OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATEINTRODUCTIONFOREWORD

Sodium sulfate
CAS N°: 7757-82-6

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

1OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

SIDS Initial Assessment Report
For
SIAM 20
Paris, France, 19 – 22 April 2005

1. Chemical Name:

Sodium sulfate

2. CAS Number:

7757-82-6

3. Sponsor Country:

Slovak RepublicContact Point:
Centre for Chemical Substances and Preparations, Bratislava
Contact Person:
Peter Rusnak, Ph.D.
Director
Czech RepublicContact Point:
Ministry of Environment
Contact Person:
Karel Bláha, Ph.D.
Director
Department of Environmental Risks
PragueSodium Sulfate Producers Association (SSPA)∗ and TOSOH

Co-sponsor Country:

4. Shared Partnership with:
5. Roles/Responsibilities of
the Partners:•

Name of industry sponsor/consortium

Sodium Sulfate Producers Association (SSPA)•

Process used

Documents were drafted by the consortium, then peer reviewed
by sponsor countries experts

6. Sponsorship History
How was the chemical or
category brought into theOECD HPV Chemicals
Programme?

Nominated by ICCA in the framework of the ICCA HPV
program

7. Review Process Prior to
the SIAM:

Two drafts were reviewed by the Slovakian/Czech authorities; third
draft subject to review by OECD membership

8. Quality check process:

Data was reviewed against the OECD criteria as describedin the SIDS manual. These criteria were used to select data
for extraction into the SIDS dossier. Original data was sought
wherever possible. Originally reported work was deemed reliable
if sufficient information was reported (according to the manual)to judge it robust. Reviews were only judged reliable if reported•

2

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

9. Date of Submission:

by reputable organisations/authorities or if partners had been directly
involved in their production
Deadline for circulation: 21 January 2005

10. Date of last Update:

13 January 2005

11. Comments:∗
The HPV dossier on Sodium sulphate was sponsored by the European Sodium sulphate
Producers Association (SSPA). At the time of writing the dossier, members were:Adisseo France

FRANCE

Akzo Nobel Nederland NV

THE NETHERLANDS

Alkim Alkali Kimya A.S.

TURKEY

Cordenka

GERMANY

Crimidesa

SPAIN

Elementis Chromium

UNITED KINGDOMFMC Foret SA

SPAIN

Lenzing AG

AUSTRIA

Minera de Santa Marta

SPAIN

Perstorp AB

SWEDEN

Säteri Oy

FINLAND

Sulquisa

SPAIN

Tessenderlo Chemie SA

BELGIUM
Co Sponsored by:

TOSOH CORPORATIONJapan

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

3

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE
SIDS INITIAL ASSESSMENT PROFILECAS No.

7757-82-6

Chemical Name

Sodium sulfate

Structural Formula

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS OF THE SIAR
Human HealthSulfate (and sodium) ions are important constituents of the mammalian body and of natural foodstuffs and there
is a considerable daily turnover of both ions (several grams/day expressed as sodium sulfate). Near-complete
absorption of dietary sulfates may occur at low concentration, depending on the counter-ion, but absorption
capacity can be saturated at higher artificial dosages resulting in cathartic effects. Absorption through skin canprobably be ignored since sodium sulfate is fully ionised in solution. One source suggests that very high levels of
sulfate in urine may occur due to absorption from dust inhalation. At dietary levels, excretion is mainly in theurine. Sulfates are found in all body cells, with highest concentrations in connective tissues, bone and cartilage.
Sulfates play a role in several important metabolic pathways, including those involved in detoxification
processes.
The acute toxicity (LD50) of sodium sulfate has not been reliably established but is probably far in excess of 5000
mg/kg. In an inhalation study with an aerosol, no adverse effects were found at 10 mg/m3. Also human data
indicate a very low acute toxicity of sodium sulfate. Human clinical experience indicates that very high oral
doses of sodium sulfate, 300 mg/kg bw up to 20 grams for an adult, are well tolerated, except from (intentionally)
causing severe diarrhoea. WHO/FAO did not set an ADI for sodium sulfate. There is no data on acute dermal
toxicity, but this is probably of no concern because of total ionisation in solution.
Sodium sulfate is not irritating to the skin and slightly irritating to the eyes. Respiratory irritation has never beenreported. Based on wide practical experience with sodium sulfate, in combination with the natural occurrence ofsulfate in the body, sensitising effects are highly unlikely.
No suitable dermal and inhalation repeated-dose toxicity studies are available. Valid oral repeated dose toxicity
studies with 21, 28 and 35 day studies in hens and pigs are available. Toxicity was confined to changes inbodyweight, water and feed intake and diarrhoea. These changes occurred only at very high doses of sodium
sulfate. In ruminants, high concentrations of sulfate in food may result in the formation of toxic amounts ofsulfites by bacterial reduction the rumen, leading to poly-encephalomalacia. The available data do not allow thederivation of a NOAEL. Based on available consumer data, a daily dose of around 25 mg/kg/day is well tolerated
by humans.
There are no data on in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity, apart from a negative Ames test. There is no valid oral
carcinogenicity study. Limited data from experimental studies support the notion that a substance that isabundantly present in and essential to the body is unlikely to be carcinogenic.
Limited data of poor validity did not provide an indication of toxicity to reproduction.
There are considerable data gaps and the data that are available are not all of standard quality or from animals
commonly used for toxicity testing. Nevertheless the weight of evidence, combined with previous assessments ofboth the sodium ion and sulfic ions lead to the conclusion that the identified data gaps need not necessarily befilled.

4

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Environment
Sodium sulphate is a solid inorganic salt well soluble in water (161-190 g/l at 20 oC) with a melting point of 884o
C and density of 2.7 g/cm3. In water solutions it is fully dissociated to sodium and sulfate ions.
In water sodium sulfate completely dissociates into sodium and sulfate ions. The ions cannot hydrolyse. In
anaerobic environments sulfate is biologically reduced to (hydrogen) sulphide by sulfate reducing bacteria, orincorporated into living organisms as source of sulphur, and thereby included in the sulphur cycle. Sodium sulfate
is not reactive in aqueous solution at room temperature. Sodium sulfate will completely dissolve, ionise anddistribute across the entire planetary "aquasphere". Some sulfates may eventually be deposited, the majority ofsulfates participate in the sulphur cycle in which natural and industrial sodium sulfate are not distinguishable
The BCF of sodium sulfate is very low and therefore significant bioconcentration is not expected. Sodium andsulfate ions are essential to all living organisms and their intracellular and extracellular concentrations areactively regulated. However some plants (e.g. corn and Kochia Scoparia), are capable of accumulating sulfate toconcentrations that are potentially toxic to ruminants.
Algae were shown to be the most sensitive to sodium sulfate; EC50 120h = 1,900 mg/l. For invertebrates(Daphnia magna) the EC50 48h = 4,580 mg/l and fish appeared to be the least sensitive with a LC50 96h = 7,960
mg/l for Pimephales promelas. Activated sludge showed a very low sensitivity to sodium sulfate. There was noeffect up to 8 g/l. Sodium sulfate is not very toxic to terrestrial plants. Picea banksiana was the most sensitive
species, an effect was seen at 1.4 g/l. Sediment dwelling organisms were not very sensitive either, with an LC50
96h = 660 mg/l for Trycorythus sp. Overall it can be concluded that sodium sulfate has no acute adverse effect onaquatic and sediment dwelling organisms. Toxicity to terrestrial plants is also low.
No data were found for long term toxicity. The acute studies all show a toxicity of sodium sulfate higher than 100
mg/l, no bioaccumulation is expected, therefore it can be considered that no further chronic studies are required.
Exposure
Production: production of sodium sulfate is 4.6 million tonnes/year (1999), of which approximately 50% a byproduct of the chemical industry and the remainder is extracted from natural deposits.
Use: The main uses are manufacturing of glass and detergents. Other users are from a wide range of industries,
including dyeing technology, electrochemical metal treatment, (animal) feeds, pharmaceuticals, textile, semiconductors, intermediates, agriculture.
Release: Releases to water come from natural sources as well as from detergents and nearly all industrial sources
listed above.
Occupational exposure: Exposure to sodium sulfate-containing dusts or aerosols is possible
Consumer products: Exposure to sodium sulfate occurs via drinking water and through naturally occurring oradded amounts in foodstuffs. The maximum acceptable concentration for drinking water is 200 – 500 mg/l
sulfate, and is based on taste rather than toxicity.

RECOMMENDATION AND RATIONALE FOR THE RECOMMENDATION AND NATURE
OF FURTHER WORK RECOMMENDED
The chemical is of low priority for further work due to its low hazard profile.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

5OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

SIDS Initial Assessment Report
1

IDENTITY

1.1

Identification of the Substance

CAS Number:
IUPAC Name:
Molecular Formula:
Structural Formula:7757-82-6
Sodium sulfate
Na2SO4

Molecular Weight:
Synonyms:

142.04
Sulfuric acid , disodium salt
Sodium sulfate anhydrous

Sodium sulfate may also occur in hydrated form, usually the hepta- or decahydrate (Glauber’s salt)
1.2

Purity/Impurities/Additives

Purity: above 99.5 %. The nature and amounts of impurities are dependent on the production
process used., which are quite numerous and may include recycling of waste sulfuric acid from amultiude of industrial processes. Therefore the impurities cannot be specified.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

6OECD SIDS
1.3

SODIUM SULFATE

Physico-Chemical properties
Table 1

Summary of physico-chemical properties

Property

Value

Reference

Physical state

Solid

Melting point

884 °C

Ullmann, 1979
and Handbook ofchemistry andPhysics, 1997/1998

Boiling point

Decomposition occurs
above 884°C.

Ullmann, 2004

Density

2.7 g/cm3 at 20 °C
2.7 g/cm3 at 25 °C

Ullmann, 1979
Chemiekaarten,
2000

Vapour pressure

No data

Water solubility

161 g/l at 20 °C

Handbook ofchemistry andPhysics, 1997/1998

430 g/l at 100 °C

Chapmann & Hall,
1992

Partition coefficient noctanol/water (log value)-3

Chemiekaarten,
2000

Henry’s law constant

No data

Comment

expected to be
extremely low

The substance is an
inorganic salt and it
will dissociate inwater, therefore it is
not of importance.

