NITE - Chemical Management Field

GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	22936-75-0
Chemical Name	N-(1,2-Dimethylpropyl)-N'-ethyl-6-(methylthio)-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diamine; Dimethametryn
Substance ID	R02-A-029-METI, MOE
Classification year (FY)	FY2020
Ministry who conducted the classification	Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI)/Ministry of the Environment (MOE)
New/Revised	New
Classification result in other fiscal year
Download of Excel format	Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION

Item	Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
UN GHS document (External link)	UN GHS document
Definitions/Abbreviations (Excel file)	Definitions/Abbreviations
Model Label by MHLW (External link)
Model SDS by MHLW (External link)
OECD/eChemPortal (External link)	eChemPortal

PHYSICAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification
1	Explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
7	Flammable solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.
8	Self-reactive substances and mixtures	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups present in the molecule associated with explosive or self-reactive properties.
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
10	Pyrophoric solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.
11	Self-heating substances and mixtures	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible because test methods applicable to solid (melting point <= 140 deg C) substances are not available.
12	Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The chemical structure of the substance does not contain metals or metalloids (B, Si, P, Ge, As, Se, Sn, Sb, Te, Bi, Po, At).
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no oxygen, fluorine or chlorine.
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule.
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible because test methods applicable to solid substances are not available.
17	Desensitized explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.

