Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 941-593-4 | CAS number: 1623405-26-4
- 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 ā 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

Adsorption / desorption
Administrative data
Link to relevant study record(s)
- Endpoint:
- adsorption / desorption: screening
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2016-08-17 to 2016-11-21
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 106 (Adsorption - Desorption Using a Batch Equilibrium Method)
- Version / remarks:
- Deviations from the Guideline
Since the test item is poorly extractable from soil, the indirect method was used for evaluations even if the mass balance was < 90%. Test item stability was verified by control samples. Samples were centrifuged < 3000 g because glass vessels had to be used. Higher centrifugation forces would have been destroyed these vials. For adsorption isotherm, no concentration range in the order of two magnitudes was feasible. With regard to the limit of quantification on the one hand and the solubility of the test item in the stock solution and therefore the maximal amount of solvent used for spiking on the other hand, the test concentrations were chosen. For the highest test item concentration, more than 0.1 vol-% organic solvent was used for spiking.
These deviations had no negative impact on the integrity and quality of the obtained data. - Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- see above at "Version / remarks"
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Council Regulation (EC) No. 440/2008, Method C.18 (2008)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of method:
- batch equilibrium method
- Media:
- soil
- Radiolabelling:
- no
- Test temperature:
- Nominal: 20 ± 2 °C
- Analytical monitoring:
- yes
- Details on sampling:
- CaCl2-solution Deionised water was used to prepare the CaCl2-solution (0.01 M).
Soil / Solution ratio Tier 1: 1:50 and 1:100
Tier 2 and Tier 3: 1:100
Agitation By overhead shaker or horizontal shaker. Frequency was adjusted to avoid sedimentation of soil particles during treatment.
Test Procedure
Test vessels 120 mL disposable glass bottles with aluminium tops with PTFE seals
Concentration for Tier 1: 3.0 mg/L, 6.0 mg/L, 10 mg/L
adsorption / desorption experiments Tier 2: 6.0 mg/L
Tier 3: 2.67 mg/L ā 4.00 mg/L ā 9.00 mg/L ā 13.5 mg/L
Stock solutions Stock solutions of 3 g/L and 10 g/L of TETRAMEEN 2HT in 50 mL 2-propanol were prepared after homogenization of the test item at 40 °C and with ultrasound. For additional test concentrations, solutions of 2.67 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L and 9 g/L were prepared from stock solutions. At the most 0.1 volume-% (0.1 mL) of these stock solutions, related to the volume of the aqueous phase in the soil suspensions, were used for spiking except for the highest concentration. For the concentration 13.5 mg/L, 0.135 volume-% (0.135 mL) was used.
Dispersion treatment Agitation
Preparation
Soil samples(conditioning) The soils were weighed into the test vessels and an appropriate volume of 0.01 M CaCl2-solution was added. After agitation overnight (12 h minimum), the samples were used for adsorption experiments.
Samples for adsorption experiments The soil samples were conditioned as described above. At the most 0.1 volume-% (0.1 mL) of the stock solutions, related to the volume of the aqueous phase in the soil suspensions was added in order to adjust the test concentrations except for the highest concentration. For the concentration 13.5 mg/L, 0.135 volume-% (0.135 mL) was used. Afterwards, the samples were agitated.
Samples for desorption experiments Samples were prepared as described above and were agitated until adsorption is completed. Afterwards, the test vessels were centrifuged, weighed (to quantify the remaining porewater) and the supernatant was replaced by fresh 0.01 M CaCl2-solution. Then the test vessels were agitated again to investigate the desorption behavior of the test item.
Samples for analysis The soil suspensions were centrifuged after agitation at 3000 rpm (2508g) to separate the phases, followed by analysing the concentration of TETRAMEEN 2HT in aqueous phase by LC-MS/MS. For analysis of the soil, the aqueous phase was decanted and the soil was extracted. Extracts were also analysed by LC-MS/MS. During Tier 2 and Tier 3, Test vessels were extracted / rinsed with organic solvent to determine test vessel adsorption. Extracts were also analysed by LC-MS/MS.
Replicates All samples were prepared in duplicate.
Controls, Blanks
CONTROLS CaCl2-solution was conditioned as described above, followed by separation of the aqueous phase by centrifugation. Then the aqueous phase was fortified acc. to the concentrations used for the test item samples and agitated as long as the test item sample with the longest agitation period.
Replicates Duplicates
BLANK Blank samples were prepared for all soils as described for the test item samples but without fortification with the test item. The samples were agitated as long as the samples with the longest agitation period.
Replicates Duplicates (Tier 1), single (Tier 2 and Tier 3)
Sample Preparation
Dilution media 1. Acetonitrile / 0.01 M CaCl2 (50:50) + 1% formic acid
2. 2-Propanol / 0.01 M CaCl2 (50:50) + 1% formic acid
Standards Stock solutions of 3 g/L and 10 g/L of TETRAMEEN 2HT in 50 mL 2-propanol were prepared after homogenization of the test item at 40 °C. The solutions were homogenized in an ultrasonic bath and were diluted to calibration standards.
Tier 1: 7 calibration standards in the range of 5 to 50 µg/L were prepared using dilution medium 1.
Tier 2 and Tier 3: 7 calibration standards in the range of 5 to 50 µg/L were prepared using dilution medium 2.
Aqueous phase
Tier 1: Suspensions (test item replicates and blanks) were centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 5 min. An aliquot of each aqueous sample was stabilized by dilution with acetonitrile containing 2% formic acid (factor 2). Samples were diluted to calibration range with dilution medium 1.
Tier 2 and Tier 3: Suspensions (test item replicates and blanks) were centrifuged at 3000 rpm for 5 min. An aliquot of each aqueous sample was stabilized by dilution with 2-propanol containing 2% formic acid (factor 2). Samples were diluted to calibration range with dilution medium 2.
