NITE - Chemical Management Field

Latest GHS Classification Results by the Japanese Government (edited by NITE)

GENERAL INFORMATION

Item	Information
CAS RN	212201-70-2
Chemical Name	1-(2,4-Dichlorophenyl)-N-(2,4-difluorophenyl)-N-isopropyl-5-oxo-1,5-dihydro-4H-1,2,4-triazole-4-carboxamide; Ipfencarbazone
Substance ID	m-nite-212201-70-2_v1
Download of Excel format	Excel file

REFERENCE INFORMATION

Item	Information
Guidance used for the classification (External link)	To Guidance List
UN GHS document (External link)	To UN GHS document
FAQ（GHS classification results by the Japanese Government）	To FAQ
List of Information Sources (Excel file)	List of Information Sources
List of Definitions/Abbreviations	Definitions/Abbreviations
Sample Label by MHLW (External link)
Sample SDS by MHLW (External link)
OECD/eChemPortal (External link)	To OECD/eChemPortal (External link)

PHYSICAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
1	Explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
2	Flammable gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
3	Aerosols	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Not aerosol products.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
4	Oxidizing gases	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
5	Gases under pressure	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
6	Flammable liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
7	Flammable solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
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.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
9	Pyrophoric liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
10	Pyrophoric solids	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	No data available.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
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.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
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).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
13	Oxidizing liquids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Solid (GHS definition)	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
14	Oxidizing solids	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	The substance is an organic compound containing fluorine, chlorine, and oxygen, which are chemically bonded only to carbon or hydrogen.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
15	Organic peroxides	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	Organic compounds containing no bivalent -O-O- structure in the molecule.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
16	Corrosive to metals	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	Classification is not possible because test methods applicable to solid substances are not available.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
17	Desensitized explosives	Not classified (Not applicable)	- -	-	-	There are no chemical groups associated with explosive properties present in the molecule.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))

