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: 215-445-8 | CAS number: 1326-83-6 This substance is identified in the Colour Index by Colour Index Constitution Number, C.I. 53186.
- 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 gene mutation study in bacteria
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 21 June - 09 August, 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 471 (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- 21 July, 1997
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.13/14 (Mutagenicity - Reverse Mutation Test Using Bacteria)
- Version / remarks:
- 30 May, 2008
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.5100 - Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test (August 1998)
- Version / remarks:
- August, 1998
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: ICH Guidance S2(R1): Guidance on Genotoxicity Testing and Data Interpretation for Pharmaceuticals Intended for Human Use, June 2012
- Version / remarks:
- June 2012
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of assay:
- bacterial reverse mutation assay
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Phenol, 2,4-dinitro-, sulfurized, thiosulfonated
- EC Number:
- 215-445-8
- EC Name:
- Phenol, 2,4-dinitro-, sulfurized, thiosulfonated
- Cas Number:
- 1326-83-6
- Molecular formula:
- not applicable
- IUPAC Name:
- Reaction product of 2,4-dinitrophenol with polysulfide, thiosulfonated
- Test material form:
- solid: particulate/powder
- Details on test material:
- Test item: Solubilised Sulphur Black 1
Appearance: black powder
CAS No: 1326-83-6
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Date of production: 30.11.2016
Expiration date: 30.11.2021
Method
- Target gene:
- his/trp
In addition to histidine (his) or tryptophan (trp) mutation, each strain has additional mutations which enhance its sensitivity to mutagens. The uvrB (uvrA) strains are defective in excision repair. It causes the strains to be more sensitive to the mutagenic and lethal effects of a wide variety of mutagens because they cannot repair DNA damages. The rfa mutation increases the permeability of the bacterial lipopolysaccharide wall for larger molecules. The plasmid pKM101 (TA98, TA100) carries the muc+ gene which participates in the error-prone "SOS" DNA repair pathway induced by DNA damage. This plasmid also carries an ampicillin resistance transfer factor (R-factor) which is used to identify its presence in the cell. The Escherichia coli strain used in this test (WP2 uvrA) is also defective in DNA excision repair.
Species / strain
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 98, TA 100 and E. coli WP2
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- S9 mix of phenobarbital and β-naphthoflavone-induced rat liver
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- 5000, 1600, 500, 160, 50, and 16 µg/plate
Selection of the concentration range was done on the basis of a solubility test and a concentration range finding test (informatory toxicity test). - Vehicle / solvent:
- - Solvents used: ultrapure water (ASTM Type I), Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)
- Justification for choice of solvent: In the study two types of solvent control were used depending on the solubility of the test item and the solubility of positive control reference items.
Controlsopen allclose all
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: 4-Nitro-1,2-phenylenediamine
- Remarks:
- TA98, without S9 mix, 4 µg/plate
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- sodium azide
- Remarks:
- TA100 and TA1535, without S9 mix, 2 µg/plate
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- 9-aminoacridine
- Remarks:
- TA1537, without S9 mix, 50 µg/plate
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- methylmethanesulfonate
- Remarks:
- E.coli WP2, without S9 mix, 2 µL/plate
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- no
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: 2-Aminoanthracene
- Remarks:
- All tested Salmonella strains, with S9 mix, 2 µg/plate; E.coli WP2, with S9 mix, 50 µg/plate
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- METHOD OF APPLICATION: in agar (plate incorporation); preincubation
DURATION
- Preincubation period:
20 min
- Exposure duration:
48 h
NUMBER OF REPLICATIONS:
3
DETERMINATION OF CYTOTOXICITY
- Method: number of revertant colonies, background lawn growth - Rationale for test conditions:
- Based on the solubility test, a stock solution/suspension with a concentration of 50 mg/mL was prepared in ultrapure water (ASTM Type I) and diluted accordingly. In the informatory toxicity test a correction factor, based on the active component of the test item (80.2 %) was taken into consideration.
The revertant colony numbers and the inhibition of the background lawn of auxotrophic cells of two of the tester strains (Salmonella typhimurium TA98, TA100) were determined at the concentrations of 5000, 1600, 500, 160, 50, 16 and 5 µg/plate of the test item.