Test vessel adsorption
Tier 1: After sampling of the aqueous phase, the test vessels were emptied and rinsed with 0.01 M CaCl2. Organic solvent (Acetonitrile containing 2% formic acid or 2-propanol containing 1% formic acid) was used for extraction of the test item from the test vessel. Therefore, the vessel was shaken by hand for 1 min, ultrasound was used for 5 min and the vessel was shaken 20 min on a shaker. Samples were diluted with 0.01 M CaCl2 (factor 2) and further diluted with dilution medium 1 to calibration range, if necessary.
Tier 2 and 3: After sampling of the aqueous phase, the test vessels were emptied and rinsed with 0.01 M CaCl2. Organic solvent (2-propanol containing 2% formic acid) was used for extraction of the test item from the test vessel. Therefore, the vessel was shaken by hand for 1 min, ultrasound was used for 5 min and the vessel was shaken 20 min on a shaker. 0.01 M CaCl2 was used if dilution factor 2 was needed, dilution medium 2 for further dilutions to calibration range.
Soil extraction (Tier1)
After decantation of the aqueous phase, the soil was used for extraction. The test item was poorly extractable from soil. Different methods of extraction were investigated. Since the best extraction was achieved using accelerated solvent extraction (ASE), only the ASE method is reported.
After removal of the aqueous phase, the soil was dried in a drying cabinet to be removable from the test vessels. The soil was weighed into a solvent extractor cell. To each sample, 2 g magnesium chloride hexahydrate and 4 g silica gel were added and homogenised carefully with the soil. Glass beads were used as spacing material in the extractor cells. Then, the samples were extracted with methanol : 2-propanol (50 : 50). For parameters of the extraction method see below. Extracts were transferred quantitatively in a 100 mL measuring flask and filled up with methanol : 2-propanol (50 : 50). 0.01 M CaCl2 was used if dilution factor 2 was needed, dilution medium 2 for further dilutions to calibration range.
Parameters of the extraction method
Preheat: 5 min
Heat: 6 min
Static: 5 min
Flush: 50 % (v/v)
Purge: 90 sec
Cycles: 3
Pressure: 100 bar
Temperature:125 °C
Solvent: methanol : 2-propanol (50 : 50)
Samples for method validation
Samples were prepared as described above. The aqueous phases were decanted and spiked with test item at 1 x LOQ level and 10 x LOQ level. Blank samples were prepared accordingly but without spiking with test item. Samples of 1 x LOQ level and blank samples were diluted with 2-propanol containing 2% formic acid (factor 2), samples of 10 x LOQ were diluted with 2-propanol containing 2% formic acid by factor 2 and further diluted with dilution medium 2. - Matrix no.:
- #1
- Matrix type:
- other: Dystric Cambisoil
- % Clay:
- 16.5
- % Silt:
- 33
- % Sand:
- 50.5
- % Org. carbon:
- 3.56
- pH:
- 5.7
- CEC:
- 8.2 meq/100 g soil d.w.
- Matrix no.:
- #2
- Matrix type:
- other: Silty sand
- % Clay:
- 4.8
- % Silt:
- 13.3
- % Sand:
- 81.9
- % Org. carbon:
- 0.741
- pH:
- 5.9
- CEC:
- 2 meq/100 g soil d.w.
- Matrix no.:
- #3
- Matrix type:
- loamy sand
- % Clay:
- 7.7
- % Silt:
- 12.7
- % Sand:
- 79.6
- % Org. carbon:
- 1.93
- pH:
- 6.3
- CEC:
- 7.2 meq/100 g soil d.w.
- Matrix no.:
- #4
- Matrix type:
- other: Silty sand
- % Clay:
- 9.8
- % Silt:
- 29.3
- % Sand:
- 61
- % Org. carbon:
- 0.617
- pH:
- 6.4
- CEC:
- 5.4 meq/100 g soil d.w.
- Matrix no.:
- #5
- Matrix type:
- clay loam
- % Clay:
- 27.6
- % Silt:
- 43.3
- % Sand:
- 29.1
- % Org. carbon:
- 2.07
- pH:
- 7.5
- CEC:
- 24 meq/100 g soil d.w.
