

Model assessment:

Prediction is logBCF = 0.5, but the result shows some critical aspects, which require to be checked:

- only moderately similar compounds with known experimental value in the training set have been found

- reliability of logP value used by the model is not optimal

Reliability: 2 out of 3 stars.

Applicability domain:

Global AD Index

AD Index = 0.85

Explanation: predicted substance could be out of the Applicability Domain of the model.

 

Similar molecules with known experimental value

Similarity index = 0.86

Explanation: only moderately similar compounds with known experimental value in the training set have been found.

 

Accuracy (average error) of prediction for similar molecules

Accuracy index = 0.045

Explanation: accuracy of prediction for similar molecules found in the training set is good.

 

Concordance with similar molecules (average difference between target compound prediction and experimental values of similar molecules)

Concordance index = 0.045

Explanation: similar molecules found in the training set have experimental values that agree with the target compound predicted value.

 

Maximum error of prediction among similar molecules

Max error index = 0.05

Explanation: the maximum error in prediction of similar molecules found in the training set has a low value, considering the experimental variability.

 

Reliability of logP prediction

LogP reliability = 0.7

Explanation: reliability of logP value used by the model is not optimal.

 

Model descriptors range check

Descriptors range check = true

Explanation: descriptors for this compound have values inside the descriptor range of the compounds of the training set.

Reference 4

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Well documented QSAR model for prediction of BCF; the substance is within the applicablility domain of the estimation model.

Justification for type of information:

QSAR prediction

Principles of method if other than guideline:

Read-Across for fish BCF, based on the similarity index developed in VEGA. The read-across is performed on a dataset of 860 compounds, extending the original BCF dataset contained in the CAESAR model.

GLP compliance:

no

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS INFORMATION
- Measured/calculated logPow: calculated

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: VegaNIC v1.1.1, BCF model CAESAR v 2.1.13
- Result based on calculated log Pow of: -0.53 (calculated by VEGA)

Type:

other: log BCF

Value:

0.12 dimensionless

Type:

BCF

Value:

1 L/kg

Prediction report:

Compound: 1

Compound SMILES: OCCNC

Experimental value: -

Prediction: 0.12 [log(L/kg)]

Prediction: 1 [L/kg]

Prediction of model 1 (HM): 0.11 [log(L/kg)]

Prediction of model 2 (GA): 0.41 [log(L/kg)]

Structural Alerts: OH group (PG 06)

Calculated LogP: -0.53 [log units]

Reliability: Compound is in model Applicability Domain

Remarks for the prediction: none

Model assessment:

Model assessment: Read-Across prediction is logBCF = 0.12, the result appears reliable.

Reliabilibity: 3 out of 3 stars.

Applicability domain:

Global AD Index

AD Index = 1

Explanation: predicted substance is into the Applicability Domain of the model.

 

Similar molecules with known experimental value

Similarity index = 0.831

Explanation: only moderately similar compounds with known experimental value in the training set have been found.

 

Accuracy (average error) of prediction for similar molecules

Accuracy index = 0.255

Explanation: accuracy of prediction for similar molecules found in the training set is good.

 

Concordance with similar molecules (average difference between target compound prediction and experimental values of similar molecules)

Concordance index = 0.407

Explanation: similar molecules found in the training set have experimental values that agree with the target compound predicted value.

 

Maximum error of prediction among similar molecules

Max error index = 0.47

Explanation: the maximum error in prediction of similar molecules found in the training set has a low value, considering the experimental variability.

 

Atom Centered Fragments similarity check

ACF matching index = 1

Explanation: all atom centered fragment of the compound have been found in the compounds of the training set.

 

Descriptors noise sensitivity analysis

Noise Sensitivity = 0.984

Explanation: predictions has a good response to noise scrambling, thus shows a good reliability.

 

Model descriptors range check

Descriptors range check = true

Explanation: descriptors for this compound have values inside the descriptor range of the compounds of the training set.

Reference 5

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

results derived from a valid (Q)SAR model and falling into its applicability domain, with adequate and reliable documentation / justification

Justification for type of information:

1. SOFTWARE
Estimation Programs Interface (EPI) Suite for Microsoft Windows, v4.11 (US EPA, 2012)

2. MODEL (incl. version number)
BCFBAF v3.01

3. SMILES OR OTHER IDENTIFIERS USED AS INPUT FOR THE MODEL
See section 'Test Material'.

4. SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OF THE (Q)SAR MODEL
See attached QMRF.

5. APPLICABILITY DOMAIN
See attached QPRF.

6. ADEQUACY OF THE RESULT
- The model is scientifically valid (see attached QMRF).
- The model estimates the bioconcentration factor (BCF) for the uncharged molecule at 25 °C as required information point under Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 [REACH], Annex IX, 9.3.2 Bioaccumulation in aquatic species, preferably fish (see also attached QMRF).
- See attached QPRF for reliability assessment.