Sodium sulfate occurs in nature as mineral salts (e.g. thenardite also known as salt cake, andmirabilite also known as Glauber’s salt) and is present in almost all fresh and salt waters. Sodium
sulfate exists as white crystals or powder, is odourless and has a bitter saline taste.
1.4

Category Justification

A category is not proposed1

1

Although most of the data presented in this monograph are probably applicable to sulfate ions in general, 4irrespective of the source, care should be taken in extrapolating to other substances. The physico-chemical properties
and the toxicity of other sulphate containing compounds will to a large extent be dependent on the counter-ion (e.g.
metals other than sodium or organic compounds) and should be assessed separately.
7

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

2

GENERAL INFORMATION ON EXPOSURE

2.1

Production Volumes and Use Pattern

Estimated world-wide production of sodium sulfate was 4.6 million tons in 1999 (U.S. Geological
Survey, 2000). The production in the USA is approximately 20% of the world production and inWestern Europe this amounts to 35 %. The total production is for approximately 50% a by-productof the chemical industry and the remainder is being extracted from natural deposits.
The main users of sodium sulfate are manufacturers of glass and detergents. Tonnages of sodium
sulfate going to detergents (SSPA, 2003) are as follows:− World total, 1,058,000 Tons,− Europe, 652,000 Tons (ca. 62 % of world).
These data are valid only for SSPA members. It is difficult to acquire data on glass production andfrom producers that are not a member of the CEFIC Sodium Sulfate Production Association.
The average concentration of sodium sulfate in detergents (SSPA, 2003) based on a representative
sample of 50 commercial detergents, powders and tablets collected in 10 different EU countries(including Eastern) was 20.8 % with a range of 0.0 % to 56.7 %.
Other users are from a wide range of industries, including dyeing technology, electrochemical metal
treatment, (animal) feeds, pharmaceuticals, textile, semi-conductors, intermediates, agriculture.
2.2. Environmental Exposure and Fate.
In anaerobic environments sulfate is biologically reduced to (hydrogen)sulfide by sulfate reducing
bacteria, or incorporated into living organisms as source of sulfur. Sodium sulfate is not reactive inaqueous solution at room temperature. In moist air sodium sulfate will take up water (hygroscopic)
to form hydrates. Sodium sulfate is also soluble in glycerol, but insoluble in alcohol. Sodium sulfate
has no oxidising properties, is not explosive and is non-flammable.
2.2.1. Sources of Environmental Exposure
Mineral deposits of sodium sulfate occur naturally around the world. The deposit results from
evaporation of inland seas and terminal lakes. Sulfate is a major anion in natural fresh and salt
waters and drinking water. The occurrence is mainly due to natural causes, but also to use of
sodium sulfate in washing detergents, discharge of industry, mining activities and runoff fromfertilized agricultural lands.
Sulfate (sulfur) is an essential nutrient for plants and concentrations of at least 0.5 mg/l in irrigationwater are required to prevent detrimental effects on growth.
2.2.2. Photodegradation
There are no data available because no photodegradation can be reasonably expected, based on thecharacter of the substance.
2.2.3. Stability in Water
In water sodium sulfate completely dissociates into sodium and sulfate ions. The ions cannothydrolyze

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

8OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

2.2.4. Transport between Environmental Compartments
There are no data available on transport between environmental compartments. However, it can be
estimated that due to low vapour pressure there is no transfer to or via the atmosphere and thatgiven the very low log Kow (-3 (Chemiekaarten, 2000) and -4.38 (EPI-Suite, 2000)), sodium sulfate
is not expected to sorb to sewage sludge or sediments. Some sodium sulfate may be expected in soil
due to agricultural use and via irrigation water from rivers.
2.2.5. Biodegradation
Sodium sulfate may be used as an electron acceptor in anaerobic sulfate reduction by sulfate
reducing bacteria. Sulfate is converted to (hydrogen)sulfide (Greben, et al., 2000 and Henry et al.,2000).
In the presence of organic substances sodium sulfate is reduced as described in the following
reactions:
C12H22O11 + 5 H2O + 4 SO42- → 4 CO2 + 8 H2 + 4 HS- + 8 HCO3- + 4 H+

Sugar:

8 H2 + 2 SO42- + 2 H+ → 2 HS- + 8 H2O
C12H22O11 + 8 H2SO4 → 8 S + 12 H2CO3 + 7 H2OEthanol:

2 C2H5OH + 3 SO42- → 3 HS- + 3 HCO3- + 3 H2O + CO2
C2H5OH + H2SO4 → 2 S + 2 H2CO3 + 3 H2O

The sulfur cycle (College of Biological sciences, 2003):
•
•
•
•
•
•

9

Assimilative sulfate reduction: sulfate (SO42-) is reduced to organic sulfhydryl groups (RSH) by plants, fungi and various prokaryotes.
Desulfuration: organic molecules containing sulfur can be desulfurated, producing hydrogensulfide gas (H2S).
Oxidation of hydrogen sulfide produces elemental sulfur (So). This reaction is done by thephotosynthetic green and purple sulfur bacteria and some chemolithotrophs.
Further oxidation of elemental sulfur by sulfur oxidizers produces sulfate.
Dissimilative sulfur reduction: elemental sulfur can be reduced to hydrogen sulfide.
Dissimilative sulfate reduction: sulfate reducers generate hydrogen sulfide from sulfate.

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

A schematic representation of the sulfur cycle (http://www.lenntech.com/sulfur-cycle.htm):

2.2.6. Bioaccumulation
Bioconcentration of sodium sulfate was predicted using the EPI-Suite program (2000). The
predicted BCF is 0.5, which is very low and does not suggest any concern with respect tobioaccumulation. Sodium and sulfate ions are essential to all living organisms and their intracellularand extracellular concentrations are actively regulated. Some plants (e.g. corn and Kochia
Scoparia), are capable of accumulating sulfate to concentrations that are potentially toxic toruminants. (Gould, 1991)

2.2.7. Other Information on Environmental Fate
The following sulfate concentrations in rivers were found on an internet page of United States
Environment Program (2001). In the last 100 years sulfate concentrations have greatly increased insome North American rivers because of increased industrial and agricultural activities. In the Volgariver the concentration has increased as well due to human activities, from 50 mg/L (natural
background) to 60 mg/L since the 1950's. In the Ob river basin of Siberia no significant changes
could be observed. The sulfate ion concentration is highly variable in surface waters where it islinked to sulfur-bearing minerals. Sulfate concentrations range from 2 to 30 mg/l for most rivers andlakes in British Columbia. However, some lakes in the Cariboo region and in Richter pass near
Osoyoos have particularly high natural sulfate levels of the thousands of mg/l (Ministry of water,
land and air protection, British Columbia, Canada, 2000). Most freshwaters contain at least a few
parts per million of sulfate, but 20 to 50 ppm or more are common in the eastern United States andmost of Europe. Seawater contains levels of about 2700 ppm (Hitchcock, 1975).
Sea salt aerosols are produced in large quantities but do not appear to be a significant source of
atmospheric sulfate, except near the place where they are produced due to the fact that they are too
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

10OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

large to remain in the air. Hitchcock (1975) also states that levels of sulfate in air samples in plumes
from fossil fuel power-generating plants decline very rapidly with distance from the source evenwhen atmospheric conditions produce minimal dispersion of the plume.
The author measured the following concentrations in the air in North-east America:•

Non-urban sites: 4.9-8.6 µg/m3•

Coastal urban sites in New York: 8.1-11.3 µg/m3•

Other coastal sites: 10.7-12.2 µg/m3•

Inland New York cities: 6.0-10.3 µg/m3

Urbanisation does not appear to influence the sulfate levels in North-east America. Most of thesulfate observed in the non-urban sites appears to be of local origin.
Hydrogen sulfide derived from the energy metabolism of bacterial sulfate reducers is the principal
source of the 100 to 200 million ton of sulfur annually contributed to the global atmosphere.
Since sodium sulfate is soluble in water it is expected to infiltrate the soil. Most of the ions will
migrate downwards through the soil with the penetrating water, for it does not interact with soil
given the very low log Kow. Sodium sulfate may run off with surface water when the soil issaturated with moisture e.g. after a rainfall (Environment Canada, 1985).
2.3. Human Exposure
2.3.1.

Occupational Exposure

Sodium sulfate can exist as dust (by-product) during manufacturing of various chemicals.
Occupational exposure to sodium sulfate is likely by dermal contact and inhalation of the dust
The occupational exposure limit value (OEL) is determined at 10 mg/m3 (UK) for an 8 hour
exposure
2.3.2.Consumer Exposure
Exposure to sodium sulfate occurs via drinking water and through naturally occurring amounts infoodstuffs. In drinking water (wells) concentrations up to 2 g/l were measured in the USA. The taste
threshold for sodium sulfate is 250 – 900 mg/l. The maximum acceptable concentration for drinking
water is 200 – 500 mg/l sulfate, and is based on taste (Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks
Province of British Columbia, Canada, 2000).
No data on the sulfate content of foodstuffs were found; however, according to WHO, sulfates areused as additives in the food industry and the estimated average daily intake of sulfate in food in the
USA is 453 mg/person, based on data on food consumption and reported usage of sulfates asadditives (WHO, 2003). An Acceptable Daily Intake for sodium sulfate has not been established.
Potential exposure to consumers also occurs from the use of detergents.
WHO/FAO did not set an ADI for sodium sulfate, since they consider this to be a substance of noconcern. This was re-confirmed in the joint WHO/FAO meeting of June 2001.