- Details on matrix:
- Relevant Characteristics of Test Matrices
Soils Eurosoil 3 LUFA 2.1 LUFA 2.2 LUFA 2.3 LUFA 2.4
FAO soil unit (Eurosoils) 1)/
Soil Type (LUFA Soils) 2) Dystric Cambisol Silty sand Loamy sand Silty sand Clayey loam
pH (0.01 M CaCl2) 4) 5.7 5.9 6.3 6.4 7.5
Organic Carbon [%] 3) 3.56 0.741 1.93 0.617 2.07
Clay (<0.002 mm) [%] 3) 16.5 4.8 7.7 9.8 27.6
Silt (0.002-0.063 mm) [%] 3) 33.0 13.3 12.7 29.3 43.3
Sand (0.063-2 mm) [%] 3) 50.5 81.9 79.6 61.0 29.1
Cation Exchange Capacity [mval/100g] 3) 8.2 2.0 7.2 5.4 24
1) source: Eurosoils II- Laboratory Reference for Soil-related Studies by B. M. Gawlik and H. Muntau
2) according to German DIN
3) determined at AGROLAB AGRAR UND UMWELT GMBH (non-GLP) for soils used during Tier 2 and Tier 3
4) data determined during the course of the study
Origin of soils European Commission, Joint Research Centre,
INSTITUTE FOR REFERENCE MATERIALS AND MEASUREMENTS IRMM
Retieseweg, B-2440 Geel, Belgium
LANDWIRTSCHAFTLICHE UNTERSUCHUNGS- UND FORSCHUNGSANSTALT LUFA SPEYER,
Obere Langgasse 40, 67346 Speyer, Germany
Storage at test facility Eurosoils: Room temperature, in brown glass bottles
LUFA soils: Room temperature, in closed containers
Expiry date Eurosoil 3 (batch: IRMM-443-3 No.: 0119): 2021-10-06
LUFA 2.1 (batch: Sp2.1 2016): 2021-05-30
LUFA 2.2 (batch: F2.2 2116): 2021-06-13
LUFA 2.3 (batch: F2.3 1916): 2021-05-19
LUFA 2.4 (batch: F2.4 1016): 2021-03-21 - Key result
- Sample No.:
- #6
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean Kd value for 5 different soils
- Value:
- 3 986 L/kg
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- Mean Kd value for 5 different soils
- % Org. carbon:
- 0
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Sample No.:
- #1
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean value from three main constituents of test item
- Value:
- 2 590 L/kg
- pH:
- 5.7
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- Eurosoil 3: Dystric Cambisol
- % Org. carbon:
- 3.56
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Sample No.:
- #2
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean value from three main constituents of test item
- Value:
- 372 L/kg
- pH:
- 5.863
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- LUFA 2.1: Silty sand
- % Org. carbon:
- 0.741
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Sample No.:
- #3
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean value from three main constituents of test item
- Value:
- 371 L/kg
- pH:
- 6.322
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- LUFA 2.2: Loamy sand
- % Org. carbon:
- 1.93
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Sample No.:
- #4
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean value from three main constituents of test item
- Value:
- 3 026 L/kg
- pH:
- 6.395
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- LUFA 2.3: Silty sand
- % Org. carbon:
- 0.617
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Sample No.:
- #5
- Type:
- Kd
- Remarks:
- Mean value from three main constituents of test item
- Value:
- 13 572 L/kg
- pH:
- 7.527
- Temp.:
- 20 °C
- Matrix:
- LUFA 2.4: Clay loam
- % Org. carbon:
- 2.07
- Remarks on result:
- other: Cationic surfactant sorption is governed by ionic interaction. Sorption should not be normalized to OC content!
- Validity criteria fulfilled:
- yes
- Conclusions:
- The test item TETRAMEEN 2HT adsorbs strongly to all tested soils. The strongest adsorption was determined for LUFA 2.4 which is also the soil with the highest cation exchange capacity. The desorption was determined to be not completely reversible. The adsorption does not show a linear correlation to the applied concentration (Freundlich adsorption). Therefore, the data obtained during the adsorption kinetics should be used for the assessment of the adsorption properties of the test item.
- Executive summary:
The adsorption / desorption behavior of the test item TETRAMEEN 2HT (batch no.890000394200) was investigatedin five different soils accordingto OECD guideline 106 and EC C.18 from 2016-08-17 to 2016-11-21 at Noack Laboratorien GmbH, 31157 Sarstedt, Germany. Distribution coefficients Kdand organic carbon normalized distribution coefficients KOC were determined with a single concentration. The desorption behavior / reversibility of the adsorption from the soils and the degree of adsorption and desorption (Freundlich adsorption and desorption isotherms) as a function of the test item loading level in the aqueous phase were investigated.
Relevant Characteristics of Test Matrices
Soils
Eurosoil 3
LUFA 2.1
LUFA 2.2
LUFA 2.3
LUFA 2.4
FAO soil unit (Eurosoils)1)
Soil Type (LUFA Soils)2)
Dystric Cambisol
Silty sand
Loamy sand
Silty sand
Clayey loam
pH (0.01 M CaCl2)4)
5.7
5.9
6.3
6.4
7.5
Organic Carbon [%]3)
3.56
0.741
1.93
0.617
2.07
Clay (<0.002 mm) [%]3)
16.5
4.8
7.7
9.8
27.6
Silt (0.002-0.063 mm) [%]3)
33.0
13.3
12.7
29.3
43.3
Sand (0.063-2 mm) [%]3)
50.5
81.9
79.6
61.0
29.1
Cation Exchange Capacity3)[mval/100g]
8.2
2.0
7.2
5.4
24
1)source: Eurosoils II- Laboratory Reference for Soil-related Studies by B. M. Gawlik and H. Muntau
2)according to German DIN
3)determined atAgrolab Agrar und Umwelt GmbH(non-GLP) for soils used duringTier 2andTier 3
4) data determined during the course of the study
Based on results of preliminary investigations during Tier 1, a soil / solution ratio of 1:100 was used for adsorption experiments. Experiments for adsorption and desorption kinetics were conducted with a nominal test item concentration of 6.00 mg/L. The adsorption equilibrium was reached after 2 hours. For investigations concerning the Freundlich adsorption and desorption isotherm, additional concentrations of 2.67 mg/L, 4.00 mg/L, 10.0 mg/L and 13.5 mg/L have been applied. The three main components Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine, Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine and Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine of TETRAMEEN 2HT have been analysed by LC-MS/MS. Data are given for each analyte in the attached full study report and results have been used to calculate the study endpoints for the test item. Detailed analytical results are shown in part12 of the attached full study report.
The table below shows obtained distribution coefficients Kdand their correspondingorganic carbon normalized distribution coefficients KOC. Furthermore, the mobility of the test item in the investigated matrices was classified according to McCall et al (1980). Additionally, the desorption coefficient Kdes, the organic carbon normalized Freundlich adsorption coefficient KOCF as well asthe Freundlich desorption coefficient KdesF are presented in the summarizing table.
Summarized Endpoints for the Active Ingredients of TETRAMEEN 2HT
Mobility according to McCall et al. (1980):KOC0 ā 50 very high,KOC50 ā 150 high,KOC150 ā 500 medium,KOC500 ā 2000 low,KOC2000 ā 5000 slight,KOC> 5000 immobile; based on results of Tier 2
Kdand Kocwere determined during Tier 2Kdes, KOCF and KdesF were determined during Tier 3
Kd[mL/g]
KOC[mL/g]
Kdes [mL/g]
KOCF
[µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]KdesF
[µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]Mobility according to McCall et al.
