Kerosine (petroleum), straight-run wide-cut

Additional ecotoxological information

Administrative data

Endpoint:

additional ecotoxicological information

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

supporting study

Study period:

N/A

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

study report

Title:

Unnamed

Year:

2008

Materials and methods

Test guideline

Qualifier:

no guideline available

Principles of method if other than guideline:

A fumigation experiment was performed in which a number of plant species representing the European flora was exposed to a range of mesitylene concentrations. Pressurised nitrogen was bubbled through warmed liquid mesitylene 10 bring it into the gas phase. It was then injected into the air-stream entering the plant fumigation chambers at constant concentrations for a period of 12 weeks. The mean measured concentrations were om, 0.12, 1.22, 3.5, 10.6, 12.5 and 29 ppmV mesitylene.

GLP compliance:

not specified

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Mesitylene

EC Number:

203-604-4

EC Name:

Mesitylene

Cas Number:

108-67-8

IUPAC Name:

mesitylene

Details on test material:

The test substance 1,3,5-trimethylbenzene further referred to as mesitylene is an aromatic hydrocarbon with an aromatic hydrocarbon with three methyl substituents attached to the benzene ring. It is a major urban volatile organic compound with its chemical formula CH3(CH2)9CH3. It was obtained from Fisher Emergo, Purity 99%.

Results and discussion

Any other information on results incl. tables

Actual exposure concentrations were quite stable and close to nominal values.Even though a range finding test was performed before the definitiveexperiments were carried out, no significant effects were found in the definitive experiments at the tested concentrations. Therefore, no NOECs could be calculated. Tissue concentrations of undecane were measured in plant samples, showing that the hydrocarbon was adsorbed to the plant although no significant toxicity occurred. Low concentrations of test compound were measured in the controls.

 

High variation between replicated plants was observed for some treatments. Therefore, a statistical variance analysis was performed to identify trends related to hydrocarbon exposure. The main results of this analysis for the experiment are negative trend observed forS. nigrum, B. campestris and P. vulgaris shoot biomass andP. ovata leaf ear length.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:

No significant toxicity occurred.

Executive summary:

Implications for the gasoline risk assessment.The highest nominal test concentrations (in ppmV) were recalculated to g/m³using the density of the test compounds (0.74 g/cm³). In this way, the highest test concentrations, where still no significant phytotoxic effects were observed, could be compared with environmental PECs for the relevant hydrocarbon block from the gasoline risk assessment (block 7). The highest test concentrations were 6.7 g/m³. This single compound concentration is up to 10⁶times higher than PECs reported for the block in the gasoline risk assessment, clearly showing that no risk for exposed vegetation due to the presence of these compounds in the atmosphere is expected.

Atmospheric Predicted Environmental Concentrations

Block	Repr. components	Local (ug/m^3)	Regional (ug/m^3)	This study (ug/m^3)
7	C9-C11 n+iso paraffins	0.15	0.12	6.7*10^6