11

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

3

HUMAN HEALTH HAZARDS

3.1

Effects on Human Health

3.1.1

Toxicokinetics, Metabolism and Distribution

Sulfate is a normal constituent of the blood and is a normal metabolite of sulfur-containing aminoacids, and excess sulfate is excreted in the urine. Daily sulfate excretion is reported to be 0.20 to0.25 mmol/kg bw/day and higher in children (Health Canada, 1994).
In humans, absorption of small amounts of sulfate from the gut occurs rapidly and almost
completely. In a study with 8 volunteers, small amounts (60-80 µCi) of radioactive sulfate-35 (35S)
were administered orally or intravenously. Plasma equilibrium was reached within 60 to 105 and 60
to 90 minutes respectively, and in both cases 80% or more of the administered amount ofradioactivity was recovered in the urine within 24 hours (Bauer et al, 1976). In contrast, absorption
studies with very large amounts of sodium sulfate (18.1 gram as decahydrate = 8 g as Na2SO4)
demonstrated incomplete absorption (53% urinary recovery of sulfate in 72 hours), which was
associated with severe diarrhea (Cocchetto and Levy , 1981). When the same amount was given infour fractions over several hours, urinary recovery was 62% in 72 hours and no or only mild
diarrhea occurred. Similar results were obtained with magnesium sulfate, although absorption
seems to be less complete and more erratic, thus leading to more adverse effects (Morris and Levy,
1983). Apparently, the capacity of intestinal transport mechanism for sulfates can be exceeded. In a
human volunteer study described 3.1.2 (Heizer 1999) , 40-80% of a single dose of 63 mg/kg of
sodium sulfate was resorbed and excreted in urine. Effects of saturation of absorption could not be
detected over a dose range of 21-63 mg/kg/day in the range-finding part of this study.
After absorption free sulfate ions rapidly distribute over the extracellular space, the apparent
volume of distribution being ~ 20% of the body volume. The serum concentration of sulfate inhumans ranges between 1.4 and 4.8 mg/100 mL, with a mean of about 3.1 mg/100 mL. Excretion ismainly in urine. The renal clearance is approximately one third of the glomerular filtration rate,
indication tubular re-absorption. However, the total free sulfate excretion rate is not dependent onurine flow rate. Organically bound sulfate may follow different excretion patterns. (Cocchetto andLevi, 1981).
About 800 mg of elemental sulfur are eliminated daily through the urine of humans, compared with
140 mg in the faeces. (ICRP, 1984) Some 85% of urinary sulfur is present as inorganic sulfates anda further 10% as organic sulfates, whereas the remainder is excreted as conjugated alkyl sulfates(Diem, 1972).
Similar data are available from experimental animals: In a study on male wistar rats using 35Slabeled Na2SO4, rapid and almost complete absorption occurred. When the radioactively labeledmaterial was added to a large amount of unlabeled sodium sulfate and subsequently orally
administered, the plasma peak occurred at the same time, but the amount of radioactivity decreased
as the dose of unlabeled sulfate increased. This indicates that there is a saturation of the absorption
mechanism (Krijgsheld, 1979). In male adult Wistar rats, approximately 73% of dietary calcium ormagnesium sulfate salts was absorbed, although absorption was partly dependent on other dietary
elements (Health Canada, 1994).
Since disturbances in sulfate metabolism are possibly associated with only one rare form ofinherited dwarfism, this area is largely unexplored. Therefore, no attempts have been made to fully
describe sulfate metabolism. Sulfate incorporation has been observed with such biologicallyimportant compounds as chondroitin, fibrinogen, l-tyrosine derivatives, bilirubin, and steroids. A
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

12OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

number of amino acids contain sulfur and take part in the sulfate cycle. Hydrolytic (sulfatase)activity has been demonstrated in liver, kidney, pancreas, serum, and urine. Sulfates play animportant role in sulfoconjugation processes, which are of great importance in a variety ofdetoxification/excretion processes (Percy, 1964).
In ruminants, excess amounts of sodium sulfate in feed may result in considerable toxicity due toformation of sulfides through bacterial action in the rumen (see section 3.1.5.)
Conclusion: relatively large amounts of sodium sulpfate are normally taken up by the gut from foodand drinking water through a saturatable mechanism. Absorbed sodium and sulfate ions circulate
freely throughout the entire body and form part of a large intra- and extracellular sodiun and sulfate
pool respectively. Sulfates are normally incorporated in a great variety of body compounds and assuch essential to life.
3.1.2

Acute Toxicity

The acute toxicity studies conducted with sodium sulfate that could be checked are summarised in
the following tables.
Studies in Animals
Oral
Table 2

Acute oral toxicity studies with sodium sulfate

Ref.
(year)

Species,strainProtocolAdministration

Endpoint

Value(mg/kg)Okahara, (1963)

Mouse

non-standard

oral (?)

LD50

5989 mg/kg bw

Henkel,unpublishedrat

unknown

Oral

LD50

> 10.000 mg/kg bw

Only one LD50 value appears to have been reported in the open literature (in Japanese) (Okahara,
1963). A summary report from Henkel (Henkel, unpublished) stated oral administration of 2-5 ml ofa solution in water (concentration not given) to 10 rats (mean body weight 270 gram), with anobservation period of 8 days. No symptoms were observed and the LD50 was given as > 10 g/kg.
Other data quoted in previous editions of IUCLID could not be found.
DermalNo valid data are available on the acute dermal toxicity for sodium sulfate. Given the complete
dissociation in solution, penetration through the intact skin is not to be expected.
Inhalation
Table 3 Acute inhalation toxicity studies with animals exposed to sodium sulfate
Ref.
(year)

Species(strain)ProtocolSource of mists

Exposure
Time

Particle size
(MMAD, µm)

Endpoint

Last et al.
(1980)Rat (Sprague–Dawley)

non-standard
protocolparticle aerosol

72 h

1.15

LOEC > 10 mg/m3

13

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

No standard inhalation studies with Na2SO4 are available. There is one study (Last et al, 1980) in
which rats were exposed to 10 mg/m3 of Na2SO4 as a dry particle aerosol in air with 50% humidity(particle size 1.15 µm Mean Mass Aerodynamic Diameter;, σg = 2.5) for 72 hours. These six malerats served as negative controls for rats exposed to various concentrations of sodium sulfite andsodium hydroxymethane sulfonate. Clinical effects were not reported. Compared to the filtered-air
control group, no significant changes in various inflammation-related lung tissue parameters,
determined post-mortem, were found (DNA, RNA, protein, wet-to-dry weight ratio, glycoprotein
secretion in trachea explants).
In a study discussed in more detail in section 3.1.4, effects on serum liver cholinesterase
concentration, blood coagulation time, brain irritability and spermatogenesis were claimed after 8hours exposure to 60 mg/ m3 Na2SO4 as well as after longer exposures to lower concentrations but
these results were considered implausible (Denisov, 1989)
Studies in Humans
Oral
There is one fully controlled study on the effects of sodium sulfate in humans (Heizer 1997). In a
range-finding study, four healthy volunteers received controlled amounts of drinking water withstepwise increasing concentrations of sulfate, up to 1200 mg/l of sulfate, over six consecutive twoday periods. The calculated dose of sodium sulfate was 0, 21, 31.5, 42, 52,5 and 63 mg/kg/day.
Apart from a faster stool passage, no abnormalities were found. In a subsequent two-day studys en
volunteers received of 0 mg on the first and 63 mg sodium sulfate on the second day. A clinicallyinsignificant increase in stool volume, decrease in stool consistency and passage time was noted,
but no change in stool frequency or diarrhea.
In another study (US-EPA 1999, Backer L, abstract only) volunteers received bottled watercontaining 0 to 1200 mg/ l of sulfate for three days and plain water on twos days before and one day
after the sulfate exposure. Atually received dose was calculated from returned bottles. There wasno effect on bowel movements at any concentration and sulfate dose, although not reported, wasstated not be a predictor for diarrhea. . In another abstract of a case-control study (US-EPA,1999,
no relationship between sulfate levels and diarrhea was found in infants receiving tap water withsulfate concentrations below 500 mg/l.
Sulfate concentrations above 600 mg/l (equivalent to more than 875 mg/l of sodium sulfate) in well
water, used to prepare infant formula was described as a cause of diarrhea without any other sign or
symptom of disease in three infants (Chien 1967). The estimated daily dose would have beenaround 70- 100 mg/kg/day. Although the clinical cause and effect relationship is absolutely clear inthese three cases, the number of cases versus the population at risk (i.e. infants with similar oral
exposure) is unknown and a dose-effect relationship or threshold concentration cannot beestablished from three cases. Nevertheless, the author's recommendation not to use water with morethan 400 mg of sulfates is in line with WHO standards.
In clinical practice sodium sulfate, alone or with magnesium sulfate, was used as a laxative to
induce rapid emptying of the gut, in doses of 300 mg/kg up to 20 grams maximum for an adult. The
laxative action is ascribed to fecal fluid retention caused by the hygroscopic action of unresorbed
sodium sulfate in the large intestine (Gilman et al, 1980). Use of sodium sulfate has been gradually
abandoned and the substance has been replaced by other laxatives because of the uncontrollable
watery diarrhea and accompanying abdominal cramping it tends to produce.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

14OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Other Routes of Exposure
An isotonic (3.89%) solution of sodium sulfate decahydrate, administered intravenously, was used
as an antihypercalcemic (Remington, 1980). This practice is considered obsolete.
Conclusion
Only limited data on the acute toxicity of sodium sulfate are available. However, in view of thelarge body pool of sulfate anions and the high body turnover, the acute toxicity of sulfates must be
low, as long as the counter-ion is not toxic. . The laxative effect of oral ingestion is well known andwas used medicinally. High dosages given in medical practice with the purpose of inducing
diarrhoea were usually accompanied by severe abdominal cramps. Apart from that, no side effects
are mentioned in the medical literature."
3.1.3. Irritation
Skin Irritation
Studies in Animals
Table 4Skin irritation testing with sodium sulfate

Ref.
(year)

Species, Test Type

Protocol

Doses

ResultBayer AG (1991)

Rabbit, Skin irritation
test on intact skin

OECD 404, “Acute Dermal
Irritation/ Corrosion”

500 mg, Occlusive

Not irritating

Sodium sulfate appears not to be irritating to the skin in rabbit. The study was performed under
GLP, and according to international well-accepted guidelines. Endpoint determination was based on
the DRAIZE scoring system. The exposure period was 4 hours, under occlusion, and the result wasscored after 14 days (Bayer, 1991 unpublished).
Studies in humans
No reports on acute studies in humans are available. Skin problems were not found in a group of
119 workers with long-term exposure to sodium sulfate (see 3.1.4; Kelada & Euinton, 1978)
A human repeated insult skin sensitisation test (see 3.1.4.) was performed with a bath salt allegedly
containing 80.8% sodium sulfate on 61 human volunteers, mainly females of all ages. It this test, tetest substance was applied under semi-occlusion in a concentration of 1.25%, 8 times for 24 hours
and once for 48 hours and induced mild irritation only once in one volunteer.However, the validityof this report could not be assessed (CTFA 1976) Another , unavailable CTFA report (1985) isquoted elsewhere as stating that a 10% solution of sodium sulfate under occlusion for 24 hours
produced mild irritation in one out of 19 volunteers.
Eye Irritation
Studies in Animals
Table 5Eye irritation testing with sodium sulfate