Soil/Solution Ratio
1:100
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Eurosoil 3
3039
85362
3192
17500
8279
immobile
LUFA 2.1
421
56827
1458
42499
1577
immobile
LUFA 2.2
433
22413
778
27640
778
immobile
LUFA 2.3
3535
572935
7420
107650
9940
immobile
LUFA 2.4
14798
714857
17009
370365
19311
immobile
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Eurosoil 3
2901
81489
3227
14964
12025
immobile
LUFA 2.1
391
52730
1418
39426
1547
immobile
LUFA 2.2
421
21792
732
29312
743
immobile
LUFA 2.3
3534
572766
7803
95503
9732
immobile
LUFA 2.4
14755
712792
17342
328193
17865
immobile
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Eurosoil 3
1831
51441
2930
5783
440961
immobile
LUFA 2.1
303
40927
1265
23420
1560
immobile
LUFA 2.2
261
13508
592
35428
1363
immobile
LUFA 2.3
2010
325843
7724
37061
6183
immobile
LUFA 2.4
11162
539238
15445
204282
15805
immobile
TETRAMEEN 2HT
Eurosoil 3
2590
72764
3116
12749
153755
immobile
LUFA 2.1
372
50161
1380
35115
1561
immobile
LUFA 2.2
371
19237
701
30793
962
immobile
LUFA 2.3
3026
490515
7649
80071
8618
immobile
LUFA 2.4
13572
655629
16598
300947
17660
immobile
Reference
Temperature
The temperature was in the range of 20 ± 2 °C during the course of the study.
Soil Dry Weights
The soil dry weight of each soil type used was determined.
Soil Dry Weights
Mean values (n = 3)
|
Soil |
||||
Eurosoil 3 |
LUFA 2.1 |
LUFA 2.2 |
LUFA 2.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
|
soil dry weight [%] |
97.4 |
99.6 |
97.1 |
97.5 |
96.2 |
pH Values
The pH values of the aqueous media of the test systems were measured before and after equilibration with the corresponding soils, after addition of the test item and after desorption in the highest test item concentration. Results are shown in the following table.
pH Values of the Aqueous Medium
Soil / Solution Ratio 1:100
|
Soils |
||||||
Eurosoil 3 |
LUFA 2.1 |
LUFA 2.2 |
LUFA 2.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
|||
0.01 M CaCl2 |
6.789 |
6.299 |
7.703 |
6.557 |
6.468 |
||
after soil contact |
5.700 |
5.863 |
6.322 |
6.395 |
7.527 |
||
after addition of the test item |
6.162 |
6.594 |
6.552 |
6.612 |
7.860 |
||
after desorption |
6.123 |
6.115 |
6.464 |
6.511 |
7.231 |
Tier 1āAdsorption / Desorption
LUFA 2.2 and LUFA 2.4 were used for preliminary investigations on the adsorption behavior of the test item with soil / solution ratios of 1:50 and 1:100 at a concentration of 3.0 mg/L. An adsorption of > 98% was obtained after an agitation phase of 24 h. For LUFA 2.4, measured concentrations were below the lowest calibration level (5 µg test item/L). Therefore, for this soil additional experiments have been performed with a soil / solution ratio 1:100 and test item concentrations of 6 mg/L and 10 mg/L.
Strong adsorption was determined for both soils. The equilibrium of the adsorption was reached after 4 h. Test item control samples (samples without soil) showed good recoveries but showed that test vessel adsorption had to be taken into account for all calculations during Tier 2 and Tier 3. Concentrations and sampling points forTier 2 have been assigned based on results in the following tables. Detailed data are shown in part12 of the attached full study report.
Tier 1:LUFA 2.4 ā Soil / Solution Ratios 1:100 and 1:50
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
24 |
1001) |
1001) |
1001) |
1:50 |
3.0 |
24 |
1001) |
1001) |
1001) |
1:100 |
6.0 |
1 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
4 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
||
24 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
||
1:100 |
10 |
1 |
98 |
98 |
98 |
4 |
98 |
98 |
98 |
||
24 |
98 |
98 |
98 |
1) = measured value for aqueous phase below lowest calibration level
Tier 1:LUFA 2.2 ā Soil / Solution Ratios 1:100 and 1:50
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
1 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
4 |
100 |
99 |
99 |
||
24 |
99 |
99 |
98 |
||
1:50 |
3.0 |
1 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
4 |
100 |
100 |
99 |
||
24 |
99 |
99 |
99 |
Tier 1ā Test Vessel Adsorption
The test item adsorption to the test vessel was determined in Tier 1 samples for test item replicates and controls with the longest agitation period. Results for test item replicates are shown in the first two tables below. Results for control samples are shown in the 3rd and 4th table below. Since significant adsorption was determined, test vessels had to be extracted during Tier 2 and Tier 3 for all adsorption samples and the determined test vessel adsorption had to be taken into account for the respective calculations. Details of the measurements are shown in part12 of the attached full study report.