In the informatory toxicity test the revertant colony numbers of solvent control plates with and without S9 mix were in line with the corresponding historical control data ranges. The positive control treatments showed the expected biological relevant increases in induced revertant colonies in both tester strains. - Evaluation criteria:
- The colony numbers on the untreated, solvent control, positive control and the test item treated plates were determined visually by manual counting and the mean values, standard deviations, and the mutation rates were calculated:
* : untreated, solvent or positive control
A test item is considered mutagenic if:
- a dose–related increase in the number of revertants occurs and/or;
- a reproducible biologically relevant positive response for at least one of the dose groups occurs in at least one strain with or without metabolic activation.
An increase is considered biologically relevant if:
- in strain Salmonella typhimurium TA100 the number of reversions is at least twice as high as the reversion rate of the solvent control,
- in strain Salmonella typhimurium TA98, TA1535, TA1537 and Escherichia coli WP2 uvrA the number of reversions is at least three times higher than the reversion rate of the solvent control.
According to the guidelines, the biological relevance of the results is the criterion for the interpretation of results, a statistical evaluation of the results is not regarded as necessary.
Criteria for a negative response:
A test item is considered non-mutagenic if it produces neither a dose-related increase in the number of revertants nor a reproducible biologically relevant positive response at any of the dose groups, with or without metabolic activation. - Statistics:
- The mean values and appropriate standard deviations and mutation rates were calculated by EXCEL software.
Results and discussion
Test resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1535
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1537
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 98
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- E. coli WP2 uvr A
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- no cytotoxicity
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Additional information on results:
- TEST-SPECIFIC CONFOUNDING FACTORS
- Precipitation: No precipitation of the test item was observed on the plates in the examined bacterial strains at any examined concentration level (±S9 Mix) throughout the study.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Table 4: Summary Table of the Results of the Initial Mutation Test
Initial Mutation Test (Plate Incorporation Test) |
||||||||||||||||||||
Concentrations (mg/plate) |
Salmonella typhimuriumtester strains |
Escherichiacoli |
||||||||||||||||||
TA 98 |
TA 100 |
TA 1535 |
TA 1537 |
WP2 uvrA |
||||||||||||||||
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
|||||||||||
Mean values of revertants per plate Mutation rate (MR) |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Untreated Control |
21.0 |
1.03 |
26.0 |
1.18 |
93.7 |
1.05 |
96.7 |
1.13 |
8.3 |
0.89 |
11.3 |
0.87 |
7.0 |
0.81 |
8.3 |
1.09 |
26.7 |
1.00 |
25.7 |
0.99 |
DMSO Control |
22.7 |
1.00 |
24.3 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
88.3 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
8.7 |
1.00 |
8.3 |
1.00 |
8.0 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
34.7 |
1.00 |
Ultrapure Water Control |
20.3 |
1.00 |
22.0 |
1.00 |
89.0 |
1.00 |
85.7 |
1.00 |
9.3 |
1.00 |
13.0 |
1.00 |
8.7 |
1.00 |
7.7 |
1.00 |
26.7 |
1.00 |
26.0 |
1.00 |
5000 |
16.7 |
0.82 |
12.0 |
0.55 |
69.3 |
0.78 |
84.7 |
0.99 |
17.0 |
1.82 |
18.0 |
1.38 |
9.0 |
1.04 |
7.3 |
0.96 |
30.3 |
1.14 |
20.7 |
0.79 |
1600 |
15.3 |
0.75 |
14.0 |