Ref.
(year)

Species, Test type

Protocol

Doses

ResultBayer AG, (1991)

Rabbit, Eye
Irritation test

OECD Guideline 405,
“Eye Irritation”

90 mg, pulverized

Slightly irritating

15

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Sodium sulfate appears to be slightly irritating to the eye in rabbit. The study was performed under
GLP, and according to international well-accepted guidelines. Endpoint determination was based on
the DRAIZE scoring system. Sodium sulfate had no adverse effect on the iris and cornea. The
substance was instilled into the conjunctival sac of the eye. The positive effects were primarily
based on the conjuctivea (redness) observed in the test. The effects were reversible within 7 days.
(Bayer, 1991 unpublished).
Conclusion : Sodium sulfate was not a skin irritant in a well conducted study. It is a slight eye
irritant with redness of the conjunctiva observed. The redness was reversible within 7 days.
Respiratory Tract Irritation
Studies in Animals
In the acute inhalation toxicity test with 72 hours of exposure described in 3.1.2 (Last et al, 1980),
no signs of irritation of the respiratory tract were described.
In an experiment set up to determine the difference in inhalatory effects of various sulfur oxide
species which occur in ambient air, 5 male rabbits were exposed for one hour to aerosols containing
an actual mass concentration of 1800-1950 µg/m3 sodium sulfate particles. Mean mass aerodynamic
diameter of the aerosol particles was 0.4 µm (σg =1.6). Animals served as their own controls throughsham exposures. Mucociliary clearance served as an indication of pulmonary irritation. This wasdetermined by means of retention measurements of previously inhaled radioactively labeled
microspheres. No effects on mucociliary clearance were found. Since similar exposures with acidsulfates (H2SO4, NH4HSO4) resulted in significant increase in retention time, i.e. lowering of theclearance, whereas (NH4)2SO4 also had no effect, the conclusion is that any irritative effects are
not caused by the sulfate ion but by the hydrogen sulfate ion (Schlessinger, 1984)
Studies in humans
An abstract only is available of a study describing the effects of 10 minute inhalation of sodium
sulfate aerosols with a mass median aerodynamic diameter of 0.5 µm in concentrations of 2 and 3 3
mg/m3 on asthmatic and normal adults., with sodium chloride aerosols of the same size as controls.
Two out of 5 asthmatics showed an immediate but not dose-dependent drop in FEV1,but groupmean values of respiratory resistance, FEV1 and VC were comparable up to 60 minutes postexposure. In a second series, 6 asthmatics and 6 normal adults were followed for 3 hours after 10minute inhalation of 3 mg/m3 and no differences were found in the same volume/flow parameters
nor in various diffusion capacity parameters (Sackner et al, 1979)
Symptoms indicating local upper respiratory tract irritation were observed in the study by Kelada
and Euinton (1978). Workers from natural sodium sulfate mines developed symptoms such as nasal
irritation and runny noses (see section 3.1.5).
Conclusion: It is unlikely that short-term inhalation of respirable sodium sulfate particles cause
pulmonary irritation.
3.1.4. Sensitisation
Skin and inhalation
Studies in Animals
No valid study was identified for skin sensitisation potential with sodium sulfate.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

16OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Studies in Humans
An incomplete report is available on a repeated insult patch test in human volunteers with 10
different cosmetic products, among them bath salt crystals allegedly containing 80.8% sodium
sulfate, tested in a concentration of 1.25% under semi-occlusion on 61 human volunteers, mainly
females of all ages. The conclusion of the report is that the substance did not demonstrate any
potential for inducing allergic sensitization. The validity of this report could not be assessed.
(CTFA, 1976)
Sodium sulphate is unlikely to cause allergy, since the body contains large amounts of sulfate(~0.33 mmol/L in serum and about 50 times higher concentration intracellularly) as well as large
amounts of sodium ions. Various metal sulfates (e.g. nickel sulfate, cobalt sulfate) are used as
standard allergens in routine skin allergy testing, but positive reactions are related to the metal ion,
not to the sulfate, as can be deduced from the definitely non-allergenic zinc sulfate (ECETOC,
1999).
Based on the above, it may be concluded that sodium sulfate is not an allergen in humans, and thatanimal testing for sensitisation potential would not provide any information relevant for hazard
identification and risk assessment.
Conclusion
Despite the absence of formal study results, it can be concluded, based on the natural intra- andextracellular occurrence of the substance, that sensitisation to sodium sulfate is highly unlikely
3.1.5. Repeated Dose Toxicity
Studies in Animals
Oral
Validated (reliability 1 or 2) repeated dose toxicity studies with sodium sulfate are summarised in
the Table 6. Two reliable non-standard repeated dose toxicity studies were reported. A nonstandard. Non-GLP study feeding study in rats was reported and given reliability 2. An invalid
carcinogenicity study is reported here since it has (very) limited reliability as a repeated dose study
Two veterinary clinical studies are also described which provide valuable clinical observations andcould also be given a reliability 2 despite deficiencies with respect to control groups. The reported
clinical effects are so severe that they may safely be assumed absent from any control group. Twomore studies assigned validity 3 are mentioned in the text but not included in table 6.

17

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Table: 6: Repeated dose toxicity studies with sodium sulfate
Ref.
(year)

Species(strain, sex)

Duration,frequency

Administration

Doses

End-point

Value (unit)/ results

Blunck & Crowther Rat, Sprague- 27 and 44(1975)
Dawley,weeks,daily
5 / Male

In food

0.84 % in diet, 320400 mg/kg/day

Mortality, tumours , bodyweight, food and water
consumption

NOAEL ~320-400 mg/kg/day

Moinuddinand
Wing-Tsit Lee

Rat, 24, male 4 weeks,
Spraguedaily
DawleyIn food

0.0;~0.01%ww;
Incremental
0.125,0.250, 0.5, 1%
2% (estimated 2000
mg /kg/d)

NOAEL 2000 mg/kg/d
Food & water
consumption, body weight
gain, food conversion
efficiency, urine
production, diarrhoea,
blood hemoglobin & whiteblood count, serum
alkaline phosphatase,inorganic phosphate, grossorgan pathology

Adams et al.
(1975)Hen (48
White
Leghorn

Drinking water

Concentrations : 25023328 mg/l
Calculated doses pergroup of 6 hens:
34 mg/kg/d;
45 mg/kg/d
120 mg/kg/d
210 mg/kg/d
550 mg/kg/d
1670 mg/kg/d
4900 mg/kg/d
1650 mg/kg/d

LC100;
Body weight,
Histopathology, Food andwater consumption, Egg
production

4 weeks,daily

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

23328 mg /l
at 4,000 mg/l depressed feed consumption and egg
production. Increase in water consumption wasobserved at 4,000 mg/l.

18

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Table: 6: Repeated dose toxicity studies with sodium sulfate (continued)
Ref.
(year)

Species(strain, sex)

Duration,frequency

Administration

Doses

Veen-huizen et al.
(1992)Pig (415,
weaned)28 days,daily

Drinking water

Body weight, food-water
54-1800 mg/l (water
consumption/animal & consumption, gastrointestinal infections
body weights not
given)

Increased prevalence of diarrhea was a trend assulfate concentration increased. A non-significant
trend in increased water intake was observed withincreasing sulfate. No differences in feed intake wereobserved between various sulfate concentrations.
Body weight increased at 600 mg/l and higher.

Gould(1991)

Cattle (921 days,young steers) daily

In food

0.8 % Na-sulfate(0.36% sulfur)

Neurological symptoms,
histopathological brain
damage, Sulfide formationin rumen

Five out of nine animals developed symptoms andsigns of polioencephalomalacia (PEM), onset
correlating well with formation of sulfide in rumen

Niles et al(2002)

Cattle (15heifers)

In food

3860 ppm, 5540 ppm
and 7010 ppm ofsulfurNeurological symptoms,
histopathological brain
damage, Sulfide formationin rumen

All low-dose animals microscopic signs of PEM, allothers macroscopic signs of PEM. Onset of symptoms
correlated well with formation of sulfide in rumen.