Tier 1:LUFA 2.4 ā Test Vessel Adsorption
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
24 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
1.1 |
1:50 |
3.0 |
24 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1:100 |
6.0 |
24 |
0.5 |
0.5 |
1.1 |
1:100 |
10 |
24 |
0.9 |
0.9 |
0.7 |
Tier 1:LUFA 2.2 ā Test Vessel Adsorption
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
24 |
0.3 |
0.4 |
0.7 |
1:50 |
3.0 |
24 |
1.3 |
0.4 |
1.4 |
Tier 1:LUFA 2.4 ā Test Vessel Adsorption ā Control Samples
0.01 M CaCl2solution was conditioned with LUFA 2.4
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
24 |
5 |
6 |
9 |
1:50 |
3.0 |
24 |
3 |
3 |
7 |
1:100 |
6.0 |
24 |
12 |
14 |
15 |
1:100 |
10 |
24 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
Tier 1:LUFA 2.2 ā Test Vessel Adsorption ā Control Samples
0.01 M CaCl2solution was conditioned with LUFA 2.2
Soil / Solution Ratio |
Applied concentration, test item [mg/L] |
Sampling point [h] |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
Adsorption |
1:100 |
3.0 |
24 |
16 |
18 |
23 |
1:50 |
3.0 |
24 |
12 |
12 |
21 |
Tier 1ā Extraction from Soil / Mass Balance
Different solvents have been tested for soil extraction, e.g. 2-propanol containing 1 % formic acid and acetonitrile containing formic acid. The best result was obtained by using accelerated solvent extractor.. Recovery rates of 9% to 21% of the nominal concentration for the analytes from LUFA 2.2 and 5% to 23% from LUFA 2.4 were obtained. Since the test item is poorly extractable from soil, the mass balance was < 90%. Test item stability was verified by control samples, which showed good recoveries throughout the adsorption experiments.
Tier 2 ā Adsorption Kinetics
The determination for adsorption kinetics was performed with a nominal test item concentration of 6.0 mg/L. A soil / solution ratio of 1:100 was used and concentrations of the test item were measured in aqueous phase and in extracts of the test vessels at defined sampling points. The following tables show the percentage of adsorption at equilibrium, the time needed to reach the adsorption equilibrium as well as the obtained distribution coefficients Kd and their corresponding organic carbon normalized distribution coefficients KOC. The test item shows high adsorption within a few hours to all tested soils. Results are shown in the tables below. Details of the measurements are shown in part12 of the attached full study report. Measured values were partly below LOQ for LUFA 2.4, but since the values were above the lowest calibration standard, quantification was possible.
Equilibrium
Time, Measured Amounts in Aqueous Phase and Soil Extracts, Percent of
Adsorption and Distribution CoefficientsKd,KOCfor
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:172 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
madsaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kd[mL/g] |
%OC |
KOC[mL/g] |
Adsorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
2 |
0.974 |
5.61 |
166 |
3039 |
3.56 |
85362 |
96.7 |
LUFA 2.1 |
2 |
0.996 |
33.0 |
139 |
421 |
0.741 |
56827 |
80.7 |
LUFA 2.2 |
2 |
0.971 |
33.0 |
139 |
433 |
1.93 |
22413 |
80.8 |
LUFA 2.3 |
2 |
0.975 |
4.84 |
167 |
3535 |
0.617 |
572935 |
97.2 |
LUFA 2.4 |
2 |
0.962 |
1.20 |
170 |
14798 |
2.07 |
714857 |
99.3 |
Vaq =used volume of aqueous phase
teq =time to reach equilibrium
msoil =used amount of soil (dry weight)
madsaq =amount of a.i. in the aqueous phase at equilibrium
madss =amount of a.i. in the soil at equilibrium
%OC =percentage of organic carbon content in the soil
Equilibrium
Time, Measured Amounts in Aqueous Phase and Soil Extracts, Percent of
Adsorption and Distribution CoefficientsKd,KOCfor
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:145 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
madsaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kd[mL/g] |
%OC |
KOC[mL/g] |
Adsorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
2 |
0.974 |
4.94 |
140 |
2901 |
3.56 |
81489 |
96.6 |
LUFA 2.1 |
2 |
0.996 |
29.6 |
115 |
391 |
0.741 |
52730 |
79.6 |
LUFA 2.2 |
2 |
0.971 |
28.4 |
116 |
421 |
1.93 |
21792 |
80.3 |
LUFA 2.3 |
2 |
0.975 |
4.08 |
141 |
3534 |
0.617 |
572766 |
97.2 |
LUFA 2.4 |
2 |
0.962 |
1.01 |
144 |
14755 |
2.07 |
712792 |
99.3 |
Vaq =used volume of aqueous phase
teq =time to reach equilibrium
msoil =used amount of soil (dry weight)
madsaq =amount of a.i. in the aqueous phase at equilibrium
madss =amount of a.i. in the soil at equilibrium
%OC =percentage of organic carbon content in the soil
Equilibrium
Time, Measured Amounts in Aqueous Phase and Soil Extracts, Percent of
Adsorption and Distribution CoefficientsKd,KOCfor
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:40.8 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
madsaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kd[mL/g] |
%OC |
KOC[mL/g] |
Adsorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
2 |
0.974 |
2.17 |
38.6 |
1831 |
3.56 |
51441 |
94.7 |
LUFA 2.1 |
2 |
0.996 |
10.1 |
30.7 |
303 |
0.741 |
40927 |
75.1 |
LUFA 2.2 |
2 |
0.971 |
11.6 |
29.2 |
261 |
1.93 |
13508 |
71.7 |
LUFA 2.3 |
2 |
0.975 |
1.98 |
38.8 |
2010 |
0.617 |
325843 |
95.1 |
LUFA 2.4 |
2 |
0.962 |
0.376 |
40.4 |
11162 |
2.07 |
539238 |
99.1 |
Vaq =used volume of aqueous phase
teq =time to reach equilibrium
msoil =used amount of soil (dry weight)
madsaq =amount of a.i. in the aqueous phase at equilibrium
madss =amount of a.i. in the soil at equilibrium
%OC =percentage of organic carbon content in the soil
Tier 3ā Desorption Kinetics
The desorption behavior of the test item was determined over a period of 24 h after 2 h adsorption with the desorption equilibrium after 24 h. The following tables show the desorption coefficient Kdes. Since the desorption coefficient is higher than the adsorption coefficient Kd, the test item adsorption is assumed to be not completely reversible. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that by measuring the concentrations of the analytes in the aqueous phase, desorption from soil and desorption from the test vessel are not distinguishable.Details of the measurements are shown in part12 of the attached full study report. Measured values were partly below LOQ for LUFA 2.3 and LUFA 2.4, but since the values were above the lowest calibration standard, quantification was possible.
