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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Environmental fate & pathways

Monitoring data

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
monitoring data
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
2005-2007
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Envirnonmental screening study by Finnish Authorities, well documentated, analytic according to standards

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
publication
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2010

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline required
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Sampling of different fisch species from Baltic Sae and lakes. Determination of MBT, DBT, TBT, MPhT, DPhT, TPhT, and DOT in fisch according to EN ISO/ICE 17025
GLP compliance:
no
Type of measurement:
other: concentration of organotins in fish in baltic sea and lakes
Media:
other: marine and fresh water

Test material

Constituent 1
Reference substance name:
Dioctyltin compound
IUPAC Name:
Dioctyltin compound
Test material form:
other: organotin coumpounds in fish

Results and discussion

Concentrationopen allclose all
Country:
Finland
Location:
Inland water areas (14 lakes, figure 1 triangles)
Substance or metabolite:
substance
Conc.:
< 1.1 other: ng/g fw
Remarks on result:
other: L0Q = 1.1 ng/g fw
Country:
Finland
Location:
Baltic sea areas subspacted as contaminated (10 dirfferent ports, ee figure 1 sqquares)
Substance or metabolite:
substance
Conc.:
< 1.1 other: ng/g fw
Remarks on result:
other: L0Q = 1.1 ng/g fw
Country:
Finland
Location:
Baltic Sea areas presumed as less contaminated ((8 different areas, see figure 1 circles)
Substance or metabolite:
substance
Conc.:
< 1.1 other: ng/g fw
Remarks on result:
other: L0Q = 1.1 ng/g fw

Any other information on results incl. tables

see publication (copyright protection)

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
There were no Dioctyltin detected in fish from Finland and Baltic Sea. In contrast different butyl- and phenyltin compounds were detected
Executive summary:

Organotin compounds (OTCs) leaching from the antifouling paints used in boats and ships have contaminated many water areas worldwide. The purpose of this study was to obtain a general view of the organotin contamination in fish in Finnish lake areas and Finnish coast of the Baltic Sea using perch as the main indicator species. Perch sampling covered areas presumed as less contaminated and areas suspected as more contaminated. Besides perch, 12 other species were sampled from sites presumed as less contaminated. OTCs measured were mono-, di- and tributyltin, mono-, di-, and triphenyltin and dioctyltin. The sum concentration of OTCs (ΣOTCs) in perch in the least contaminated areas of the Baltic Sea were around 20 ng/g fresh weight (fw) and less than 10 ng/g fw in lake areas. In heavily contaminated areas of the Baltic Sea 150–500 ng/g fw in perch were detected. In lake areas the maximum ΣOTCs in perch was only 30 ng/g fw. With regard to the other species in the Baltic Sea, salmon, sprat, flounder, whitefish, vendace and lamprey contained low concentrations (ΣOTCs mainly less than 20 ng/g fw), whereas in pike, pike-perch, burbot and bream concentrations were higher. ΣOTCs in lake fish were generally lower than in the Baltic Sea. In a distance gradient study, ΣOTCs in perch decreased quickly from nearly 200 ng/g fw at a contaminated harbor area to 35 ng/g fw during a distance of 5 km. Further decrease was slower and reached 15 ng/g fw at 100 km. In a size dependence study triphenyltin showed better correlation with the fish length than tributyltin for all species studied, i.e. for perch (0.16 vs 0.26), pike-perch (0.13 vs 0.24) and roach (0.46 vs 0.80). High correlation for roach may be partly explained by smaller number of samples collected and small length range.