19

35 daysEnd-point

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

Value (unit)/ resultsOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

In the study by Blunck and Crowther (1975), also described under Carcinogenicity, two groups of 5
male rats were fed 2% sodium sulfate in the diet for 27 and 44 weeks respectively. No adverse
effects were detected with respect to the limited number of endpoints reported from this study.
Obviously, group size is too limited to draw firm conclusions bit a tentative NOAEL of >= 320
mg.kg may be deduced. .
In a non-standard non-GLP 4 week repeated dose study comparing the effects of Mg SO4, Mn SO4
and Na2 SO4, rats were fed an artificial diet enhanced with minimal amounts of MgS04 and MnSO4
but not Na2SO4; the pure sulfates were added on a mmole/kg food basis. At the top dose, the foodcontained around 2% of the respective sulfates (calculated to be around 2000 mg/kg/d). While the
Mn SO4 and Mg SO4-exposed rats showed various functional and even gross pathologicalaberrations at the top dose, the Na2SO4 -exposed rats were comparable to to the controls in every
aspect (see table) except slight diarrhoea in one animal for a few days (Moinuddin & Wing-tstit
Lee, 1960). Thus the NOAEL from this study is 2000 mg/kg/day
In the studies of Adams et al (1975) and Veenhuizen et al (1992) the test animals were exposed tosodium sulfate in the drinking water which was available on a daily basis. The primary end-points
were food and water intake, body weight (occurrence of diarrhoea) and clinical signs ofdehydration. In the study (Adams et al., 1975) with 48 hens, small and not clearly dose-related
effects on food consumption and egg production were observed at concentrations up to andincluding 4,000 mg/l of sodium sulfate, compared to two weeks of pre-test observations (calculated
dose ~ 550 mg/kg/d of sodium sulfate). Water consumption was strongly increased atconcentrations of 4000, 5832 mg/l and 16000 mg/l and dramatically decreased at the top level of23328 mg/l. At 5832 mg/l a serious decline in egg production and decrease of food consumption
was observed. At this concentration, the calculated dose was about 1670 mg/kg/d due to increased
water consumption. No mortality was observed at 16.000 mg/l ( 4900 mg/kg/d) but 100 % mortality
was observed at 23328 mg/l (only 1644 mg/kg/d due to strongly reduced water consumption) .
Necropsy of hens receiving 23340 mg/l sodium sulfate and above showed extreme emaciation andvisceral urate deposits. Microscopic examination of kidney tissues showed urate accumulation ofindividual glomeruli and tubules losing cellular detail in animals receiving 5832 mg/l or more
Examinations of other organs were not reported. The above data seem to indicate that the mortality
in the top dose was due more to dehydration because of inpalatable drinking water than to the doseof sodium sulfate.
In the study with 415 weaned pigs (Veenhuizen 1992) diarrhoea was observed with increasing test
concentrations. No significant effects were observed in feed and water intake at the tested
concentrations. Body weight gain was observed at 600 mg/l or higher. Weight gain to feed ratios
for all treatments were not different. Isolates of E-coli were found in 14% of the pigs, from 1 pig
rotavirus was isolated. No pigs were exposed to transmissible gastroenteritis virus. None of thetreatments had an adverse effect on nursery pig performance. During the study one pig died at aconcentration of 600 mg/l. Daily doses could not be calculated in the absence of body weigh andwater consumption data; percentages only were given.
Another oral study (Upton, 1976) with rats (exposure 6 weeks) indicated that daily dietary
supplementation (1-2%) with sodium sulfate did not significantly affect food/water intake and liveweight gain of rats. In an oral chicken study (Sibblad, 1976) effects on weight gain were reportedwith increasing sodium sulfate in the drinking water (1-5%). The exposure period was 11 days, andno mortality was observed.
In a study with 9 young Holstein steers, a concentrate diet containing 0.8 % sodium sulfate (total
sulfur content approximately 0.36%) was given during 21 days. 3 controls were given the same dietwithout added sodium sulfate (total sulfur or sulfate content not reported). Five out of nine test
animals vs. no controls developed clinically manifest poli-encephalomalacia (PEM) as well as
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

20OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

macroscopically visible and histologically recognisable cerebral lesions (brain histology of notaffected animals not reported). The onset of the disease correlated well with increasing
concentrations of sulfide in the rumen. Thiamine concentrations in serum (another alleged cause ofPEM) were not significantly affected. (Gould et al., 1991)Similar disease due to high sulfur content
of food was allegedly also reported earlier in sheep
In another study three groups of young heifers (5 heifers per group) were fed diets with 3860 ppm,
5540 ppm and 7010 ppm of sulfur respectively during 5 weeks. Sulfur concentrations were reachedby adding sodium sulfate to the desired level. Microscopic signs of PEM were seen in all four lowdose animals, macroscopic signs in 4/5 medium-dose and 4/5 high-dose animals. Clinical signs of
PEM were seen in all animals. Onset of PEM correlated highly with sulfide concentrations inrumen. Other potential causes of PEM were excluded. (Niles et al, 2002).
DermalNo data have been found with respect to repeated dermal toxicity
Combined Inhalation/ oral exposure
An inhalation study on rats was found describing inhalation exposures of 8, 12, 44, 90 and 720
hours duration to Na2 SO4 concentrations of 60.45, 40.05, 18.03, 11.06 and 3 mg/m3 respectively,
with concurrent exposure to sodium sulfate in drinking water at a concentration of 500 mg/l.
(estimated dose at the lowest level / longest duration 60 mg/kg/day orally and 1.8 mg/kg/d byinhalation). Small but statistically significant effects were claimed at all concentrations on serum
liver cholinesterase concentration (first appearing at 6, 12, 44, 90 and 720 hours respectively),
prolongation of blood coagulation time (first appearing at 4, 8, 30, 64 and 510 hours respectively)
and brain irritability as measured by "summated threshold potential", (first appearing at 4, 8, 24, 45
and 288 hours respectively), and these effects were stated to be worse at end-of exposure (no data
provided). (Denisov et al, 1989). Depression of spermatogenesis (presumably at end-of-exposure),
was also at all concentrations and all effects were stated to be completely reversible within one
month post-exposure (size of recovery groups not given). No abnormalities were observed in
number of erythrocytes and leucocytes, total haemoglobin, meth- and sulfhaemoglobin, blood
histamine, presence of Heinz-Ehrlich bodies brain cholinesterase, number of sulfhydryl groups,
basic phosphatase activity in blood serum and content of ascorbic acid in the adrenals.
However, the documentation of this study is insufficient, some of the results are clearly artificiallyconstructed and incredible and the effects are biologically implausible (see below)“Similar effects were described in a follow-up 90-day study (Denisov and, Tkachev, 1990)
inwhich rats were exposed to 1 mg/m3 sodium sulfate, or 0.1 and 1 mg/m3 of sodium sulfite or 1
mg/m3 of an unspecified mixture of both, together with 500 mg/l in drinking water, i.e an estimateddose of 60 mg/kg/d orally and 0.6 mg/kg/day by inhalation. Apart from the neuro-physiological andbiochemical parameters described above, body weight was also depressed, relative liver weight was
decreased, histopathological evidence of serious lung damage and testicular damage was described.
Effects were similar for sulfites, sulfates and the mixture, but more severe and earlier for thesulfites. Again, the description of the experiment is insufficient and no actual data are presented.
The biological plausibility of such relatively severe effects at such low concentrations, from acompound normally abundantly present in drinking water and food is very much in doubt. There is
no reason why a simple, non-reactive and freely circulating ion like sulfate would exert systemic
effects when absorbed through the lungs at a fraction of the amount absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract. These findings also strongly contrast with all other available data.
A possible explanation of the findings from these two studies, if accepted at face value, iscontamination of the dust used for the inhalation studies with heavy metals, e.g. cadmium. Spent
21

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

sulfuric acid commonly contains heavy metals, so pre-refinery sodium sulfate made from such
recycled material may well be contaminated.. In the absence of any analytical data, this cannot be
verified.
Studies in Humans
Oral/dermal
No information found.
Inhalation
The effects of long-term inhalation of sodium sulfate dust were determined in a cross-sectional
study among 119 male workers from natural sodium sulfate mines (Kelada and Euinton, 1978). Ageof the subjects ranged from 17 to 58, exposure duration from two months to 31 years (no control
group, study outcomes compared with "normal values", source not given). Dust exposures ranged
from less than 5 mg/m3 to 150 mg/m3 during specific tasks (sampling method, strategy, number,frequency and timespan of sampling not given). General medical screening, lung function tests,
blood pressure, skin condition, gastro-intestinal functioning, serum sodium, calcium, potassium
chloride and sulfate content were all within normal ranges (i.e. presumably as found in the general
population). Mean urinary excretion of inorganic sulfate exceeded 2.2 g/liter in all workers andthirty percent of the workers excreted more than 3 g of inorganic sulfate per day, indicating massive
uptake from recent exposure. The only subjective symptom indicated by the workers was nasal
irritation and runny noses on exposure to dust.
An internal comparison between workers from this group with less than 10 years of exposure(n=77, mean age 28.0 +-10, mean exposure duration 3.1 + 2.8 years) with those with more than 10
years exposure (n=42, mean age 45.5 + 8.8, mean exposure duration 19.9 + 3.6 years) did not show
any differences that could not be explained by normal ageing processes There are differences
between the group with longer and the group with shorter exposure, but these differences appear to
be normal for the respective ages and are therefore attributed to the substantial age difference
between groups rather than to exposure to sodium sulfate.No abnormalities were detected that could
be explained by exposure to sodium sulfate. (The possibility of a "healthy worker effect" was notaddressed in this study).
The study by Denisov and Tkachev (1990) also mentions exposure concentrations in working
atmosphere. Shift averages of 88 mg/m3 are given, yet there is no mention of any clinical orbiochemical effects on the workers.
Conclusion: A clear NOAEL cannot be derived from the available data. Tentatively a chronic
NOAEL of >= 320 mg/kg/day may be deduced from a 27 / 44 week study and a sub-chronic
NOAEL of 2000 mg/kg from a 28 day study in rats. Ruminating animals are at risk at much lower
levels because of the potential formation of sulfide in the rumen. Since this substance has no
discernable systemic toxicity, the tentative chronic NOAEL of >= 320 mg/kg in rats would seem toprovide a reasonable margin of safety compared to the estimated daily intake of 453 mg/person/day
or around 6.5 to 7.5 mg/kg/day (see 2.3.2)

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

22

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

3.1.6. Mutagenicity
In vitro studies
Table 7

Genetic toxicity in vitro with sodium sulfate

Ref.
(year)

Species, Test
type

Protocol

Doses

ResultBayer AG,(1988)

S. Typhimurium,
Ames test

Salmonella/
Microsome test

312-5000 µg with and without Negative
activation

Sodium sulfate has been shown to be without effect in the Ames test using various strains of S.
typhimurium (TA1535, TA1537, TA100, TA98) both with and without S9 activation in a GLP
standardised test.
In a paper describing cytogenicity studies with sodium bisulfite in human cultured lymphocytes,
Meng and Zhang (1992) state that sodium sulfate did not increase the frequencies of chromosomal
aberrations, sister chromatid exchanges or micronuclei , nor did it cause changes in mitotic index orcell cycle at concentrations ranging from 5 x 10-5 to 5 x 10-3 M. However, no data are shown and it
is not clear from the study description how, when and why these determinations were made.
Therefore this study is assigned reliability 4.
Based on the natural intra- and extracellular occurrence of the substance it can be concluded that
sodium sulfate is highly unlikely to be mutagenic
3.1.7. Carcinogenicity
Valid standard carcinogenicity studies with sodium sulfate are not available. The carcinogenicity
studies listed in Table 8 and described below are those involving the longest exposure to sodium
sulfate. Their power to detect any carcinogenic potential that sodium sulfate might possess isextremely low
Table 8