Percent
of Desorption and Desorption CoefficientKdes for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:172 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
mdesaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kdes[mL/g] |
Desorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
24 |
0.974 |
5.29 |
170 |
3192 |
3.1 |
LUFA 2.1 |
24 |
0.996 |
9.93 |
154 |
1458 |
6.4 |
LUFA 2.2 |
24 |
0.971 |
18.7 |
160 |
778 |
11.7 |
LUFA 2.3 |
24 |
0.975 |
2.33 |
171 |
7420 |
1.4 |
LUFA 2.4 |
24 |
0.962 |
1.04 |
171 |
17009 |
0.6 |
Vaq =used volume of aqueous phase
teq =time to reach equilibrium
msoil =used amount of soil (dry weight)
mdesaq =amount a.i. measured in the aqueous phase after desorption step
(entrained water taken into account)
madss =amount of a.i. to soil at equilibrium
Percent
of Desorption and Desorption CoefficientKdes for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:145 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
mdesaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kdes[mL/g] |
Desorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
24 |
0.974 |
4.41 |
143 |
3227 |
3.1 |
LUFA 2.1 |
24 |
0.996 |
8.55 |
129 |
1418 |
6.6 |
LUFA 2.2 |
24 |
0.971 |
16.5 |
134 |
732 |
12.3 |
LUFA 2.3 |
24 |
0.975 |
1.86 |
144 |
7803 |
1.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
24 |
0.962 |
0.859 |
144 |
17342 |
0.6 |
Percent
of Desorption and Desorption CoefficientKdes for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentration, test item: 6.0 mg/L
Applied amount, test item: 600 µg
Applied amount, a.i.:40.8 µg
n = 2; soil / solution ratio: 1:100
Vaq= 100 mL
Soil Type |
teq[h] |
msoil[g] |
mdesaq(eq) [µg] |
madss(eq) [µg] |
Kdes[mL/g] |
Desorption [%] |
Eurosoil 3 |
24 |
0.974 |
1.37 |
40.3 |
2930 |
3.4 |
LUFA 2.1 |
24 |
0.996 |
2.66 |
36.1 |
1265 |
7.4 |
LUFA 2.2 |
24 |
0.971 |
5.58 |
37.6 |
592 |
14.8 |
LUFA 2.3 |
24 |
0.975 |
0.530 |
40.5 |
7724 |
1.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
24 |
0.962 |
0.272 |
40.6 |
15445 |
0.7 |
Vaq =used volume of aqueous phase
teq =time to reach equilibrium
msoil =used amount of soil (dry weight)
mdesaq =amount a.i. measured in the aqueous phase after desorption step
(entrained water taken into account)
madss =amount of a.i. to soil at equilibrium
Tier 3 ā Adsorption Isotherms
The adsorption isotherm was determined with additional concentrations of 2.67 mg/L, 4.00 mg/L, 9.00 mg/L and 13.5 mg/L after adsorption for 2 h. With regard to the limit of quantification on the one hand and the solubility of the test item in the stock solution and therefore the maximal amount of solvent used for spiking on the other hand, the test concentrations were chosen. Although it was not feasible to set the concentration range over two orders of magnitude, it is obvious that adsorption and concentration do not show a linear correlation. This was also investigated for comparable substances (surfactants) in earlier studies (info provided by the sponsor). For the C16C16 compound 1/n) > 1 (regression constant was determined. A 1/n > 1 relates to an S-type of Freundlich relation which can be explained by double layers of surfactants on sorbent.The tables below show the Freundlich adsorption coefficient Kd and the organic carbon normalized Freundlich adsorption coefficient KOCF.Detailed data are shown in part12 of the attached full study report.
Measured values were partly below LOQ and even below lowest calibration level for Eurosoil 3 and LUFA 2.4, but since the values were detectable, measured values were taken into account as measured.
Freundlich
Adsorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 76.4, 114, 172, 257, 386
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
%OC |
KadsF |
KOCF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.9325 |
0.4393 |
3.56 |
623 |
17500 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.9548 |
0.651 |
0.741 |
315 |
42499 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.7274 |
0.8462 |
1.93 |
533 |
27640 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.9954 |
0.491 |
0.617 |
664 |
107650 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9543 |
0.825 |
2.07 |
7667 |
370365 |
msoil = used amount of soil (dry weight) [g]
n = regression constant
%OC = percentage of organic carbon content in the soil
KadsF = Freundlich adsorption coefficient [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
KOCF = Freundlich adsorption coefficient normalized to content of organic carbon [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
Freundlich
Adsorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 64.3, 96.4, 145 217, 325
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
%OC |
KadsF |
KOCF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.9289 |
0.4257 |
3.56 |
533 |
14964 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.9420 |
0.6601 |
0.741 |
292 |
39426 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.7377 |
0.9271 |
1.93 |
556 |
29312 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.9798 |
0.4729 |
0.617 |
589 |
95503 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9512 |
0.8065 |
2.07 |
6794 |
328193 |
Freundlich
Adsorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 18.2, 27.2, 40.8, 61.2, 91.8
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
%OC |
KadsF |
KOCF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.9571 |
0.4075 |
3.56 |
206 |
5783 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.938 |
0.6946 |
0.741 |
174 |
23420 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.778 |
1.2495 |
1.93 |
684 |
35428 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.9947 |
0.4649 |
0.617 |
229 |
37061 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9681 |
0.8005 |
2.07 |
4229 |
204282 |
msoil = used amount of soil (dry weight) [g]
n = regression constant
%OC = percentage of organic carbon content in the soil
KadsF = Freundlich adsorption coefficient [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
KOCF = Freundlich adsorption coefficient normalized to content of organic carbon [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
Tier 3ā Desorption Isotherms
The desorption isotherm was determined with additional concentrations of 2.67 mg/L, 4.00 mg/L, 9.00 mg/L and 13.5 mg/L after adsorption for 2 h and desorption for 24 h. The desorption and the concentration of the test item do not show a linear correlation. This is presumably attributed to the fact that desorption from soil and desorption from test vessel are not distinguishable. The following tables summarize the obtained data.Detailed data are shown in part12 of the attached full study report.