0.64 |
77.7 |
0.87 |
82.0 |
0.96 |
8.0 |
0.86 |
9.7 |
0.74 |
11.0 |
1.27 |
10.3 |
1.35 |
25.0 |
0.94 |
20.3 |
0.78 |
500 |
17.0 |
0.84 |
15.3 |
0.70 |
80.0 |
0.90 |
89.7 |
1.05 |
8.7 |
0.93 |
10.3 |
0.79 |
7.7 |
0.88 |
9.3 |
1.22 |
29.3 |
1.10 |
21.0 |
0.81 |
160 |
16.3 |
0.80 |
23.3 |
1.06 |
72.3 |
0.81 |
90.0 |
1.05 |
7.3 |
0.79 |
11.0 |
0.85 |
9.3 |
1.08 |
6.3 |
0.83 |
30.7 |
1.15 |
26.3 |
1.01 |
50 |
17.3 |
0.85 |
29.0 |
1.32 |
72.3 |
0.81 |
83.3 |
0.97 |
10.7 |
1.14 |
14.0 |
1.08 |
11.7 |
1.35 |
6.7 |
0.87 |
28.0 |
1.05 |
28.3 |
1.09 |
16 |
18.0 |
0.89 |
25.7 |
1.17 |
80.3 |
0.90 |
94.0 |
1.10 |
8.3 |
0.89 |
11.7 |
0.90 |
6.7 |
0.77 |
6.0 |
0.78 |
27.0 |
1.01 |
32.0 |
1.23 |
NPD (4mg) |
306.0 |
13.50 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
SAZ (2mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
988.0 |
11.10 |
– |
– |
1428.0 |
153.00 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
9AA (50mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
209.0 |
25.08 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
MMS (2mL) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
810.7 |
30.40 |
– |
– |
2AA (2mg) |
– |
– |
1957.3 |
80.44 |
– |
– |
1001.3 |
11.34 |
– |
– |
222.3 |
25.65 |
– |
– |
191.3 |
23.92 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
2AA (50mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
202.0 |
5.83 |
MR:Mutation Rate; NPD:4-Nitro-1,2-phenylenediamine;SAZ: Sodium azide;9AA:9-Aminoacridine;MMS:Methyl methanesulfonate;2AA: 2-aminoanthracene
Remarks: Ultrapure water was applied as vehicle of the test item and the positive control substance: SAZ and MMS; the DMSO was applied as vehicle for positive control substances NPD, 9AA and 2AA. The mutation rate of the test item, SAZ, MMS and untreated control is given referring to the ultrapure water; the mutation rate of NPD, 9AA and 2AA is given referring to DMSO.
Table 5 : Summary Table of the Results of the Confirmatory Mutation Test
Confirmatory Mutation Test (Pre-Incubation Test) |
||||||||||||||||||||
Concentrations (mg/plate) |
Salmonella typhimuriumtester strains |
Escherichia coli |
||||||||||||||||||
TA 98 |
TA 100 |
TA 1535 |
TA 1537 |
WP2 uvrA |
||||||||||||||||
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
-S9 |
+S9 |
|||||||||||
Mean values of revertants per plate Mutation rate (MR) |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Mean |
MR |
Untreated Control |
18.3 |
1.31 |
20.7 |
1.09 |
82.7 |
1.06 |
102.3 |
1.07 |
15.0 |
1.05 |
12.3 |
1.00 |
7.0 |
1.40 |
9.0 |
0.93 |
29.3 |
0.75 |
32.7 |
0.82 |
DMSO Control |
14.7 |
1.00 |
20.0 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
92.0 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
14.7 |
1.00 |
6.0 |
1.00 |
8.7 |
1.00 |
– |
– |
37.3 |
1.00 |
Ultrapure Water Control |
14.0 |
1.00 |
19.0 |
1.00 |
77.7 |
1.00 |
95.7 |
1.00 |
14.3 |
1.00 |
12.3 |
1.00 |
5.0 |
1.00 |
9.7 |
1.00 |
39.3 |
1.00 |
40.0 |
1.00 |
5000 |
13.0 |
0.93 |
14.7 |
0.77 |
55.0 |
0.71 |
88.3 |
0.92 |
17.0 |
1.19 |
24.3 |
1.97 |
4.7 |
0.93 |
7.0 |
0.72 |
33.3 |
0.85 |
32.0 |
0.80 |
1600 |
12.3 |
0.88 |
17.0 |
0.89 |
77.7 |
1.00 |
80.7 |
0.84 |
15.7 |
1.09 |
13.3 |
1.08 |
6.0 |
1.20 |
8.7 |
0.90 |
28.0 |
0.71 |
36.0 |
0.90 |
500 |
13.7 |
0.98 |
21.7 |
1.14 |
72.0 |
0.93 |
78.3 |
0.82 |
12.0 |
0.84 |
11.3 |
0.92 |
5.0 |
1.00 |
10.3 |
1.07 |
34.0 |
0.86 |
30.3 |
0.76 |
160 |
15.3 |
1.10 |
21.3 |
1.12 |
77.3 |
1.00 |
79.3 |
0.83 |
10.7 |
0.74 |
12.7 |
1.03 |
6.7 |
1.33 |
10.7 |
1.10 |
46.3 |
1.18 |
40.3 |
1.01 |
50 |
15.3 |
1.10 |
23.7 |
1.25 |
68.3 |
0.88 |
89.7 |
0.94 |
10.3 |
0.72 |
14.7 |
1.19 |
5.0 |
1.00 |
10.7 |
1.10 |
38.0 |
0.97 |
33.7 |
0.84 |
16 |
17.7 |
1.26 |
31.3 |
1.65 |
74.7 |
0.96 |
100.7 |
1.05 |
11.7 |
0.81 |
13.3 |
1.08 |
5.0 |
1.00 |
7.3 |
