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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 233-823-0 | CAS number: 10377-52-3
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From 2009-10-19 to 2009-11-03
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 010
- Report date:
- 2010
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- UK GLP standards (Schedule 1, Good Laboratory Practice Regulations 1999 (SI 1999/3106 as amended by SI 2004/0994)). These Regulations are in accordance with GLP standards published as OECD Principles on Good Laboratory Practice (revised 1997, ENV/MC/CHEM
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Sodium dihydrogenorthophosphate
- EC Number:
- 231-449-2
- EC Name:
- Sodium dihydrogenorthophosphate
- Cas Number:
- 7558-80-7
- Molecular formula:
- H3O4P.Na
- IUPAC Name:
- sodium dihydrogen phosphate
- Test material form:
- solid: granular
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- SOURCE OF TEST MATERIAL
- Lot/batch No.of test material: 444/09
STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: room temperature in the dark over silica gel
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- other: CBA/Ca (CBA/CaOlaHsd)
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source:
Female CBA/Ca (CBA/CaOlaHsd) strain mice were supplied by Harlan UK Limited, Bicester, Oxon, UK.
- Age at study initiation:
At the start of the study the animals were eight to twelve weeks old.
- Weight at study initiation:
At the start of the study the animals were in the weight range of 15 to 23 g.
- Housing:
The animals were individually housed in suspended solid-floor polypropylene cages furnished with softwood woodflakes.
- Diet:
ad libitum (2014 Teklad Global Rodent diet supplied by Harlan Teklad, Blackthorn, Bicester, Oxon, UK)
- Water:
ad libitum.
- Acclimation period:
At least five days.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C):
The temperature was controlled to remain within the target ranges of 19 to 25 °C.
- Humidity (%):
The humidity was controlled to remain within the target ranges of 30 to 70%.
- Air changes (per hr):
The rate of air exchange was approximately fifteen changes per hour.
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light):
The lighting was controlled by a time switch to give twelve hours continuous light (06:00 to 18:00) and twelve hours darkness.
IN-LIFE DATES:
From: Day 1 To: Day 6
Study design: in vivo (LLNA)
- Vehicle:
- propylene glycol
- Remarks:
- Please see below for Vehicle Determination Record
- Concentration:
- Each group was exposed to concentrations of 10%, 5% or 2.5% w/w (in propylene glycol)
- No. of animals per dose:
- Groups of four mice were treated
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Using available information regarding the systemic toxicity/irritancy potential of the test material, a preliminary screening test was performed using one mouse. The mouse was treated by daily application of 25 µL of the undiluted test material to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2, 3). The mouse was observed twice daily on Days 1, 2 and 3 and once daily on Days 4, 5 and 6. Any signs of toxicity or excessive local irritation noted during this period were recorded. The bodyweight was recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and on Day 6.
- Lymph node proliferation response:
Clinical observations, bodyweight and mortality data are give in the results section (table 1).
No signs of systemic toxicity were noted.
Based on this information the dose levels selected for the main test were 2.5% , 5% and 10% w/w in propylene glycol.
MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- animals were selected at random and given a number unique within the study by indelible ink marking on the tail and a number written on a cage card
- Name of test method:
Local Lymph Node Assay in the Mouse. The assay has undergone extensive inter-laboratory validation and has been shown to reliably detect test materials that are moderate to strong sensitisers.
- Criteria used to consider a positive response:
The proliferation response of lymph node cells was expressed as the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute per lymph node(dpm/node) and as the ratio of 3HTdR incorporation in lymph node cells of test nodes relative to that recorded for the control nodes (stimulation Index).
The test material will be regarded as a sensitiser if at least one concentration of the test material results in a threefold or greater increase in 3HTdR incorporation compared to control values. Any test material failing to produce a threefold or greater increase in 3HTdR incorporation will be classified as a "non-sensitier".
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
For the purpose of the study, the test material was used undiluted and also freshly prepared in propylene glycol. This vehicle was chosen as it produced the most suitable formulation at the required concentration. The concentrations used are given above.
Test Material Administration:
Groups of four mice were treated with the test material at concentrations of 10%, 5% or 2.5% w/win propylene glycol. The preliminary screening test suggested that the test material would not produce systemic toxicity or excessive local irritation at the highest suitable concentration. The mice were treated by daily application of 25 µL of the appropriate concentration of the test material to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2, 3). The test material formulation was administered using an automatic micropipette and spread over the dorsal surface of the ear using the tip of the pipette.
A further group of four mice received the vehicle alone in the same manner.
3H-Methyl Thymidine Administration:
Five days following the first topical application of the test material (Day 6) all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250 µL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 3H-methyl thymidine (3HTdR: 80 µCi/ml, specific activity 2.0 Ci/mmol, GE Healthcare UK Ltd) giving a total of 20 µCi to each mouse. - Positive control substance(s):
- other: Phenylacetaldehyde (90%)
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- One group of five animals was treated with 50 µL (25 µL per ear) of Phenylacetaldehyde (90%) as a solution in propylene glycol at a concentration of 2.5% v/v. A further group of five animals was treated with propylene glycol only.
