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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 407-000-3 | CAS number: 127519-17-9 CGL 384; TINUVIN 384
- 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
Additional information
In vitro
Gene mutation (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay/Ames test):
The substance Chiguard 5599 was tested in two in vitro gene mutation studies in bacteria (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay/Ames Test). In the supporting study (84/449/EEC, B.14/GLP), bacterial strains (Salmonella typhimurium TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537, E. Coli WP urvA) were exposed to the substance in acetone at concentrations of 312.5 – 5000 µg/plate in the presence and absence of mammalian metabolic activation (Aroclor induced rat-liver S9). Precipitation was observed at 313 µg/plate. No mutagenic effects were observed in the original or in the confirmatory experiment. The substance was negative in the presence and absence of metabolic activation in the Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay/Ames test.
In the bacterial in vitro gene mutation key study (Annex V/GLP), bacterial strains (Salmonella typhimurium TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537, TA 1538 and E. Coli WPurvA) were exposed to the substance in acetone at concentrations of 312.5 – 5000 µg/plate in the presence and absence of mammalian metabolic activation (Aroclor induced rat-liver S9). The substance was tested up to cytotoxic concentrations and no precipitation was noted. The substance was negative in the presence and absence of metabolic activation in the Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay/Ames Test.
Gene mutation (in vitro mammalian cell gene mutation):
A read-across unscheduled DNA synthesis in mammalian cells in vitro study from Tinuvin 1130 (EC No. 400-830-7), as the analogue of Chiguard (EC No. 407-000-3), was submitted to fill this data gap. In the unscheduled DNA synthesis in mammalian cells in vitro study (Similar to OECD 482/GLP), rat hepatocytes were exposed to Tinuvin 1130 in DMSO at concentrations of 0.2 to 400 µg /mL for 16-18 hours. Positive controls gave the expected responses and the results were confirmed in an independent confirmatory study. No evidence of induction of DNA damage by the test substance or its metabolites was detected. Tinuvin 1130 was negative in the unscheduled DNA synthesis in mammalian cells in vitro.
The full read-across report justification is attached.
In vivo
Chromosome aberration (In vivo micronucleus assay):
The substance Chiguard 5599 was tested in two in vivo micronucleus assays. In a supporting study, a mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay (Annex V/GLP), groups of mice (5/sex/dose) were treated intraperitoneally with Chiguard 5599 in arachis oil at doses of 0 and 5000 mg/kg bw. Bone marrow cells were harvested at 16, 24 and 48 hrs post-treatment. At the dose producing toxicity, there was no apparent effect on the P/N ratio. The substance was negative in the in vivo micronucleus assay (Chromosome aberration) in mice.
In the key study, a mouse bone marrow micronucleus assay (84/449/EEC, B.12, GLP /GLP), groups of mice (5/sex/dose) were treated orally with Chiguard 5599 in peanut oil at doses of 0 and 5000 mg/kg bw. Bone marrow cells were harvested at 16, 24 and 48 hrs post-treatment. The substance was negative in the in vivo micronucleus assay (Chromosome aberration) in mice.
Justification for selection of genetic toxicity endpoint
No study was selected as all three studies (two in vitro and one in vivo) were negative.
Short description of key information:
In vitro
Gene mutation (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay/Ames test): the substance Chiguard 5599 did not induce mutagenicity in S. typhimurium TA 98, TA 100, TA 1535, TA 1537 and TA 102 and E. Coli WP2 uvrA in the presence or absence of Aroclor-induced rat liver S9 metabolic activation (Annex V, GLP);
Gene mutation (in vitro mammalian cell gene mutation): A read-across unscheduled DNA synthesis in mammalian cells in vitro study (Similar to OECD 482, GLP) from Tinuvin 1130 (EC No. 400-830-7), as the analogue of Chiguard (EC No. 407-000-3), was submitted to fill this data gap. The results of this study were concluded to be negative.
In vivo
Chromosome aberration (In vivo micronucleus assay): the substance Chiguard 5599 shows no evidence of mutagenic potential or bone marrow cell toxicity in an in vivo mouse assay (84/449/EEC, B.12, GLP).
Endpoint Conclusion: No adverse effect observed (negative)
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the available information in the dossier, the substance Chiguard (CAS No. 127519-17-9) does not need to be classified for germ cell mutagenicity when the criteria outlined in Annex I of 1272/2008/EC are applied.
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.