Principles of method if other than guideline:

Calculated with SRC BCFBAF v3.01

GLP compliance:

no

Radiolabelling:

no

Test organisms (species):

other: fish (Calculation of aquatic BCF by EPI-Win (BCFBAF, v3.01), based on measured log Pow of -0.91)

Test type:

other: Calculation of aquatic BCF by EPI-Win (BCFBAF, v3.01), based on measured Log Pow of -0.91.

Water / sediment media type:

natural water: freshwater

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS INFORMATION
- Measured/calculated logPow: measured

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: BCFBAF Program (v3.01) (part of EPI Suite v4.10)
- Result based on measured log Pow of: -0.91 (BASF AG, 1989; Study No. BRU 89.018)

Type:

BCF

Value:

3.16 L/kg

Remarks on result:

other: log BCF: 0.50

Type:

BAF

Value:

0.901 L/kg

Remarks on result:

other: log BAF: -0.05; Arnot-Gobas BAF method (including biotransformation rate estimates; upper trophic level)

Summary Results:

Log BCF (regression-based estimate): 0.50 (BCF = 3.16 L/kg wet-wt)

Biotransformation Half-Life (days) : 0.0333 (normalized to 10 g fish)

Log BAF (Arnot-Gobas upper trophic): -0.05 (BAF = 0.901 L/kg wet-wt)

 

Log Kow (experimental): not available from database

Log Kow used by BCF estimates: -0.91 (user entered)

 

Equation Used to Make BCF estimate:

Log BCF = 0.50

 

Correction(s): Value

Correction Factors Not Used for Log Kow < 1

 

Estimated Log BCF = 0.500 (BCF = 3.162 L/kg wet-wt)

 

Whole Body Primary Biotransformation Rate Estimate for Fish:

 

Type	Num	Log Biotransformation Fragment Description	Coeff	Value
Frag	1	Aliphatic alcohol [-OH]	-0.0616	-0.0616
Frag	1	Aliphatic amine [-NH2 or -NH-]	0.4067	0.4067
Frag	1	Methyl [-CH3]	0.2451	0.2451
Frag	2	-CH2- [linear]	0.0242	0.0484
L Kow	*	Log Kow = -0.91 (user-entered )	0.3073	-0.2797
MolWt	*	Molecular Weight Parameter		-0.1926
Const	*	Equation Constant		-1.5371
Result	Log Bio Half-Life (days)			-1.3707
Result	Bio Half-Life (days)			0.04259
Note	Bio Half-Life Normalized to 10 g fish at 15 °C

 

Biotransformation Rate Constant:

kM (Rate Constant): 16.28 /day (10 gram fish)

kM (Rate Constant): 9.152 /day (100 gram fish)

kM (Rate Constant): 5.147 /day (1 kg fish)

kM (Rate Constant): 2.894 /day (10 kg fish)

 

Arnot-Gobas BCF & BAF Methods (including biotransformation rate estimates):

Estimated Log BCF (upper trophic) = -0.045 (BCF = 0.9013 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BAF (upper trophic) = -0.045 (BAF = 0.9013 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BCF (mid trophic)  = -0.028 (BCF = 0.9381 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BAF (mid trophic)  = -0.028 (BAF = 0.9381 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BCF (lower trophic) = -0.024 (BCF = 0.9462 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BAF (lower trophic) = -0.024 (BAF = 0.9462 L/kg wet-wt)

 

Arnot-Gobas BCF & BAF Methods (assuming a biotransformation rate of zero):

Estimated Log BCF (upper trophic) = -0.043 (BCF = 0.9062 L/kg wet-wt)

Estimated Log BAF (upper trophic) = -0.043 (BAF = 0.9063 L/kg wet-wt)

Validity criteria fulfilled:

yes

Conclusions:

BCF = 3.162

Executive summary:

The Bioconcentration Factor (BCF) of N-methylethanolamine was determined by calculation. This calculation was performed by EPIWIN software BCFBAF v3.01; US EPA, 2012). Estimation: BCF = 3.162.