Measured values were partly below LOQ and even below lowest calibration level for LUFA 2.3 and LUFA 2.4, but since the values were detectable, measured values were taken into account as measured.
Freundlich
Desorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 76.4, 114, 172, 257, 386
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
KdesF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.7831 |
1.1614 |
8279 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.7138 |
1.0517 |
1577 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.8799 |
0.8238 |
778 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.7771 |
0.9441 |
9940 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9842 |
1.0322 |
19311 |
msoil = used amount of soil (dry weight) [g]
n = regression constant
KdesF = Freundlich desorption coefficient [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
Freundlich
Desorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 64.3, 96.4, 145 217, 325
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
KdesF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.8679 |
1.2932 |
12025 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.674 |
1.0546 |
1547 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.8750 |
0.8603 |
743 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.8376 |
0.9463 |
9732 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9879 |
1.0095 |
17865 |
Freundlich
Desorption for
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N-
di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine
Applied concentrations, test item [mg/L]: 2.67, 4.00, 6.00, 9.00, 13.5
Applied amount, test item [µg]: 267, 400, 600, 900, 1350
Applied amount, a.i. [µg]: 18.2, 27.2, 40.8, 61.2, 91.8
Soil Type |
msoil[g] |
R2 |
1/n |
KdesF |
Eurosoil 3 |
0.974 |
0.8835 |
2.1051 |
440961 |
LUFA 2.1 |
0.996 |
0.5923 |
1.0847 |
1560 |
LUFA 2.2 |
0.971 |
0.8622 |
1.1895 |
1363 |
LUFA 2.3 |
0.975 |
0.8635 |
0.8839 |
6183 |
LUFA 2.4 |
0.962 |
0.9715 |
1.026 |
15805 |
msoil = used amount of soil (dry weight) [g]
n = regression constant
KdesF = Freundlich desorption coefficient [µg1-1/n(mL)1/ng-1]
Control Samples
The test item stability was confirmed by measurement of two control replicates during each adsorption experiment. The table below shows the recovery rate for control samples. The recovery is related to the nominal applied concentration and the adsorption to the test vessel is taken into account for control samples at the end of the experiment (2 h and 4 h). Therefore, amounts measured in the aqueous phase and amounts measured in test vessel extracts have been totalized.
Recovery Rates [%] of the Control Samples
Concentration Tier 2 ā Adsorption kinetics: 6.00 mg test item/L
Concentration Tier 3 ā Adsorption isotherm: 2.67 mg test item/L
|
Eurosoil 3 |
LUFA 2.1 |
LUFA 2.2 |
LUFA 2.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
C18C18 Compound |
|||||
Tier 20h |
104 |
108 |
95 |
103 |
81 |
Tier 24h |
96 |
91 |
80 |
851) |
70 |
Tier 32h |
111 |
88 |
91 |
88 |
80 |
C18C16 Compound |
|||||
Tier 20h |
105 |
110 |
95 |
101 |
79 |
Tier 24h |
95 |
90 |
83 |
871) |
68 |
Tier 32h |
105 |
89 |
96 |
84 |
87 |
C16C16 Compound |
|||||
Tier 20h |
108 |
115 |
100 |
104 |
90 |
Tier 24h |
98 |
92 |
84 |
881) |
76 |
Tier 32h |
111 |
90 |
123 |
91 |
82 |
1) = test vessel adsorption was not taken into account, since measured value was not plausible
Description of key information
Di-C16 -18 Tetramines is protonated under ambient conditions. This means it they will sorb strongly to negatively charged substances like glassware, soil and sediment constituents. For five different soils Kd values were observed for diC16 -18 tetramines ranging from: 371 to 13572 L/kg with a mean Kd of 3986 L/kg. Sorption of alkyl polyamines is mainly driven by ionic interaction and to a lesser extend by the hydrophobic interaction of the hydrophobic tail(s). The observed Kd values should therefore not be normalized to the organic carbon this will otherwise lead to erroneous extrapolations.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Other adsorption coefficients
- Type:
- log Kp (solids-water in soil)
- Value in L/kg:
- 3.6
- at the temperature of:
- 20 °C
Other adsorption coefficients
- Type:
- log Kp (solids-water in suspended matter)
- Value in L/kg:
- 3.902
- at the temperature of:
- 20 °C
Other adsorption coefficients
- Type:
- log Kp (solids-water in sediment)
- Value in L/kg:
- 3.6
- at the temperature of:
- 20 °C
Additional information
Due to the cationic surface-active properties Di-C16 -18 Tetramine will adsorb strongly onto the solid phase of soil and sediments. The substance can adsorb both onto the organic fraction and, dependent on the chemical composition, onto the surface of the mineral phase.Research (K. U. Goss, S. Droge, Y. Chen & J. Hermens) has shown that cationic surfactants partitioning to soil and sediment is mainly based on cation exchange. The clay, silt and organic matter fraction are the main fractions in soil and sediment contributing to the cation exchange capacity. Correlating partitioning of cationic surfactants to the organic carbon content alone will therefore not allow a reliable prediction of the partitioning in the environment. The non-normalized adsorption coefficients are therefore used for risk assessment.
The adsorption / desorption behavior of the test item di-C16 -18 Tetramine (batch no.890000394200) was investigated in five different soils according to OECD guideline 106. Distribution coefficients Kd and organic carbon normalized distribution coefficients KOC were determined with a single concentration. The desorption behavior / reversibility of the adsorption from the soils and the degree of adsorption and desorption (Freundlich adsorption and desorption isotherms) as a function of the test item loading level in the aqueous phase were investigated.
