Registration Dossier

Administrative data

Endpoint:
in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
Type of information:
(Q)SAR
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
results derived from a valid (Q)SAR model and falling into its applicability domain, with adequate and reliable documentation / justification

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2020
Report Date:
2020

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
other: QSAR

Test material

Reference
Name:
Unnamed
Type:
Constituent

Results and discussion

Remarks on result:
no mutagenic potential (based on QSAR/QSPR prediction)

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
In summary, we applied two Ames Test prediction models, ACD/TOX Ames Test and DS/TOPKAT Ames test QSTR model, for predicting the Ames test result of the compound 3,7,11,15-tetramethylhexadec-2-en-1-ol. Both prediction models suggested that the compound would have a positive Ames test result in a very low possibility. Based on model predictions in combination with the literature-reported Ames test result of similar compound Citronellol, it was predicted that the compound would have a negative result in bacterial reverse mutation test (Ames Test ) in a high possibility.