0.76 |
32.0 |
0.81 |
48.0 |
1.20 |
NPD (4mg) |
304.0 |
20.73 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
SAZ (2mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
981.3 |
12.64 |
– |
– |
978.7 |
68.28 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
9AA (50mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
738.7 |
123.11 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
MMS (2mL) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
1544.0 |
39.25 |
– |
– |
2AA (2mg) |
– |
– |
1411.3 |
70.57 |
– |
– |
2442.7 |
26.55 |
– |
– |
234.0 |
15.95 |
– |
– |
209.7 |
24.19 |
– |
– |
– |
– |
2AA (50mg) |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
– |
249.7 |
6.69 |
MR:Mutation Rate; NPD:4-Nitro-1,2-phenylenediamine;SAZ: Sodium azide;9AA:9-Aminoacridine;MMS:Methyl methanesulfonate;2AA: 2-aminoanthracene
Remarks: Ultrapure water was applied as vehicle of the test item and the positive control substance: SAZ and MMS; the DMSO was applied as vehicle for positive control substances NPD, 9AA and 2AA. The mutation rate of the test item, SAZ, MMS and untreated control is given referring to the ultrapure water; the mutation rate of NPD, 9AA and 2AA is given referring to DMSO.
Table 6: Historical Control Values for Revertants/Plate (for the Period of 2008-2016)
|
Bacterial strains |
||||||
Historical control data of untreated control |
‑S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
Average |
21.0 |
105.0 |
10.5 |
8.1 |
25.4 |
||
SD |
3.7 |
25.7 |
1.4 |
2.3 |
5.2 |
||
Minimum |
9 |
66 |
3 |
2 |
11 |
||
Maximum |
39 |
155 |
23 |
19 |
45 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
||
+S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
|
Average |
27.5 |
117.1 |
11.8 |
9.0 |
33.9 |
||
SD |
4.3 |
18.1 |
1.4 |
1.9 |
5.2 |
||
Minimum |
12 |
75 |
4 |
2 |
17 |
||
Maximum |
46 |
166 |
23 |
20 |
56 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
||
|
Bacterial strains |
||||||
Historical control data of DMSO control |
‑S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
Average |
20.4 |
100.1 |
10.3 |
7.9 |
24.7 |
||
SD |
3.6 |
24.8 |
1.3 |
2.4 |
4.6 |
||
Minimum |
10 |
64 |
3 |
2 |
11 |
||
Maximum |
38 |
147 |
23 |
20 |
45 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
||
+S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
|
Average |
26.5 |
113.8 |
11.8 |
8.8 |
33.7 |
||
SD |
4.1 |
18.3 |
1.5 |
1.9 |
5.0 |
||
Minimum |
15 |
71 |
3 |
3 |
16 |
||
Maximum |
47 |
162 |
25 |
20 |
57 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
||
|
Bacterial strains |
||||||
Historical control data of Water control |
‑S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
Average |
21.9 |
104.7 |
10.5 |
7.6 |
26.1 |
||
SD |
3.7 |
25.9 |
1.5 |
2.2 |
5.5 |
||
Minimum |
12 |
68 |
3 |
2 |
12 |
||
Maximum |
35 |
154 |
24 |
16 |
48 |
||
n |
89 |
236 |
216 |
89 |
215 |
||
+S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
|
Average |
27.4 |
117.3 |
11.4 |
8.7 |
34.9 |
||
SD |
4.0 |
18.5 |
1.3 |
2.2 |
4.9 |
||
Minimum |
15 |
83 |
4 |
3 |
18 |
||
Maximum |
43 |
167 |
22 |
16 |
57 |
||
n |
89 |
152 |
149 |
89 |
148 |
|
Bacterial strains |
||||||
Historical control data of positive controls |
‑S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
Average |
260.1 |
977.2 |
847.3 |
478.6 |
724.5 |
||
SD |
31.8 |
150.6 |
126.3 |
104.5 |
65.0 |
||
Minimum |
123 |
521 |
359 |
110 |
320 |
||
Maximum |
664 |
1970 |
1855 |
1601 |
1313 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
||
+S9 |
|
TA98 |
TA100 |
TA1535 |
TA1537 |
E. coli |
|
Average |
1222.7 |
1436.4 |
164.1 |
147.0 |
257.7 |
||
SD |
274.9 |
318.3 |
33.1 |
20.1 |
72.5 |
||
Minimum |
386 |
583 |
85 |
69 |
140 |
||
Maximum |
2676 |
2988 |
498 |
399 |
477 |
||
n |
226 |
236 |
216 |
214 |
215 |
