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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 244-334-7 | CAS number: 21324-40-3
- 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
LiPF6
Ames test (Salmonella + E. Coli) negative results have been obtained.
HF
Using either in vitro or in vivo assays for genotoxicity, exposure to HF will result in target cell exposure only to fluoride (ionic F- with some organically bound fluoride). For this reason, test data from assays using sodium fluoride are relevant for assessment of HF genotoxicity (HF: EU Risk Assessment Report, 2001); however this EU RAR also notes that HF itself has given a negative result in a bacterial (Salmonella) mutation assay.
US NTP Technical Report 393 (1990) describes genotoxicity tests of sodium fluoride using bacteria (Salmonella typhimurium TA 1535, 1537, 98 and 100) and cultured mammalian cells (mouse lymphoma L5178Y; Chinese hamster ovary, SCE and chromosome aberration assay). Tests were conducted with and without rat liver derived S9 metabolic activating system. Among assays nominally detecting gene mutation, wholly negative results were obtained in bacteria but using L5178Y cells, two separate laboratories found positive results (both with and without S9 in the one laboratory testing both). However the observed L5178Y mutant colonies were principally small in size, suggesting chromosomal damage as the underlying mechanism. This was supported by the observation of induced chromosome aberrations in one test laboratory (at 400 µg/ml and higher concentration, with S9 only), but a second laboratory which tested at concentrations below 400 µg/ml found no such effect. One laboratory (but not the other) reported a positive SCE test result.
Clastogenic activity of NaF has also been investigated by other workers, using in vitro and in vivo assays. In cultured human lymphocytes, NaF caused chromosome damage in cultures without S9 and (to a lesser degree) with S9, but only at 20 and 40 µg/ml (Albanese, 1987): this worker reviewed other reports of NaF clastogenicity and noted a clear threshold effect, with no genotoxicity below 10µg/ml. He also dosed rats orally with NaF at 500 and 1000 mg/kg and scored bone marrow cells for micronucleated polychromatic erythrocytes: no significant increase in micronucleated cell frequency was seen (both 24 and 48h post-dose, but at 48h only 1/5 mice given 1000 mg/kg survived). This absence of activity in vivo was confirmed by Zeiger et al (1994): mice exposed to NaF in drinking water at up to 400 ppm F-(a concentration proving lethal to 3/16 mice) were examined for micronucleated peripheral erythrocytes (in blood samples) after 1 and 6 weeks and for chromosome aberrations (in bone marrow cells) after 6 weeks. No evidence of clastogenic activity was found, although fluoride uptake was demonstrated by measurement of F- in bones: at 400 ppm F- in water (average intake 75µg/kg/day) humerus F- concentration was raised to 7302 ppm, compared to 947 ppm in untreated controls.
Fluoride (F-)
This is addressed in the HF text above.
Lithium
The genotoxicity of lithium has been reviewed by various workers. One expert group report summarised most studies of chromosome damage in patients receiving lithium therapy as showing no significant increase in chromosome aberrations or SCEs, and noted a reported weight of evidence conclusion in bacteria (Nordic Expert Group for Criteria Documentation of Health Risks from Chemicals 131, 2002). Another review (Aral and Vecchio-Sadus, 2008) lists negative results in bacterial mutation tests (lithium chloride in Bacillus stains, trilithium citrate in Salmonella strains and E.coli) and the host-mediated assay (trilithium citrate: E. coli and intraperitoneally treated mice), plus a negative Drosophila sex-linked lethal test (trilithium citrate). One report of increased single-strand breaks in DNA and slightly increased gene mutation in cultured V79 cells (only in the absence of S9 activating system) was cited in this review, but only questionable mutagenic activity in vitro was concluded; in another cited study, no increase in chromosome aberrations was seen in cultured human lymphocytes exposed to lithium carbonate at concentrations stated equivalent to distribution of up to 10g in a 70kg patient body. Bille et al (1975) investigated haematological parameters and bone marrow cell chromosome morphology in patients treated with lithium (900 – 1500 mg/day) for two months to 10 years: no differences in % cells with chromosome aberrations or % hyperdiploid cells was seen between this test group and controls. They also examined bone marrow cell aspirates from rats dosed intraperitoneally with lithium (3 x 86 mg/day), finding a similar absence of effect. Lithium bromide has been shown to be inactive in bacterial mutation assays (Salmonella typhimurium TA 1535, 1537, 98 and 100 plus E. coli WP2 uvrA, up to 5 mg/plate: Japan MHW, 2002).