HEALTH HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
1	Acute toxicity (Oral)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: > 2,000 mg/kg (GLP) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012))	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Dermal)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) LD50 for rats: > 2,000 mg/kg (GLP) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012))	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Solid (GHS definition). It was classified as "Not classified."	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours)	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
1	Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists)	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) LC50 for rats (4 hours): > 5.9 mg/L (GLP) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012))	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
2	Skin corrosion/irritation	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] It was classified as "Not classified" from (1). [Evidence Data] (1) In a skin irritation test with rabbits (n = 3) (GLP, semi-occlusive, 4-hour application, 72-hour observation), no erythema/eschar, edema, or other irritation changes were observed (erythema/eschar score: 0/0/0, edema score: 0/0/0) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
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) (GLP, 72-hour observation), irritation changes were observed only in the conjunctiva in the unwashed eye group (3 animals) but were fully reversible within 24 hours (in 3 in the unwashed eye group: corneal opacity score: 0/0/0, iritis score: 0/0/0, conjunctival redness score: 0/0/0, chemosis score: 0/0/0) (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
4	Respiratory sensitization	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
4	Skin sensitization	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] A positive rate did not reach 30% in (1), and it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) It is reported that in a maximization test with guinea pigs (n = 20) (GLP, intradermal administration: 2.5% suspension), a positive rate was 25% (5/20), 15% (3/20) at 24, 48 hours after a challenge (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
5	Germ cell mutagenicity	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (4), it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) In a micronucleus test using the bone marrow cells of mice (GLP, oral administrations), negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (2) In a comet assay of the urinary bladder of rats (oral administration, 2 days), negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (3) In a bacterial reverse mutation test (GLP), negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). (4) In a mammalian cell chromosome aberration test (GLP), negative results were obtained (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). [Reference Data, etc.] (5) Based on the test results, a mutagenic potential was not found in this substance (J. Pestic. Sci., 41(3), 111-119 (2016)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
6	Carcinogenicity	Category 1B	Danger	H350	P308+P313 P201 P202 P280 P405 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) and (2), it was classified in Category 1B. It was negative in the test with mice, but the incidence of tumors of the urinary bladder was observed at a high frequency with rats. [Evidence Data] (1) In a 2-year carcinogenicity study with rats (GLP, dosed by feeding), in male/female groups at the maximum dose, a significant increase in the incidence frequency of transitional cell papilloma (28/50 (male), 16/50 (female)) and transitional cell carcinoma (26/50 (male), 39/50 (female)) of the urinary bladder were observed. Meanwhile, interstitial cell tumors, which were observed in the testis at or above the mid-dose, were commonly occurring tumors for the strain of rats used, and based on the background data of the testing laboratory, it was considered to be an accidental change due to a low incidence frequency in the control group (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). (2) In an 18-month carcinogenicity study with mice (GLP, dosed by feeding), no increase in the incidence frequency of neoplastic lesions associated with the administration was observed. The carcinogenicity was not observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
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 (GLP), at 30 ppm, an increase in extramedullary hematopoiesis of the spleen (P and F1 male), congestion and brown pigment deposit of the spleen (P female and F1 male/female), increases in absolute and relative weight of the spleen, and an increase in hematopoiesis of the bone marrow (sternum and femur) (F1 female) were observed in parent animals; and an increase in extramedullary hematopoiesis of the spleen (F1 male) was observed in offspring, but no effect on reproductive ability was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). (2) It was reported that in a developmental toxicity study with rats dosed by gavage (GLP, days 6 to 19 of gestation), at 300 mg/kg/day, weight gain inhibition, a decrease in food consumption, and an enlargement and darkening of the spleen were observed in parent animals; and an increase in the number of fetuses with skeletal variations was observed in offspring, but since there was no significant difference in the incidence frequency per dam, it was not considered to be treatment-related effect. It was reported that teratogenicity was not observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)). (3) It was reported that in a developmental toxicity study with rabbits dosed by gavage (GLP, days 6 to 27 of gestation), at 15 mg/kg/day, a decrease in food consumption, weight gain inhibition, and darkening of the spleen were observed in parent animals; and low body weight was observed in offspring, but teratogenicity was not observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012), A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
8	Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure	Not classified	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (4), in any of the oral, dermal, and inhalation routes, no specific target organ toxicity was observed within the dose range for Category 1 or Category 2, and it was classified as "Not classified." [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with rats (GLP), at 2,000 mg/kg (within the range for Category 2), there was no death, and loose stool and soiled fur around the anus were observed in males (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (2) It was reported that in an acute oral toxicity test with mice (GLP), at 2,000 mg/kg (within the range for Category 2), enlargements of the liver and the spleen were observed in 1/6 cases (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (3) It was reported that in an acute dermal toxicity test with rats (GLP), at 2,000 mg/kg (within the range for Category 2), neither death nor appearance of symptoms was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (4) It was reported that in an acute inhalation (dust) exposure test with rats (GLP, 4 hours), at 5.9 mg/L (in the range corresponding to "Not classified"), neither death nor appearance of symptoms was observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, (2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
9	Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure	Category 1 (blood system, liver, urinary bladder)	Danger	H372	P260 P264 P270 P314 P501	[Rationale for the Classification] Based on (1) to (5), it was classified in Category 1 (blood system, liver, urinary bladder). The kidney was excluded because only pigment deposit and the progress of chronic nephrosis due to aging were observed. [Evidence Data] (1) It was reported that in a 90-day oral toxicity test with rats dosed by feeding, at 10 to 100 ppm (0.592 to 5.97 mg/kg/day (male), 0.664 to 6.69 mg/kg/day (female), within the range for Category 1), effects on the blood (decreases in red blood cell count (RBC)/Hb/Ht, an increase in reticulocytes, leukocyte count and platelet count, an increase in methemoglobin, etc.) were observed, and an increase in hematopoiesis of the bone marrow and findings of the spleen (congestion, hemosiderin deposit, an increase in extramedullary hematopoiesis), which were considered to be associated with the above effects on the blood, and slight effects on the liver (centrilobular hypertrophy of the hepatocytes) were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (2) It was reported that in a 90-day oral toxicity test with dogs dosed by feeding, at 30 to 300 ppm (0.792 to 7.79 mg/kg/day (male), 0.789 to 8.09 mg/kg/day, within the range for Category 1), in addition to the effects on the blood, which were the same as in the test in (1) (additional findings: APTT shortening, Heinz body), effects on the liver (additional: centrilobular acidophilic change of the hepatocytes, hemosiderin deposit of the Kupffer cells and lipofuscin deposit of the hepatocytes, increases in ALP/ALT/GGT (mainly in males), etc.) were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (3) It was reported that in a 1-year chronic toxicity study with rats dosed by feeding, at 30 to 100 ppm (1.29 to 4.4 mg/kg/day (male), 1.61 to 5.59 mg/kg/day (female), within the range for Category 1), in addition to the effects on the blood, which were the same as in the test in (1) (additional: APTT/PT extension), the findings of the liver (increases in absolute and relative weight, centrilobular hypertrophy/fatty changes of the hepatocytes (female only), altered hepatocellular foci (acidophilic cells/basophilic cells), etc.), the kidney (increases in absolute/relative weight, lipofuscin deposit of the proximal tubules), the urinary bladder (single cell necrosis/apoptosis of mucosa epithelial cells and mucosa epithelium hyperplasia), etc. were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (4) It was reported that in a 2-year carcinogenicity study with rats dosed by feeding, at 30 to 200 ppm (1.09 to 7.44 mg/kg/day (male), 1.4 to 9.67 mg/kg/day (female), within the range for Category 1), as non-neoplastic lesions, effects on the blood, liver, kidney (additional: an increase in the frequency of chronic nephrosis), urinary bladder, etc., which were the same as in the test in (3), were observed (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). (5) It was reported that in a 1-year chronic toxicity study with dogs dosed by feeding, at 30 to 100 ppm (0.819 to 2.72 mg/kg/day (male), 0.818 to 2.55 mg/kg/day (female), within the range for Category 1), the findings of the blood and liver, which were the same in the tests in (1) to (3), were observed, and in addition, a weight increase and hypertrophy of the follicular cells in the thyroid were observed in females (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)). [Reference Data, etc.] (6) It was reported that in an 18-month carcinogenicity study with mice dosed by feeding, at 100 ppm (11.6 mg/kg/day (male), 10.7 mg/kg/day (female), within the range for Category 2), the findings, which were the same as in the carcinogenicity study with rats in (4), were observed in the liver, spleen, bone marrow, and urinary bladder (Risk Assessment Report (Pesticides) (Food Safety Commission of Japan, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
10	Aspiration hazard	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	[Rationale for the Classification] Classification not possible due to lack of data.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

Hazard class		Classification	Pictogram Signal word	Hazard statement (code)	Precautionary statement (code)	Rationale for the classification	Classification year (FY)	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government
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 = 0.022 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
11	Hazardous to the aquatic environment Long term (Chronic)	Category 1	Warning	H410	P273 P391 P501	It was classified in Category 1 because it is not rapidly degradable (BIOWIN) and due to 72-hour NOErC = 0.00877 mg/L for algae (Raphidocelis subcapitata) (A pesticide abstract and evaluation report (Food and Agricultural Materials Inspection Center, 2012)).	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))
12	Hazardous to the ozone layer	Classification not possible	- -	-	-	This substance is not listed in the Annexes to the Montreal Protocol.	FY2020	GHS Classification Guidance for the Japanese Government (FY2019 revised edition (Ver. 2.0))

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