Abbreviations: TA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537: Salmonella typhimuriumTA98, TA100, TA1535, TA1537; E. coli:Escherichia coliWP2uvrA
SD: Standard deviation; DMSO: Dimethyl sulfoxide; n: number of studies
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Conclusions:
- In an in vitro bacterial reverse mutation assay (Ames) according to OECD guideline 471, the test item did not induce gene mutations by base pair changes or frameshifts in the genome of the strains used.
- Executive summary:
The test item was tested with regard to a potential mutagenic activity using the Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay (Ames) according to OECD guideline 471. The experiments were carried out using histidine-requiring auxotroph strains of Salmonella typhimurium (Salmonella typhimurium TA98, TA100, TA1535 and TA1537), and the tryptophan-requiring auxotroph strain of Escherichia coli (Escherichia coli WP2uvrA) in the presence and absence of a S9 mix prepared from livers of phenobarbital/beta-naphthoflavone-induced rats. The study included preliminary solubility test, preliminary concentration range finding test (informatory toxicity test), an initial mutation test (plate incorporation test), and a confirmatory mutation test (pre-incubation test). Based on the results of the solubility tests and the concentration range finding tests the test item was in ultrapure water (ASTM Type I). At the formulation of test item solutions correction of concentrations for active component content (80.2 % dyestuff) was made in the main experiments. Based on the results of the preliminary concentration range finding tests (informatory toxicity tests) the following concentrations of the test item (based on 97.4 % dyestuff) were prepared and investigated in the initial and confirmatory mutation tests: 5000, 1600, 500, 160, 50, and 16 µg/plate. No precipitation of the test item was observed on the plates in the examined bacterial strains at any examined concentration level (±S9 Mix) throughout the study. The test item did not show unequivocal inhibitory, cytotoxic effects in the performed experiments. The colony and background lawn development was not affected in any case; the obtained revertant colony number decreases (compared to the revertant colony numbers of the vehicle control) were considered to be within the biological variability range of the applied test system. The revertant colony numbers of solvent control (ultrapure water (ASTM Type I)) plates with and without S9 mix demonstrated the characteristic mean number of spontaneous revertants that was solved in line with the corresponding historical control data ranges. The reference mutagen treatments (positive controls) showed the expected biologically relevant increases (more than 3-fold increase) in induced revertant colonies and the number of revertants mostly fell in the corresponding historical control ranges, thereby meeting the criteria for the positive control in all experimental phases, in all tester strains.No biologically relevant increases were observed in revertant colony numbers of any of the five test strains following treatment with the test item at any concentration level, either in the presence or absence of metabolic activation (S9 mix) in the performed experiments.
The reported data of this mutagenicity assay show that under the experimental conditions applied, the test item did not induce gene mutations by base pair changes or frameshifts in the genome of the strains used.
In conclusion, the test has no mutagenic activity on the applied bacterium tester strains under the test conditions used in this study.
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.

EU Privacy Disclaimer
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our websites.