HEALTH HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification
1	Acute toxicity (Oral)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1) - (4). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats (males): about 2,560 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)) (2) LD50 for rats (females): about 2,120 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)) (2) LD50 for rats (males): about 2,240 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)) (4) LD50 for rats (females): about 1,980 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1), (2). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: > 2,000 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)) (2) LD50 for rats: > 5,000 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Solid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in a skin irritation test with rabbits (n = 6) (24-hour application, 48-hour observation), no irritation changes were seen in any animal when patches were removed and after 48 hours (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
3	Serious eye damage/eye irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in an eye irritation test with rabbits (n = 6), no irritation changes in the cornea and iris were seen in the unwashed eye group (3 animals), which showed irritation changes in the conjunctiva by 3 days after application but recovered at 4 days after application (The mean score at 24/48/72 hours after application (maximum 110): 6.7, 6.7, 2) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.
4	Skin sensitization	Category 1B	Warning	H317	P302+P352 P333+P313 P362+P364 P261 P272 P280 P321 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified in Category 1B from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in a maximization test with guinea pigs (n = 20) (GLP, intradermal administration: 5% solution), a positive rate was 60% (12/20) at both 24, 48 hours after challenge (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (5), it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) In a chromosomal aberration test using CHL/IU cells, positive results (S9+: high concentrations that were cytotoxic) were obtained. But they were observed at concentrations that exhibited cytotoxicity, and in an in vivo micronucleus test that was conducted at up to the maximum tolerated dose, negative results were obtained. Therefore, this substance was considered not to have a genotoxicity that might become a problem for a living body (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (2) In a bacterial reverse mutation test, negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (3) In a micronucleus test with CHL cells, negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (4) In an in vivo/vitro reverse mutation (host-mediated) test with mice, negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (5) In a DNA repair test using bacteria, negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 2	Warning	H351	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (3), it was classified in Category 2. The oncogenicity of this substance in male rats could not be denied, but there was no evidence of carcinogenicity in female rats and male and female mice. [Evidence Data] (1) There were no classification results by domestic and international carcinogenicity organizations. (2) In a two-year combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study with rats, an increase in adenomas in the exocrine pancreas was observed in males at the middle and high doses and an increase in the incidence of benign tumors in the testicular interstitial cells was observed in the high-dose groups (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (3) In an 18-month carcinogenicity study with mice, no carcinogenicity was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). [Reference Data, etc.] (4) Concerning the mechanism of an increase in pancreatic and testicular tumors, multiple tests were conducted. In any of the tests, carcinogenic mechanism could not be identified, but concerning the increase in pancreatic tumors, the result of a medium-term test on carcinogenicity in the pancreatic exocrine gland suggested that the administration of this substance could act as a promotor in the pancreas of rats (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)).
7	Reproductive toxicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (3), it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in a two-generation reproduction toxicity study with rats dosed by feeding, no effects on fertility were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (2) It was reported that in a developmental toxicity study with rats dosed by gavage, at 50 mg/kg/day, salivation was observed in parental animals and an increased incidence of the lumbar ribs was observed in pups, but no teratogenicity was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (3) It was reported that in a developmental toxicity study with rabbits dosed by gavage, at 90 mg/kg/day, lower body weight and delays in the ossification of the fore- and hind-limb phalanges were observed in pups, but no teratogenicity was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Category 2 (nervous system)	Warning	H371	P308+P311 P260 P264 P270 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (4), generalized convulsions, etc. were observed. Therefore, it was classified in Category 2 (nervous system). [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with rats, deaths, reduced spontaneous activity, decreased muscle tone, hypodynamia, prone position, hyposthenia, recumbency, palpebral closure, lacrimation, salivation, and incontinence were observed at or above 2,000 mg/kg (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). (2) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with rats, vomiting, salivation, lacrimation, slight generalized convulsions, and reduced motility were observed at or above 1,500 mg/kg (males) and 1,300 mg/kg (females) (within the range for Category 2), and deaths occurred at or above 1,500 mg/kg both in males and females (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (3) It was reported that in an acute dermal toxicity test with rats, slight epistaxis was observed at 5,000 mg/kg (in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)). (4) It was reported that in an acute dermal toxicity test with rats, no effects were observed at 2,000 mg/kg (within the range for Category 2) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011)).
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 2 (liver, kidney, blood system)	Warning	H373	P260 P314 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (3), it was classified in Category 2 (liver, kidney, blood system). [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in a two-year combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study with rats dosed by feeding, decreased food consumption, increases in absolute and relative pancreas weight (males), hepatic lipofuscinosis (females), and kidney effects (deposition of pigments including hemosiderin in the renal tubules, chronic progressive nephropathy) (females) were observed at or above 250 ppm (9.2 mg/kg/day (males), 10.8 mg/kg/day (females), within the range for Categories 1 and 2); and hematological effects (increases in RBC, Hb, Ht, ALP), liver effects (an increase in relative weight, lipofuscinosis, increases in hepatic cysts and choledochal cyst), kidney effects (small abscess, deposition of pigments including hemosiderin in the renal tubules (males), renal tubular atrophy, renal pelvis epithelial hyperplasia), deposition of ceroid in the adrenal gland (females), accumulation of alveolar foamy cells, gastric gland dilation, vacuolation of the pancreatic exocrine gland, hyperplasia of testicular interstitial cells (males) and spleen effects (an increase in relative weight, hemosiderosis) were observed at 2,500 ppm (112 mg/kg/day (males), 132 mg/kg/day (females), in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (2) It was reported that in a one-year oral toxicity test with dogs dosed by feeding, decreased food consumption, hematological effects (decreases in RBC, Hb, Ht, HDW and MCHC, an increase in MCV, shortened PT, decreases in TP and Alb), a decrease in Chol, phospholipid and calcium, increased chlorine, liver effects (an increase in relative weight, increases in AST, ALT and ALP, necrosis of cells, bile duct fibrosis, pigmentation of Kupffer cells (hemosiderin), inflammatory cell infiltration), kidney effects (an increase in relative weight, pigmentation of tubular epithelial cells), aggressive behavior, salivation, tremors, threat behavior, chewing behavior, an increase in GGT, decreases in urea and Glu were observed at 3,500 ppm (98 mg/kg/day (males), 104 mg/kg/day (females), within the range for Category 2) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). (3) It was reported that in an 18-month combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study with mice dosed by feeding, an increased deposition of hemosiderin in the spleen (females) was observed at or above 300 ppm (34.6 mg/kg/day (males), 31.6 mg/kg/day (females), within the range for Category 2); and liver effects (an increase in relative weight), hematological effects (decreases in RBC, Hb and Ht), spleen effects (an increased deposition of hemosiderin (males), extramedullary hematopoiesis), adrenal effects (extramedullary hematopoiesis), and increases of inflammatory polyps in the uterus were observed at 3,000 ppm (378 mg/kg/day (males), 370 mg/kg/day (females), in the range corresponding to "Not classified") (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2011), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Short term (Acute)	Category 1	Warning	H400	P273 P391 P501	It was classified in Category 1 from 72-hour ErC50 = 0.0124 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)).
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	If chronic toxicity data are used, then it is classified in Category 1 because it is not rapidly degradable (BIOWIN) and due to 72-hour NOErC = 0.0055 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). If acute toxicity data are used for a trophic level for which chronic toxicity data are not obtained, then it is classified in Category 2 because it is not rapidly degradable (BIOWIN) and due to 96-hour LC50 = 4.45 mg/L for fish (Cyprinus carpio) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2013)). By drawing a comparison between the above results, it was classified in Category 1.
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.

NOTE:

GHS Classification Result by the Japanese Government is intended to provide a reference for preparing a GHS label or SDS for users. To include the same classification result in a label or SDS for Japan is NOT mandatory.
Users can cite or copy this classification result when preparing a GHS label or SDS. Please be aware, however, that the responsibility for a label or SDS prepared by citing or copying this classification result lies with users.
This GHS classification was conducted based on the information sources and the guidance for classification and judgement which are described in the GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government etc. Using other literature, test results etc. as evidence and including different content from this classification result in a label or SDS are allowed.
Hazard statement and precautionary statement will show by hovering the mouse cursor over a code in the column of "Hazard statement" and "Precautionary statement," respectively. In the excel file, both the codes and statements are provided.
A blank or "-" in the column of "Classification" denotes that a classification for the hazard class was not conducted in the year.
An asterisk “*” in the column of “Classification” denotes that “Not classified (or No applicable)” and/or “Classification not possible” is applicable. Details are described in the column of “Rationale for the classification”. If no English translation is available for “Rationale for the classification,” please refer to the Japanese version of the results.

To GHS Information