Thus lithium is generally inactive in mutagenicity tests conducted in vitro or in vivo, with no evidence of chromosome damage in patients receiving lithium therapy. However there is some evidence for aneugenic activity of lithium at high exposure levels. The review of Aral and Vecchio-Sadus (2008) cites a report of increased micronucleated erythrocyte frequency in mice dosed intraperitoneally with lithium citrate (2 x 1100 mg/kg), and a detailed in vitro investigation of lithium salts found aneugenic activity in the absence of genotoxicity: both lithium chloride and lithium carbonate induced no chromosome aberrations or DNA strand breaks in exposed CHO cells, but increased the frequency of kinetochore-positive micronuclei (Pastor et al, 2009) at concentrations of 5mM and higher (corresponding to approximately 5-10mM lithium). The biological significance of this effect on chromosome assortment at cell division is uncertain, in view of the relatively high dosage/concentration required to elicit the effect. Also, a study of lithium bromide in CHO cells found neither increased polyploidy nor induction of chromosome aberrations in CHL cells at concentrations up to 870 µg/ml (Japan MHW, 2002).
Phosphate
Inorganic phosphate is routinely included in many of the standard protocols used for in vitro genotoxicity testing: as sodium phosphate, G6P, NADP, etc. in S9 mix activating system, potassium and ammonium phosphates in Vogel Bonner medium used in Ames test agar plates, sodium phosphate in cell culture media used for gene mutation and cytogenetic studies, etc. (see e.g. Handbook of Mutagenicity test procedures, Elsevier, 1977). No mutagenic activity under test conditions is of course a requirement for such use.
The ubiquity of endogenous phosphate within the body and the Maximum Tolerable Daily Intake level of phosphate for man (70 mg/kg/day as P: FAO/WHO/IPCS, 1982; EFSA, 2008b) clearly demonstrate the low toxicity of phosphoric acid/phosphate. Any internal dose of these resulting from LiPF6 exposure at levels not causing rapid and overt toxicity due to HF/F- release will not be of concern for genotoxicity (P forming 20% of LiPF6, with F 75%).
Justification for selection of genetic toxicity endpoint
Lithium hexafluorophosphate is reactive and unstable in water and
air. Reaction in contact with water proceeds rapidly, with release of
hydrogen fluoride (hydrofluoric acid), lithium fluoride and phosphoric
acid. Information is available on the genotoxicity of the ultimate
hydrolysis products hydrogen fluoride, lithium/Li+, fluoride/F- and
phosphoric acid/phosphate so further testing of LiPF6 itself, in
addition to the bacterial mutation test already performed, is
scientifically unnecessary (see separate read-across justification in
Section 13). In accordance with Annex XI, 1.2 of the REACH Regulation
testing is not scientifically necessary based on weight-of-evidence
approach.
In vivo testing for genotoxicity is similarly not necessary, and on
humane grounds should not be performed on accordance with Article 15, 2
of Directive 2010/63/EU (as likely to involve severe pain, suffering or
distress).
Short description of key information:
The substance itself proved negative in a bacterial mutation study.
Considering its hydrolysis products:
[1] fluoride (tested as HF or NaF) proved negative in bacterial mutation
assays. Tested as NaF, it gave positive results indicative of chromosome
damage in vitro, in an L5178Y cell mutation study and a human lymphocyte
cytogenetic study. In vivo, NaF produced no evidence of chromosome
damage in two separate mouse studies:
- oral dosing at up to 1000 mg/kg did not increase micronucleated bone
marrow cells
- administration in drinking water at up to 400 ppm did not increase
micronucleated peripheral lymphocytes or bone marrow chromosome
aberrations, despite analytical evidence of fluoride uptake in bones
[2] in patients receiving lithium therapy, the weight of evidence
supports a conclusion that Li+ does not cause DNA damage, mutation or
chromosome damage.In vitro, genotoxicity tests with lithium salts gave
generally negative results in bacteria and mammalian cells., although
one questionable positive result was reported. In vivo, bone marrow cell
from lithium-treated rats (3 x 86 mg/day ip) and human patients
(900-1500 mg/day for up to 10 years) showed no increased chromosomal
aberrations. An apparent aneugenic effect of lithium salts in vitro and
in vivo, in the absence of evident genotoxicity, has been reported.
[3] Inorganic phosphate is routinely included in many of the standard
protocols used for in vitro genotoxicity testing and does not exhibit
mutagenicity. it is not considered to possess genotoxic activity.
Endpoint Conclusion: No adverse effect observed (negative)
Justification for classification or non-classification
The hydrolysis products of LiPF6, formed rapidly on reaction with water, do not show mutagenic activity warranting classification.
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.