27.12.2012 Views

Environmental Profiles of Chemical Flame-Retardant Alternatives for

Environmental Profiles of Chemical Flame-Retardant Alternatives for

Environmental Profiles of Chemical Flame-Retardant Alternatives for

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Aquatic Organism Toxicity<br />

Ecotoxicity<br />

Acute Toxicity to Freshwater and Marine Fish (OPPTS Harmonized Guideline 850.1075;<br />

OECD Guideline 203)<br />

Conclusion:<br />

The available acute toxicity data <strong>for</strong> freshwater fish (cold- and warm-water species) and<br />

saltwater fish were judged inadequate to meet the endpoint. The available acute fish toxicity<br />

studies are summarized in Table 3-1. However, if the results <strong>of</strong> the SafePharm study (1993a),<br />

cited by IPCS (1998) (see below), are confirmed independently, the acute toxicity data <strong>for</strong> cold<br />

freshwater fish species might meet the endpoint given the high degree <strong>of</strong> agreement <strong>of</strong> the two<br />

available studies in rainbow trout.<br />

Basis <strong>for</strong> Conclusion:<br />

Freshwater Fish<br />

Ahrens et al. (1979) tested the toxicity to goldfish (Carassius auratus) <strong>of</strong> tris (1,3-dichloro-2propyl)<br />

phosphate (TDCPP) released from fabric treated with the flame retardant. Laundered or<br />

unlaundered sections <strong>of</strong> garment that had been treated with Fyrol FR-2, were placed in tanks<br />

with six goldfish. Fish in the tank with the unlaundered section became sluggish and all died<br />

within 3 hours. The concentration <strong>of</strong> Fyrol FR-2 in the test water reached 30 mg/L. Fish<br />

exposed <strong>for</strong> 96 hours to the laundered section <strong>of</strong> garment did not exhibit signs <strong>of</strong> toxicity. In<br />

another study, TDCPP in water at 1 mg/L was not toxic to goldfish after 168 hours, but 5 mg/L<br />

<strong>of</strong> TDCPP killed all (6/6) goldfish within 24 hours (Eldefrawi et al., 1977). The studies by<br />

Ahrens et al. (1979) and Eldefrawi et al. (1977) did not evaluate toxicity using a range <strong>of</strong><br />

concentrations <strong>of</strong> TDCPP in water and, thus, cannot be used to derive an LC 50.<br />

Sasaki et al. (1981) estimated that the 96-hour LC 50 values <strong>for</strong> killifish (Oryzias latipes) and<br />

goldfish were 3.6 mg/L and 5.1 mg/L, respectively. It appears that mortality was not evaluated<br />

in a control group <strong>of</strong> fish. It is unclear if the TDCPP concentrations in water reported by Sasaki<br />

et al. (1981) are measured or nominal values. The latter point is important because a parallel<br />

study indicated that the amount <strong>of</strong> TDCPP added to test water declines rapidly and less than 40%<br />

<strong>of</strong> the original amount <strong>of</strong> TDCPP remains in the test water after 96 hours (Sasaki et al., 1981).<br />

Thus, the lethal concentrations <strong>of</strong> TDCPP could be lower than the reported LC 50 values.<br />

Sasaki et al. (1981) reported de<strong>for</strong>mation <strong>of</strong> the spine in 7/10 killifish exposed to 3.5 mg/L<br />

TDCPP <strong>for</strong> 24 hours. However, Sasaki et al. (1981) do not provide sufficient in<strong>for</strong>mation<br />

regarding the spine de<strong>for</strong>mation in killifish to make meaningful use <strong>of</strong> these observations. It is<br />

unclear whether the de<strong>for</strong>mations were observed in the acute toxicity study or in a separate assay<br />

using killifish only. It appears that de<strong>for</strong>mation was tested at only one concentration and a<br />

control group <strong>of</strong> fish was not evaluated.<br />

3-28

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!