Carcinogenicity studies with sodium sulfate

Ref. (year)

Test Type,Species, Strain

Duration,
Frequency

Animal/group

Dose

ResultBlunck &Crowther(1975)

Carcinogenicity,
Rat, SpragueDawley

27 and 44
weeks, daily

5 / Male0.84 % in diet,320-400
mg/kg/day

No mortality, no tumors

Toth (1987)

Carcinogenicity, 26 weeks,
Swiss albino mice weekly

50 male, 50
female31 µg in 0.01 ml
sodium chloride(0.9%) per g bodyweight, s.c.
injected

Tumor of subcutis
and/or skin in 1% of thefemale and 4% in
male.(normal for thisstrain in this lab)

In the study of Blunck and Crowther animals were fed an additional 0.84% sodium sulfate in thediet. Because of protocolled food restrictions, the actual additional dose could be calculated and wasaround 320-400 mg/kg /day. These animals served as controls for animals in which the enhancing
effect was studied of the same amount of sodium sulfate on the carcinogenicity of various azo dyes.
No carcinogenic effects (tumors) were observed in these control animals. No significant differencesin overall body weight gain were observed during the study. Liver weight was not changed. No
23

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

evidence of hyperplastic and/or dysplastic change, and no cholangiofibrosis or mild cirrhosis wasobserved as compared to controls. In addition, no changes in the water or food intake was reported.
In the experimental animals fed additional sodium sulfate together with carcinogenic azo dyes, thelatency period of tumor development appeared to be reduced, supporting the hypothesis that
sulfotransferase plays an important role in the activation of azo dyes.
In a study with mice (Toth, 1987), animals S.C. injected with 31 µg in 0.01 ml of saline per gram
body weight (31 mg/kg bw) during 26 weeks served as controls for animals injected with a
carcinogenic substance, 4-HMBD. The tumor incidences of the subcutis and skin and of tumors inother organs in the sodium sulfate injected animals were in the normal range observed in thehistorical untreated control Swiss mice in the same test laboratory.
Conclusion
The limited available data do not allow firm conclusions with respect to carcinogenicity of sodium
sulfate. However, they do not contradict the notion that a substance that is abundantly present in andessential to the body, is unlikely to be carcinogenic.
3.1.8. Toxicity for Reproduction
Studies in Animals
Effects on Fertility
One study was found with reliability 4 (Non-standard protocol, non-GLP, insufficient data forassessment, in which 10 female mice per group were exposed to sulfate in the drinking water
onwards from one week prior to mating with untreated males. Sodium sulfate concentrations indrinking water were 0 mg/l (distilled water control), 0 mg/l (Na control), .924 mg/l, 1848 mg/l,
3696 mg/l and 7.392 mg/l with sodium concentrations in the Na control and all sodium sulfate
groups made identical by addition of NaHCO3 as required.water concentrations correspond to
calculated doses of around 140, 280, 560 and 1120 mg/kg/d. Dams with litters from each groupwere re-bred immediately after weaning. No effects on maternal weight gain, lactational
performance, litter size, pup survival and weaning weight at maximum treatment levels over 2
parities were found. However, since it is stated in the paper that only animals with two subsequent
litters were involved in the analysis, i.e. ultimately 4 animals/group, and full data on reproductive
succes are not given, the effects on fertility cannot be properly assessed. (Andres & Cline, 1989).
The available data on fertility are quite limited but in view of the fact that the substance isabundantly occurring in the body, toxicity for reproduction is unlikely.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

24

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Developmental Toxicity
Table 9Developmental toxicity/teratogenicity studies with sodium sulfate

Ref. (year)

Species,
StrainProtocol Administration

Exposure time, Doses
frequency

Results

Arcuri &Gautieri (1973)

Mouse,CF-1

Other

SC, single
injection

Day 8 or 9 of60
gestation, single mg/kg
dose
bw

Increased maternal weight
gain, normal litters/ litter
size, statistically significant
increase in delayed
ossifications no otherabnormalities,othergavageday 8-12

no maternal mortality,
normal litters/litter size,
100% survival, no visible
abnormalities (no necropsy)
Increased litter weight on
day 1 pn, normal on day 3

Seidenberg et al Mouse,(1986)ICR/SIM

2800
mg/kg
bw

Two studies of limited validity were found in the literature. In the study of Arcuri and Gautieri,(1973), which was aimed at documenting teratogenic effects of morhine sulfate, atropine sulfate andphysostigmine sulfate, sodium sulfate served as anion control, with sodium chloride as negative
control. The study was well documented, with various endpoints (clinical observations, maternal
weight ratio, uterine lef/righ horn fetal ratio and resorption ration, fetal weight, sex ratio, skeletal
abnormalities, ,soft tissue abnormalities, more specifically exencephaly, cryptorchid test and axial
skeletal fusions, but covered only the 8-9 day period of gestation for exposure and the dose of 60
mg/kg was relatively small. There was a statistically significant increase in skeletal abnormalities,
described as delayed ossification in the phalanges, sternebrae and skull. Such variations are quite
common in tests with rodents and, in the absence of skeletal malformations, generally not regarded
as indicative of developmental toxicity. No abnormalities for any of the other end-points werereported.
In another study (Seidenberg et al., 1986) the developmental effects of sodium sulfate in the mousewere examined as part of a validation effort of a developmental screening test. The test substance
was administered (2800 mg/kg/day) by gavage on gestation days 8 through 12. No mortality, an
unchanged average weight gain, and normal number of litters and neonates/litter were found. A 100% perinatal survival was found, with an increased postnatal weight at day 1, normal weight at day 3
in the absence of externally visible abnormalities. In a later paper (Seidenberg et al, 1987) thatsummarised the results of this validation test, the outcome of the screening test was considered
positive for sodium sulfate, based solely on the increased postnatal weight on day 1 post-partum.
However, the significance of such an effect, in the absence of any other effect, is unclear and thereasons for taking this as a positive result are not given
In a summary report (Paterson et al., 1979) the effects of various concentrations of sulfate indrinking water were described on the pregnancy and lactation of sows and gilts (primiparous sows),
58 in total, divided in three groups. Sodium sulfate in drinking water was given in concentrations of
320, 1820 and 3320 mg/l respectively from 30 days post-breeding through 28 days of lactation(body weights and water consumption not given). No effects were found on gestation and lactationin terms of weight gain during gestation, number or weight of piglets at birth or development duringlactation. 41 of the newborn piglets, equally representing all treatment groups, were taken from thelitters. These newborns were split in three groups and were raised for 28 days on a 18% protein dietplus drinking water containing either 3000 mg/l added sulfate from sodium sulfate, 3000 mg/l

25

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

sulfate from magnesium/sodium sulfate or no sulfate added; no differences in development were
found between the groups. The study is of not assignable validity.
Studies in Humans
No data.
Conclusion
The limited available data give no indication that sodium sulfate is toxic for reproduction. With
regard to the natural occurrence of the substance in the body, developmental toxicity is very
unlikely.
3.2

Initial Assessment for Human Health

Sodium sulfate is not known to have acute oral effects other than laxative effects, caused by its
hygroscopy. It is not irritating to the skin and is a slight eye irritant. The substance is unlikely to
be sensitiser. Oral repeated dose toxicity is limited to diarrhoea and subsequent dehydration atdosages far higher than the normal daily intake from food and water. Ruminant animals may
develop serious brain disorders from high sulfate content in food and water due to formation of
sulfides in the rumen but this is not relevant to humans. Limited inhalation data from humans do notindicate serious concerns with respect to acute or chronic dust inhalation. There is limited data on
reproduction which give not indication that sodium sulfate is toxic for reproduction. There is novalid data on carcinogenicity. However, given the natural occurrence in the body of this substancewhich is essential to life, carcinogenicity and toxicity for reproduction is not an issue.

4

HAZARDS TO THE ENVIRONMENT

4.1

Aquatic Effects

Acute toxicity
Effects in fish
Three studies were reliable with restrictions as the studies were not performed according tostandardised guidelines, but were performed using an adequate scientific methodology anddescribed with enough details (see table 10). No studies were performed under GLP. All three tests
were performed in reconstituted water. In two tests a concentration range of the test substance anddetermination of test parameters are described. The study with Pimephales promelas was performed
according to EPA guideline with determination of test substance concentrations (ionchromatography). During two studies (with Lepomis macrochirus, Trama (1954) and Pimephales
promelas, Mount et al. (1997)) the critical confounding factors pH and oxygen were within
acceptable ranges, while in the third study (with Lepomis macrochirus, Patrick et al. (1968)) theseparameters were not indicated. The acute toxicity for fish is very low, with LC50 values far above
1,000 mg/l for both species, Lepomis macrochirus and Pimephales promelas.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

26

OECD SIDS
Table 10
Acute/ prolonged
toxicity to fish

SODIUM SULFATE
Validated data (validity 1 or 2) on acute toxicity to fish.
Ref. (year)

Species

Method/ Protocol

Results

Trama (1954)

Lepomismacrochirus

Concentration range inreconstituted water

LC50 96h = 13,500 mg/l;
LC0 = 8,700 mg/l.

Patrick et al.
(1968)

Lepomismacrochirus

96 hours test, based on Cairns
et al. (1964)

LC50 96h = 13,500 mg/l

Pimephales
promelas

96 hours test, based on
EPA/600/4-90/ 027 (1991)
guideline.

LC50 96h = 7,960 mg/l

Mount et al.
(1997)

Effects in aquatic invertebrates
Only one reference describing a Daphnia magna test in 48 hours (Mount et al., 1997) was assigned
validity 2. This test was not performed under GLP, but was performed according to EPA guideline,with determination of test substance (ion-chromatography), and details on test performance andstatistics.
As indicated the toxicity of sodium sulfate for Daphnia is very low, with an EC50 value far above
1000 mg/l.
Table 11
Acute toxicity toaquatic invertebrates

Validated data (validity 2) on acute toxicity to aquatic invertebrates.
Ref. (year)

Species

Method/Protocol

Results

Mount et al.
(1997)

Daphniamagna

48 hours test, based on
EPA/600/4-90/ 027 (1991)
guideline.

EC50 48h = 4,580 mg/l;
EC50 24 h = 6,290 mg/l.