Relevant Characteristics of Test Matrices used
|
Soils |
||||
|
Eurosoil 3 |
LUFA 2.1 |
LUFA 2.2 |
LUFA 2.3 |
LUFA 2.4 |
FAO soil unit (Eurosoils)1) Soil Type (LUFA Soils)2) |
Dystric Cambisol |
Silty sand |
Loamy sand |
Silty sand |
Clayey loam |
pH (0.01 M CaCl2)4) |
5.7 |
5.9 |
6.3 |
6.4 |
7.5 |
Organic Carbon [%]3) |
3.56 |
0.741 |
1.93 |
0.617 |
2.07 |
Clay (<0.002 mm) [%]3) |
16.5 |
4.8 |
7.7 |
9.8 |
27.6 |
Silt (0.002-0.063 mm) [%]3) |
33.0 |
13.3 |
12.7 |
29.3 |
43.3 |
Sand (0.063-2 mm) [%]3) |
50.5 |
81.9 |
79.6 |
61.0 |
29.1 |
Cation Exchange Capacity3)[mval/100g] |
8.2 |
2.0 |
7.2 |
5.4 |
24 |
1)source: Eurosoils II- Laboratory Reference for Soil-related Studies by B. M. Gawlik and H. Muntau
2) according to German DIN
3) determined at Agrolab Agrar und Umwelt GmbH (non-GLP) for soils used duringTier 2andTier 3
4) data determined during the course of the study
Based on results of preliminary investigations during Tier 1, a soil / solution ratio of 1:100 was used for adsorption experiments. Experiments for adsorption and desorption kinetics were conducted with a nominal test item concentration of 6.00 mg/L. The adsorption equilibrium was reached after 2 hours. For investigations concerning the Freundlich adsorption and desorption isotherm, additional concentrations of 2.67 mg/L, 4.00 mg/L, 10.0 mg/L and 13.5 mg/L have been applied. The three main components Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine, Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine and Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine of di-C16 -18Tetramine have been analysed by LC-MS/MS. Data are given for each analyte in the attached full study report and results have been used to calculate the study endpoints for the test item.
The table below shows obtained distribution coefficients Kd and their corresponding organic carbon normalized distribution coefficients KOC. Furthermore, the mobility of the test item in the investigated matrices was classified according to McCall et al (1980). Additionally, the desorption coefficient Kdes, the organic carbon normalized Freundlich adsorption coefficient KOCF as well asthe Freundlich desorption coefficient KdesF are presented in the summarizing table.
Summarized Endpoints for the Active Ingredients of di-C16 -18 Tetramine
Mobility
according to McCall et al. (1980): KOC 0 ā 50 very
high, KOC 50 ā 150 high, KOC 150
ā 500 medium, KOC 500 ā 2000 low, KOC
2000 ā 5000 slight, KOC > 5000
immobile; based on results of Tier 2
Kd and Kocwere
determined during Tier 2
Kdes, KOCF and KdesF were determined duringTier 3
|
Kd [mL/g] |
KOC [mL/g] |
Kdes [mL/g] |
KOCF |
KdesF |
Mobility according to McCall et al. |
Soil/Solution Ratio |
1:100 |
|||||
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine |
||||||
Eurosoil 3 |
3039 |
|
3192 |
|
8279 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.1 |
421 |
|
1458 |
|
1577 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.2 |
433 |
|
778 |
|
778 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.3 |
3535 |
|
7420 |
|
9940 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.4 |
14798 |
|
17009 |
|
19311 |
immobile |
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- C16, C18 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine |
||||||
Eurosoil 3 |
2901 |
|
3227 |
|
12025 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.1 |
391 |
|
1418 |
|
1547 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.2 |
421 |
|
732 |
|
743 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.3 |
3534 |
|
7803 |
|
9732 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.4 |
14755 |
|
17342 |
|
17865 |
immobile |
Nā-{3-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]propyl}-N,N- di-C16 alkylpropane-1,3-diamine |
||||||
Eurosoil 3 |
1831 |
|
2930 |
|
440961 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.1 |
303 |
|
1265 |
|
1560 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.2 |
261 |
|
592 |
|
1363 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.3 |
2010 |
|
7724 |
|
6183 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.4 |
11162 |
|
15445 |
|
15805 |
immobile |
Di-C16 -18 Tetramine |
||||||
Eurosoil 3 |
2590 |
|
3116 |
|
153755 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.1 |
372 |
|
1380 |
|
1561 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.2 |
371 |
|
701 |
|
962 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.3 |
3026 |
|
7649 |
|
8618 |
immobile |
LUFA 2.4 |
13572 |
|
16598 |
|
17660 |
immobile |
Because there is no principal difference between soil and sediments considering the sorption properties and because for cationic surfactants the degree of sorption is not only related to the organic carbon content, the value for soil will also be used for sediment and suspended particles. Suspended sediment contains more smaller particles and the Kd (=Kp) for suspended sediment is therefore for precautionary reasons doubled. For sludge which consists mainly of organic matter the sorption data as observed for soil is not considered to be representative. This is however not a serious problem because the removal by sorption in a waste water treatment plant will be close to what is observed for C-16 -18 Tetramine in the waste water treatment simulation test i.e. about 15% removal.
In table ???, the distribution constants used in this assessment is summarized:
Tab. ???:Distribution constants for di-C16 -18 Tetramine
Kpsoil |
3986 L/kg |
Ksoil-water |
5979 m3/m-3 |
||||
Kpsusp |
7972 L/kg |
Ksusp-water |
1993 m3.m-3 |
||||
Kpsed |
3986 L/kg |
Ksed-water |
1993 m3.m-3 |
With a Kpsuspof 7972 L/kg and a concentration of 15 mg/L suspended matter in surface waters, the adsorbed fraction is calculated as 11%.
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.