Reference 6

Endpoint:

bioaccumulation in aquatic species: fish

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

other: Methods were validated by US EPA using statistical external validation. All similarity coefficients are below the reliable scope (>= 0.5) in the external test set. Therefore, the substance is within the applicability domain of the prediction model.

Justification for type of information:

QSAR prediction

Principles of method if other than guideline:

T.E.S.T. is a toxicity estimation software tool. The program requires only the molecular structure of the test item, all other molecular descriptors which are required to estimate the toxicity are calculated within the tool itself. The molecular descriptors describe physical characteristics of the molecule (e.g. E-state values and E-state counts, constitutional descriptors, topological descriptors, walk and path counts, connectivity, information content, 2d autocorrelation, Burden
eigenvalue, molecular property (such as the octanol-water partition coefficient), Kappa, hydrogen bond acceptor/donor counts, molecular distance edge, and molecular fragment counts). Each of the available methods uses a different set of these descriptors to estimate the toxicity.
The bioconcentration factor (BCF) was estimated using several available methods: hierarchical method; FDA method, single model method; group contribution method; nearest neighbor method; consensus method. The methods were validated using statistical external validation using separate training and test data sets.
The experimental data set was obtained from several different databases (Dimitrov et al., 2005; Arnot and Gobas, 2006; EURAS; Zhao, 2008). From the available data set salts, mixtures and ambiguous compounds were removed. The final data set contained 676 chemicals.

References:
- Dimitrov, S., N. Dimitrova, T. Parkerton, M. Combers, M. Bonnell, and O. Mekenyan. 2005. Base-line model for identifying the bioaccumulation potential of chemicals. SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research 16:531-554.
- Arnot, J.A., and F.A.P.C. Gobas. 2006. A review of bioconcentration factor (BCF) and bioaccumulation factor (BAF) assessments for organic chemicals in aquatic organisms. Environ. Rev. 14:257-297.
- EURAS. Establishing a bioconcentration factor (BCF) Gold Standard Database. EURAS [cited 5/20/09]. Available from http://www.euras.be/eng/project.asp?ProjectId=92.
- Zhao, C.; Boriani, E.; Chana, A.; Roncaglioni, A.; Benfenati, E. 2008. A new hybrid system of QSAR models for predicting bioconcentration factors (BCF). Chemosphere 73:1701-1707.

GLP compliance:

no

Test organisms (species):

other: Fish

Details on estimation of bioconcentration:

BASIS FOR CALCULATION OF BCF
- Estimation software: US EPA T.E.S.T. v4.1

Applied estimation methods:
- Hierarchical method : The toxicity for a given query compound is estimated using the weighted average of the predictions from several different cluster models.
- FDA method : The prediction for each test chemical is made using a new model that is fit to the chemicals that are most similar to the test compound. Each model is generated at runtime.
- Single model method : Predictions are made using a multilinear regression model that is fit to the training set (using molecular descriptors as independent variables).
- Group contribution method : Predictions are made using a multilinear regression model that is fit to the training set (using molecular fragment counts as independent variables).
- Nearest neighbor method : The predicted toxicity is estimated by taking an average of the 3 chemicals in the training set that are most similar to the test chemical.
- Consensus method : The predicted toxicity is estimated by taking an average of the predicted toxicities from the above QSAR methods (provided the predictions are within the respective applicability domains; recommended method by T.E.S.T. for providing the most accurate predictions).

Type:

BCF

Value:

1.25

Remarks on result:

other: Consensus method; log BCF = 0.10

Model details:  

Method	Predicted value		Model statistics			MAE (in log10)
						External test set		Training set
	log BCF	BCF	r²	q²	Chemicals (n)	Entire set	S.C. >= 0.5	Entire set	S.C. >= 0.5
Consensus method	0.10	1.25				0.51	0.27	0.42	0.22
Hierarchical clustering	0.01	1.03 (0.45-2.37)	0.741 -	0.502	5 cluster models:	0.54	0.26	0.23	0.12
			0.835	0.810	19 - 540
Single model	-0.59	0.26 (0.02-3.50)	0.764	0.733	540	0.54	0.37	0.53	0.44
Group contribution	0.03	1.08 (0.05-23.64)	0.719	0.527	499	0.62	0.43	0.60	0.55
FDA	0.43	2.67 (0.92-7.72)	0.739	0.636	29	0.57	0.38	0.53	0.30
Nearest neighbor	0.60	3.98			3	0.60	0.22	0.55	0.36

SC = similarity coefficient

r² = correlation coefficient

q² = leave one out correlation coefficient

 

Most similar chemicals (SCmin >= 0.5):

- External test set: 10

- Training set: 10

Description of key information

Calculations for the bioconcentration factor (BCF) of the substance were performed using several QSAR tools (OASIS Catalogic, VEGA, US-EPA EPIWIN (software BCFBAFv3.00) and T.E.S.T. The low bioaccumulation potential is thereby confirmed.