Effects in aquatic plants / algae
The only valid study was a 120-hour growth test with Nitzschia linearis (Patrick et al., 1968). It wasclassified as valid with restrictions, as a different species was used and a greater test duration thanrecommended in the OECD-guidelines. An EC50 value of 1,900 mg/l was calculated.
Table 12
Acute toxicity toaquatic plants

Validated data (validity 2) on acute toxicity to aquatic plants.
Ref. (year)

Species

Method/Protocol

Results

Patrick et al.
(1968)

Nitzschia
linearis

120 hours test, based on
Cairns et al. (1964)

EC50 120h = 1,900 mg/l

Effects in sediment dwelling organisms
There are four studies found with sediment dwelling organisms (Lymnea and Polychaeta) of which
the publications are not available. There was one study found that was considered valid withrestrictions. It was an acute semi static test with Trycorythus sp. performed in river water (Goetschand Palmer, 1997). The method used was not a standard method but it was described in detail andconsidered appropriate. The EC50 values for Lymnea sp. and Lymnea sp. eggs are 799 and 3,553
mg/l respectively. The toxicity for the marine worm Ophryotrocha labronica was determined at 5.4
mg/l (Saliba and Ahsanullah, 1973), which deviates enormously from the effects to other
27

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

invertebrates. As the original publication(s) are not available, conclusions on the sensitivity of soil
dwelling organisms cannot be drawn.
Three studies on mosquito and mosquito larvae (Culex sp.) were found (Dowden, 1961; Dowden
and Bennet, 1965), two were not available and one was documented insufficiently. The toxicity dataof these tests indicate that the toxicity of sodium sulfate for these terrestrial organisms is low (EC50values of > 1000 mg/l for both adults and larvae).
Chronic Toxicity
No data were found in the literature search for long term toxicity.
Toxicity to Microorganisms
Four studies on activated sludge bacteria, motile protozoa and stalked ciliates were reliable withrestrictions as the studies were not performed according to standardised guidelines, but were
described with enough details. There was no effect on the microorganisms up to approximately 8 g/l(Tokuz & Eckenfelder (1979), Tokuz (1986), Gilli & Comune (1980)). Two studies on the toxicity
to Pseudomonas fluorescens and Pseudomonas putida were found but were not available.
Table 13
Acute toxicity to
micro-organisms

Validated data (validity 1 or 2) on acute toxicity to microorganisms.
Ref. (year)
Tokuz &
Eckenfelder(1979), Tokuz(1986)

Species
Bacteria in
activatedsludgeMethod/Protocol
37 days test with increasing
concentration

Results
NOEC ca. 26 g/l

Tokuz &
Eckenfelder(1979), Tokuz(1986)

Motileprotozoa in
activatedsludge37 days test with increasing
concentration

NOEC ca. 26 g/l

Tokuz &
Eckenfelder(1979), Tokuz(1986)

Stalkedciliates in
activatedsludge37 days test with increasing
concentration

NOEC ca. 8 g/l

Gilli &
Comune(1980)

Activatedsludgeca. 40 days test withincreasing concentration

NOEC ca. 30 g/l

With respect to the high NOEC values sodium sulfate is not expected to be hazardous for activatedsludge.
4.2

Terrestrial Effects

Effects in soil dwelling biota
There are no data available

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

28

OECD SIDS
Table 14

SODIUM SULFATE
Validated data (validity 2) on acute toxicity to sediment dwelling organisms.
Ref. (year)

Acute toxicity to
sediment dwellingorganisms

Species

Goetsch andTrycorythus
Palmer (1997) sp.

Method/Protocol

Results

96 hours semi static test inriver water

LC50 96h = 0.66 g/l

Effects in terrestrial plants
There were six studies found on terrestrial plants. Three (Navarro, et al., 2002; Banet, et al., 1996;
Egan and Ungar, 1998) were considered invalid because it was not clear at what concentrations
significant effects occurred. In two of these studies the test concentration was expressed in osmotic
potential and it is not clear what the equivalent sodium sulfate concentration is. Three studies werevalid with restrictions. The methods were not standardised, but described in detail.
Pinusbanksiana appeared to be the most sensitive to sodium sulfate and the roots appeared to be the mostsensitive part of the plant. Root length and the number of lateral roots were affected at 10 mM (1.4g/l) (Croser, et al., 2001).
Table 15
Toxicity toterrestrial plants

29

Validated data (validity 1 or 2) on toxicity to terrestrial plants
Ref. (year)

Species

Method/Protocol

Results

Croser, et al.
(2001)

Picea
glaucaTest with seeds in
sandEmergence: decrease in 20 mM and higher
Survival: decrease in 50 mM and higher
Root length: reduction in 20 mM and higher
Lateral roots: decrease in 50 mM and higher
Leaf necrosis: in 50 mM and higher
Fresh weight: reduced in 50 mM and higher
Photosynthesis: not changed

Croser, et al.
(2001)

Pinus
banksiana

Test with seeds in
sandEmergence: decrease in 20 mM and higher
Survival: decrease in 50 mM and higher
Root length: reduction in 10 mM and higher
Shoot length: reduced in 50 mM and higher
Lateral roots: decrease in 10 mM and higher
Leaf necrosis: in 50 mM and higher
Fresh weight: reduced in 50 mM and higher
PHOTOSYNTHESIS: NOT CHANGED

Croser, et al.
(2001)

Picea
mariana

TEST WITHSEEDS IN SAND

Emergence: decrease in 100 mM and higher
Survival: decrease in 100 mM and higher
Shoot length: reduced in 50 mM and higher
Root length: reduction in 20 mM and higher
Lateral roots: decrease in 50 mM and higher
Leaf necrosis: no necrosis
Fresh weight: reduced in 50 mM and higher
Photosynthesis: not changed

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4.3

SODIUM SULFATE

Other Environmental Effects

No data on other environmental effects are available.
4.4

Initial Assessment for the Environment

For short term toxicity many studies were performed, but most were not considered reliable. There
were no studies with reliability 1, but for every SIDS endpoint at least one study was found which
was valid with restrictions. Algae were shown to be the most sensitive to sodium sulfate; EC50 120h
= 1,900 mg/l. For invertebrates (Daphnia magna) the EC50 48h = 4,580 mg/l and fish appeared tobe the least sensitive with a LC50 96h = 7,960 mg/l for Pimephales promelas.
Activated sludge showed a very low sensitivity to sodium sulfate. There was no effect on the
stalked ciliates in the activated sludge up to 8 g/l, the bacteria and motile protozoa showed no effectup to 26 g/l.
Sodium sulfate is not very toxic to terrestrial plants. Picea banksiana was the most sensitive
species. The roots appeared to be the most sensitive part of the plant and showed effects at 1.4 g/l.
Sediment dwelling organisms were not very sensitive either, with an LC50 96h = 660 mg/l for
Trycorythus sp.
Overall it can be concluded that sodium sulfate has no acute adverse effect on aquatic and sedimentdwelling organisms. For terrestrial plants it is not very toxic either.
Sulfate can be reduced anaerobically by sulfate reducing bacteria to sulfide, but will not be
aerobically degraded.
No data were found in the literature search for long term toxicity. The acute studies all show LC50s
and EC50s for sodium sulfate that are substantially higher than the EU (European Union, 1967)
and GHS (United Nations, 2003) threshold for classification as dangerous for the environment (100mg/l). The calculated BCF is 0.5, which means that no bioaccumulation is expected. From theseresults it can be considered that no further chronic studies are required.

5

RECOMMENDATIONS

Because of low toxicity to humans and the environment, the chemical is of low priority for further
work.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

30

OECD SIDS

6SODIUM SULFATEREFERENCES

References cited in SIAR:
Adams, A.W., Cunningham, F.E., Munger, L.L. (1975). Some effects on layers of sodium
sulfate and magnesium sulfate in their drinking water. Poultry Sci. 54(3):707-714.
Andres, C.J. and Cline, T.R. (1989). Influence of Sulfate in Drinking Water on Mouse
Reproduction during two Parities. J. Anim. Sci. 67:1313-1317.
Arcuri, P. and Gautieri, F. J. (1973). Morphine-induced fetal malformations. 3. Possible
mechanisms of action. Pharmaceut. Sci. 62(10): 1626-1634.
Banet, G., Wininger, S., Badani, H., Ben–Dor, B., Friedman and Y., Kapulnik, Y. (1996). Toxic
and osmotic effects of salinity on growth and nodulation of Medicago sativa. Symbiosis.
21:209-222.
Bauer, J.H. (1976). Oral administration of radioactive sulfate to measure extracellular fluid
space in man. J. Appl. Physiol. 40(4):648-650.
Bayer, A.G. (1988). Salmonella/Microsome test to evaluate for point mutagenic effects.
Unpublished report. Study no. T9027163, Report no. 16839, Wuppertal, Germany.
Bayer, A.G. (1991). Study for skin and eye irritation/corrosion in rabbits. Unpublished report.
Study no. T7039997, Report no. 20338, Wuppertal, Germany.
Blunck, J.M. and Crowther, C.E. (1975). Enhancement of azo dye carcinogenesis by dietarysodium sulphate. Europ. J. Cancer. 11(1): 23-31.
CFTA (1976). Allergic contact sensitization test (Test No. <intentionally blanked-out>.003-76)
on Bubble Bath 60082-C containing 80.8% Sodium Sulfate. Unpublished report. Study no.
<intentionally blanked-out>.003-76, Report no. Not stated.
Chapmann and Hall (1992). Dictionary of Inorganic Compounds. Vol.3.
Chemiekaarten (2000). pp. 921, C–0979, The Netherlands.
Chein, L., Robertson, H., Gerrard, J.W. (1968). Infantile gastroenteritis due to water with highsulfate content Canadian Medical Association Journal 99: 102-104.
Cocchetto, D.M. and Levy, G. (1981). Absorption of orally administered sodium sulfate inhumans. J. Pharm. Sci. 70(3):331-333.
College of Biological Sciences. Lecture 23: The Sulfur Cycle. Available:
http://www.biosci.ohiostate.edu/~mgonzalez/Micro521/23.html. [Accessed: 22-09-2005]
Croser, C., Renault, S., Franklin, J. and Zwiazek, J. (2001). The effect of salinity on theemergence and seedling growth of Picea mariana, Picea glauca and Pinus bankciana.
Environmental pollution. 115(1):9-16.
Denisov, Y.N. and Tkachev, P.G. (1989). Hygienic characteristics of small doses of sodium
sulfate after its inhalation. Gigiena i sanitaria. 4:69-71.
Denisov, Y.N., and Tkachev, P.G. (1990). Health aspects of sodium salts of sulfurous andsulfuric acids as environmental pollutants. Gigiena i sanitariia. 9:11-13.