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for the treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows:
Concentration % v/v in acetone/olive oil 4:1 Stimulation Index (SI) Result
15 10.91 Positive
Alpha-Hexylcinnamaldehyde, Tech 85% was considered to be a sensitiser under the conditions of the test.
In vivo (LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.31
- Test group / Remarks:
- 2.5% test material
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.01
- Test group / Remarks:
- 5% test material
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.05
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10% test material
Any other information on results incl. tables
Preliminary Screening Test
Clinical observations, bodyweight and mortality data are given in Table 1.
No signs of systemic toxicity were noted.
Based on this information the dose levels selected for the main test were 10%, 5% and 2.5% w/w in propylene glycol.
Table1 Clinical Observations, Bodyweight and Mortality Data – Preliminary Screening Test
Concentration (%w/w) in |
Animal Number |
Bodyweight (g) |
Day |
|||||||||
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
|||||||
Day 1 |
Day 6 |
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
|||||
10 |
S-1 |
19 |
19 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0= No signs of systemic toxicity
Main Test
Estimation of the Proliferative Response of Lymph Node Cells
The radioactive disintegrations per minute per lymph node and the stimulation index are given in Table 2.
Table2 Disintegrations per Minute, Disintegrations per Minute/Node and Stimulation Index
Concentration |
dpm |
dpm/Nodea |
Stimulation Indexb |
Result |
Vehicle |
5155.29 |
644.41 |
na |
na |
2.5 |
6770.88 |
846.36 |
1.31 |
Negative |
5 |
5203.17 |
650.40 |
1.01 |
Negative |
10 |
5413.31 |
676.66 |
1.05 |
Negative |
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for each treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows:
Concentration (%w/w) in |
Stimulation Index |
Result |
2.5 |
1.31 |
Negative |
5 |
1.01 |
Negative |
10 |
1.05 |
Negative |
Clinical Observations and Mortality Data
Individual clinical observations and mortality data for test and control animals are given in Table 3.
There were no deaths. No signs of systemic toxicity were noted in the test or control animals during the test.
Table3 Individual Clinical Observations and Mortality Data
Concentration |
Animal Number |
Day 1 |
Day 2 |
Day 3 |
Day 4 |
Day 5 |
Day 6 |
|||
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
Pre-Dose |
Post Dose |
|||||
Vehicle |
1-1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1-2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1-3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1-4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2.5 |
2-1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2-2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2-3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
2-4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
5 |
3-1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3-2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
3-3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
3-4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
10 |
4-1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4-2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
4-3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
4-4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0= No signs of systemic toxicity
Bodyweight
Individual bodyweights and bodyweight changes for test and control animals are given in Table 4.
Bodyweight changes of the test animals between Day 1 and Day 6 were comparable to those observed in the corresponding control group animals over the same period.
Table4 Individual Bodyweights and Bodyweight Changes
Concentration |
Animal Number |
Bodyweight (g) |
Bodyweight Change (g) |
|
Day 1 |
Day 6 |
|||
Vehicle |
1-1 |
19 |
21 |
2 |
1-2 |
18 |
18 |
0 |
|
1-3 |
21 |
20 |
-1 |
|
1-4 |
19 |
19 |
0 |
|
2.5 |
2-1 |
21 |
21 |
0 |
2-2 |
17 |
18 |
1 |
|
2-3 |
19 |
20 |
1 |
|
2-4 |
18 |
18 |
0 |
|
5 |
3-1 |
18 |
20 |
2 |
3-2 |
17 |
19 |
2 |
|
3-3 |
18 |
18 |
0 |
|
3-4 |
20 |
20 |
0 |
|
10 |
4-1 |
18 |
18 |
0 |
4-2 |
19 |
20 |
1 |
|
4-3 |
19 |
19 |
0 |
|
4-4 |
21 |
21 |
0 |
Please see attachment
"Appendix1 Current Positive Control Study for the
Local Lymph Node Assay”
Please see attachment "Appendix2 Summary of Positive Control Data for
the Local Lymph Node Assay”
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The test material was considered to be a non-sensitiser under the conditions of the test. The study is considered to be reliable and acceptable for use as a key study.
- Executive summary:
Introduction:
A study according to OECD Guideline 429 was performed to assess the skin sensitisation potential of the test material in the CBA/Ca strain mouse following topical application to the dorsal surface of the ear.
Methods:
Following a preliminary screening test in which no clinical signs of toxicity were noted at a concentration of 10% w/w, this concentration was selected as the highest dose investigated in the main test of the Local Lymph Node Assay. Three groups, each of four animals, were treated with 50 µL (25 µL per ear) of the test material as a suspension in propylene glycol at concentrations of 10 %, 5 % or 2.5 % w/w. A further group of four animals was treated with propylene glycol only.
Results:
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for each treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows:
Concentration (% w/w) in
propylene glycolStimulation Index
Result
2.5
1.31
Negative
5
1.01
Negative
10
1.05
Negative
Conclusion:
The test material was considered to be a non-sensitiser under the conditions of the test.
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.