Thus, significant accumulation in organisms of N-methylethanolamine (CAS 109-83 -1) is not to be expected.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

BCF (aquatic species):

3.2 L/kg ww

Additional information

QSAR-disclaimer:

In Article 13 of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, it is laid down that information on intrinsic properties of substances may be generated by means other than tests, provided that the conditions set out in Annex XI (of the same Regulation) are met. Furthermore, according to Article 25 of the same Regulation testing on vertebrate animals shall be undertaken only as a last resort.

 

According to Annex XI of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (Q)SAR results can be used if (1) the scientific validity of the (Q)SAR model has been established, (2) the substance falls within the applicability domain of the (Q)SAR model, (3) the results are adequate for the purpose of classification and labeling and/or risk assessment and (4) adequate and reliable documentation of the applied method is provided.

 

For the assessment of N-methylethanolamine (CAS 109-83-1) (Q)SAR results were used for aquatic bioaccumulation. The criteria listed in Annex XI of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 are considered to be adequately fulfilled and therefore the endpoint(s) sufficiently covered and suitable for risk assessment.

 

Therefore, and for reasons of animal welfare, further experimental studies on aquatic bioaccumulation are not provided.

 

Assessment:

No experimental data on the bioaccumulation potential of N-Methylethanolamine (CAS 109-83-1) are available. In order to assess the bioaccumulation potential of the test substance, the BCF was calculated with several estimation models. The table below lists the applied (Q)SAR models, the estimated BCF values and basic information on the applicability domain (AD) for the compound. Detailed information on the model’s results and the AD are given in the endpoint study records of IUCLID Chapter 5.3.1. The selected models comply with the OECD principles for (Q)SAR models.

 

Summary of relevant information on aquatic bioaccumulation: Predicted BCF values for applied QSAR models sorted by BCF:

(AD = Applicability Domain)

Model	BCF [L/kg]	In AD	Restraints
BCF KNN/Read-Across v1.1.0 (VEGA v1.1.3)	0.1	Yes	-
BCFBAF v3.01 (EPI Suite v4.11): Arnot-Gobas BCF, upper trophic, incl. biotransformation	0.894	No	the substance appreciably ionizes at physiologically relevant pH
BCFBAF v3.01 (EPI Suite v4.11): Arnot-Gobas BCF, upper trophic, incl. biotransformation of zero	0.896	No	the substance appreciably ionizes at physiologically relevant pH
CAESAR v2.1.14 (VEGA v1.1.3)	1	No	The following relevant fragments have been found: Tertiary amine (SR05); OH group (PG 06) The tertiary amines fragment has been found in a number of non-bioaccumulative molecules even with high log Pow values. In addition, the OH group increases the hydrophilicity of a compound which is related to lower values of BCF. - only moderately similar compounds with known experimental value in the training set have been found
BCF baseline model v.02.09 (OASIS Catalogic v5.11.19): incl. mitigating factors	2.34	No	With regard to the parametric, structural and mechanistic domain, the test substance is not within the structural applicability domain of the model. Therefore, the estimation is not reliable.
Meylan v1.0.3 (VEGA v1.1.3)	3	No	- reliability of log P value used by the model is not optimal
US EPA T.E.S.T. v4.2.1: Bioaccumulation: Consensus method	3.16	Yes	Based on the mean absolute errors of the models compared to the training set data, the confidence in the predicted results is high.
BCFBAF v3.01 (EPI Suite v4.11): Meylan et al. (1997/1999)	3.16	Yes	-
BCF baseline model v.02.09 (OASIS Catalogic v5.11.19): not considering mitigating factors	9.35	No	With regard to the parametric, structural and mechanistic domain, the test substance is not within the structural applicability domain of the model. Therefore, the estimation is not reliable.

 

Considering all models applied for N-Methylethanolamine (CAS 109-83-1), the estimated BCF values range from 0.1 to 9.35 L/kg. Based on the available information on the log Kow (log Kow= -0.91; measured; BASF AG, 1989; report no. BRU.89.018) it can be concluded that accumulation of 2-methylaminoethanol (109-83-1) in organisms is not possible.