Registration Dossier

Toxicological information

Eye irritation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
Study period:
1946
Reliability:
4 (not assignable)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: see 'Remark'
Remarks:
The study did not meet current guideline requirements in regard to various aspects of data and reporting. For example study length, number of animals and observation period deviated from the guideline, the report was lacking in details on test material and test animals. It does however, add weight of evidence for eye irritation.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1951
Report date:
1951

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline followed
Principles of method if other than guideline:
An effect grade system was used for assessing corneal burns of rabbit eye.
GLP compliance:
not specified

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Trichloro(ethyl)silane
EC Number:
204-072-6
EC Name:
Trichloro(ethyl)silane
Cas Number:
115-21-9
Molecular formula:
C2H5Cl3Si
IUPAC Name:
trichloro(ethyl)silane
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Trichloroethylsilane

- Substance type: Chloro-Si

Test animals / tissue source

Species:
rabbit
Strain:
not specified

Test system

Vehicle:
not specified
Controls:
not specified
Duration of treatment / exposure:
No data.
Observation period (in vivo):
No data.
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
No data.

Results and discussion

In vivo

Results
Irritation parameter:
cornea opacity score
Basis:
other: not specified
Time point:
other: not specified
Remarks on result:
other: Grade 9.
Other effects:
None reported.

Any other information on results incl. tables

Grade 9 corneal burns.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
The test substance was designated Grade 9 in the rating system for corneal burns, as determined in a study which did not meet current guideline requirements as the report was lacking in details on test material and test animals. It does however, add weight of evidence for eye irritation.