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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: - | CAS number: 313644-32-5
- 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
Genetic toxicity: in vitro
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- in vitro cytogenicity / chromosome aberration study in mammalian cells
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 19.09.2016 to 26.01.2017
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 017
- Report date:
- 2017
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 473 (In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.10 (Mutagenicity - In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of assay:
- other: Chromosome aberration test in mammalian cells (in vitro cytogenetic study)
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- 1,4-bis(7-methyloctyl) cyclohexane-1,4-dicarboxylate
- Cas Number:
- 313644-32-5
- Molecular formula:
- C26H48O4
- IUPAC Name:
- 1,4-bis(7-methyloctyl) cyclohexane-1,4-dicarboxylate
- Test material form:
- liquid
Constituent 1
Method
Species / strain
- Species / strain / cell type:
- lymphocytes:
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- S9 mix from Aroclor 1254
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- 125, 250, 500, 1000, 2000 µg/mL medium of DINCD
- Vehicle / solvent:
- - Vehicle(s)/solvent(s) used: ethanol
Controls
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Remarks:
- ethanol (vehicle)
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- no
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- mitomycin C
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- METHOD OF APPLICATION: in medium
DURATION
- Exposure duration: 4 and 24 h without S9 mix; 4h with S9 mix
- Fixation time (start of exposure up to fixation or harvest of cells):
Two hours before termination the cell division was arrested by the addition of 0.5 mL of the spindle poison Colcemid® to each culture (10 µg/mL solution). The tubes were capped and left to incubate for a further two hours.
The cells were harvested by low speed centrifugation (80 - 100 x g) and the pellets of cells collected were resuspended in hypotonic potassium chloride solution (0.56%) and fixed in freshly prepared methanol : glacial acetic acid fixative (4:1, v/v).
SPINDLE INHIBITOR (cytogenetic assays):
Colcemid®
STAIN (for cytogenetic assays):
Giemsa stain (1:10 in WEISE's buffer12 pH 6.8)
NUMBER OF REPLICATIONS:
duplicates
METHODS OF SLIDE PREPARATION AND STAINING TECHNIQUE USED:
The tubes were centrifuged, the fixative removed and the cell pellet resuspended in a few drops of 60% acetic acid. Single drops of the cell suspension were spread on clean, grease-free glass slides on a hot plate (approx. 50°C) and the slides were left to air-dry. Two slides were prepared per culture, stained for 30 minutes in Giemsa stain (1:10 in WEISE's buffer12 pH 6.8), washed in buffer and left to air-dry. Permanent slides were made using CONSUL MOUNT mountant after clearing in xylene.
NUMBER OF METAPHASE SPREADS ANALYSED PER DOSE (if in vitro cytogenicity study in mammalian cells):
For each culture (duplicate) 150 metaphases were examined, yielding a total of 300 metaphases for each concentration analysed.
DETERMINATION OF CYTOTOXICITY
- Method: mitotic index
- Any supplementary information relevant to cytotoxicity:To examine the toxicity of the test item, 1000 cells were scored and the mitotic index was calculated as the percentage of cells in metaphase. - Rationale for test conditions:
- Acceptance of the test was based on the following criteria:
o The concurrent negative control is considered acceptable for addition to the laboratory historical negative control database.
o Concurrent positive controls should induce responses that are compatible with those generated in the historical positive control data base and produce a statistically significant increase compared with the concurrent negative control.
o All three experimental conditions were tested unless one resulted in positive results (see paragraph 28 of the OECD 473).
o Adequate number of cells and concentrations are analysable (paragraphs 31 and 21 of the OECD 473).
o The criteria for the selection of top concentration are consistent with those described in paragraphs 22, 23 and 24 of the OECD 473.
o Both replicate cultures lead to similar results.
o Adequate numbers of cells (i.e. at least 1000 countable cells) and concentrations re-analyzable. - Evaluation criteria:
- The test item is judged to have mutagenic properties with respect to chromosomal or chromatid change, if the following criteria are fulfilled:
o The number of chromosomal aberrations is significantly (at p 0.05) increased compared with the solvent control in at least one of the test concentrations
o The increase observed is concentration-dependent
o The increase should not occur in the severely cytotoxic range (mitotic index <0.25), as it is known that high cytotoxicity causes artefacts in the form of aberrations in in vitro chromosomal aberration tests
o Any of the results are outside the distribution of the historical negative control data
o A reproducible increase in the number of cells with chromosomal aberrations
o All three experimental conditions were tested unless one resulted in positive results - Statistics:
- The assessment was carried out by a comparison of the number of chromosome aberrations of the samples with those of the solvent control, using the exact test of R. A. FISHER (p 0.05) as recommended by the UKEMS guidelines (1989).
Results and discussion
Test results
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- lymphocytes:
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not determined
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not examined
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no mutagenic potential (based on QSAR/QSPR prediction)
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- Under the present test conditions, Diisononyl 1 ,4-cyclohexanedicarboxylate (DINCD) tested up to a concentration of 2000 μg /ml medium in the absence and
presence of metabolic activation, revealed no indications of mutagenic properties with respect to chromosomal or chromatid damage.
In the same test, Mitomycin C and cyclophosphamide induced significant damages, which confirmed the validity of this assay .
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.