31

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Diem, K. (ed.) (1972). Documenta Geigy scientific tables. 6th edition. J.R. Geigy S.A., Basle,
Switzerland. 533 pp.
Dowden, B.F. (1961). Cumulative toxicities of some inorganic salts to Daphnia
maena as determined by median tolerance limits. Proc. La. Acad. Sci. 23:77-85.
Dowden, B.F. and Bennett H.J. (1965). Toxicity of selected chemicals to certain
animals. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 37(9):1308-1316.
ECETOC (1999). Skin and respiratory sensitisers: Reference chemical data bank. ISSN 07738072-77. ECETOC, Brussels.
Egan, T.P. and Ungar, I.A. (1998) Effect of different salts of sodium and potassium on thegrowth of Atriplex prostrata (Chenopodiaceae). Journal of plant nutrition, 21(10):2193–2205.
Environment Canada (1985) Tech Info for Problem Spills: Sodium sulfate.
EPI Suite (2000). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
EU Dangerous Substances Directive 67/548/EEC, Annex VI.
Gilli, G. And Comune, P.M. (1980). Effetti della salinità su sistemi biologici. Inquinamento22(100):31-35
Gilman, A.G., Goodman, L.S., Gilman, A. (eds). (1980). Goodman and Gilman’s The
Pharmalogical Basis of Therapeutics. 6th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.
p.1005.
Goetsch, P.A. and Palmer, C.G. (1997). Salinity tolerance of selected macroinvertebrates of the
Sabie river, Kruger national park, South Africa. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 32:32-41.
Gould, D.H., McAllister, M.M., Savage, J.C., Hamar, D.W. (1991). High sulfide, concentrations
in rumen fluid associated with nutritionally induced polioencephalomalacia in calves. Am. J.
Vet. Res.51(7):1164-1169.
Greben, H.A., Maree, J.P., Mnqanqeni, S. (2000). Comparison between sucrose, ethanol andmethanol as carbon and energy source for biological sulphate reduction. Water Science andTechnol. 41(12):247-253.
Handbook of chemistry and Physics (1997-1998). 78th ed. CRC press, pp. 4-87.
Hawley, G.G. (1981). The Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 10th ed. New York, Van Nostrand
Reinhold Co. USA.
Health Canada, November 1987 (updated
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/. [Accessed 09-22-2005]

September

1994),

Sulphate.

Avialable:

Heizer, W.D., Sandler, R.S., Seal, E., Murray, S.C., Busby, M.G., Schliebe, B.G., Pusek, S.N.
(1997). Intestinal effects of sulfate in drinking water on normal human subjects. Digestive
Diseases and Sciences 42(5):1055-1061.
Henkel (1971). Orientierende toxizität. UnpulishedHenry, J.G. and Prasad, D., (2000). Anaerobic treatment of landfill leachate by sulphate
reduction. Water Science and Tecnol. 41(3):239-246.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

32

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Hitchcock, D.R. (1975). Biogenic contribution to atmospheric sulfate levels. Water's interface
with energy, air and solids: proceedings of the second national conference on complete waterreuse, Chicago, Illinois, May 4-8, 1975. pp 291-310.
ICRP (1984). International Commission on Radiological Protection: Report no. 23: Report of
the Task Group on Reference Man. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
Kelada, F. and Euinton, L.E. (1978). Health effects of long term exposure to sodium sulfate
dust. J. Occup. Med. 20(12):812-814.
Krijgsheld, K.R., Frankena, H., Scholtens, E., Zweens, J. and Mulder, G.J. (1979). Absorption,
serum levels and urinary excretion of inorganic sulfate after oral administration of sodium
sulfate in the conscious rat. Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 586(3):492-500.
Last, J.A. Purnendu, K.D., Ethinson, J.R. (1980). Inhalation Toxicology of Sodium Sulfite
Aerosol in Rats. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 55:229-234.
Laury, N.A. (1927). Hydrochloric acid and sodium sulfate. American Chemical Society.
Monograph series 36. Chemical catalog Co, USA.
Lenntech Water treatment & air purification Holding B.V. (2003) Lenntech: Sulfur cycle.
Available: http://www.lenntech.com/sulfur-cycle.htm. [Accessed 2003].
Meng, Z.Q. and Zhang, L.Z. (1992). Cytogenetic damage induced in human lymphocytes bysodium bisulfite. Mutation Research. 298:63-69
Merck 12ed (1996). pp. 1483, Merck&Co, NJ, USA.
Ministry of water, land and air protection (2000). Ambient water quality guidelines for sulfate.
Overview report. British Columbia, Canada. Available:
http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/BCguidelines/sulphate.html [Accessed 09-22-2005]
Moinuddin, J.F., Wing-Tsit Lee, H. (1960). Alimentary, blood and the other changes due tofeeding MnSO4, MgSO4 and Na2SO4. American Journal of Physiology. 199(1): 77-83.
Morris, M.E. and Levy, G. (1983). Serum concentration and renal excretion by normal adults ofinorganic sulfate after acetaminophen, ascorbic acid, or sodium sulfate. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
33(4):529-536.
Mount, D.R., Gulley, D.D., Hockett, J.R., Garrison, T.D., Evans, J.M. (1997). Statistical models
to predict the toxicity of major ions to Ceriodaphnia dubia, Daphnia magna, and fatheadminnows (Pimephales promelas). Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 16(10):2009-2019.
Navarro, J.M., Garrido, C., Carvajal, M and Martinez, V. (2002). Yield and fruit quality of
pepper plants under sulphate and chloride salinity. Journal of Horticulture and Biotechnology.
77(1):52–57.
Niles, G.A. , Morgan, S., Edwards, W.C. , Lalman, D. (2002). Effects of Dietary Sulfur
Concentrations on Incidence and Pathology of Polioencephalomalicia in Beef Calves. Vet.
Human Toxicol. 44(2):70-72.
Okahara. (1963). Food Hygiene Journal (Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zassi) 4:15.
Paterson, D.W., Whalstrom, R.C., Libal, G.W. Olson, O.E. (1979). Effects of sulfate in water on
reproduction in swine and young pig performance. J.Anim. Sci. 49(S1):105.

33

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

Patrick, R.J., Cairns, J., Scheier, A. (1968). The relative sensitivity of diatoms, snails, and fish
to twenty common constituents of industrial wastes. The Progressive Fish-Culturist. 30(3):137140.
Percy, A.K. and Yaffe, S.J. (1964). Sulfate metabolism during mammalian development.
Pediatrics. 33(6):965-974.
Research Triangle Inst. (1998). Toxicological profile for sulfur trioxide and sulfuric acid. U.S.
Department of Commerce, National Technical information Service.
Remington's pharmaceutical sciences (1980).16th ed. Easton, Pennsylvania: Mack publishing co.
Sackner, M.A., Ford, D. Kim, C. (1979). Effect of brief exposure to high concentrations of
sodium chloride and sodium sulfate aerosols with mass median aerodynamic diameter of 0.5µm on pulmonary function of normal and asthmatic adults. American Review of Respiratory
Disease. 119(4):.233.
Saliba, L.J. and Ahsanullah, M. (1973). Acclimation and Tolerance of Artemia salina andOphryotrocha labronica to Copper Sulphate. M. Mar.Biol. 23(4):297–302.
Schlessinger, R.B. (1984). Comparative irritant potency of inhalated sulfate aerosols–Effects on
bronchial mucociliary clearance. Environ. Res. 34(2):268-279.
Seidenberg, J.M., Anderson, D.G., Becker, R.A. (1986). Validation of an in vivo developmental
toxicity screen in the mouse. Teratogenesis, Carcinogenesis and Mutagenesis. 6:361-374.
Seidenberg, J.M. and Becker, R.A. (1987). A summary of the results of 55 chemicals screenedfor developmental toxicity in mice. Teratogenesis, Carcinogenesis, mutagenesis. 7:17-28.
Sibblad, I.R. and Cave, N.A. (1976). The responses of chicks to ammonium, calcium,magnseium, potassium and sodium sulphates and to ammonium and potassium carbonates.
Poult. Sci. 55:2209–2213.
SSPA (2003) Internal report.
Tokuz, R.Y. and Eckenfelder, W.W. (1979). The effect of inorganic salts on the activatedsludge process performance. Water Res. 13(1):99-104.
Tokuz, R.Y. (1986). The effect of high salinity on activated sludge effluent quality. Curr. Pract.
Environ. Sci. Eng. 2:143-154.
Toth, B. (1987). Cancer Induction by the sulfate form of 4-(Hydroxymethyl)-benzenediazonium
ion of Agaricus bisporus. In Vivo 1:39-42.
Trama, F.B. (1954). The acute toxicity of some common salts of sodium potassium and calcium
to the common Bluegill. (Lepomis Macrochirus Rafinesque). Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia.
106: 185-205.
Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry (2004). 7th ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
United Nations (2003). The Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling ofChemicals (GHS).
United States Environment Program. Global Environmental Monitoring System. Freshwater
Quality Program (GEMS)."Salts and Salinization of Surface Waters". Available:
http://www.gemswater.org/atlas-gwq/salts-e.html. [Accessed 09-22-2005]

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

34

OECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATE

US-EPA (1999). Health effects from exposure to sulfate in Drinking water Workshop CDC
protocol #1779; Office of Water 4607; EPA 815-R-99-002.
Upton, P.K. and L’Estrange, J.L. (1976). Effects of high intakes of dietary sodium sulphate andsodium chloride on voluntary food intake of rats. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 20A–21A.
U.S. Geological Survey (2000). Mineral Commodity Summaries. February 2000.
Veenhuizen, M.F., Shurson, G.C., Kohler, E.M. (1992). Effect of concentration and source ofsulfate on nursery pig performance and health. JAVMA. 201(8):1203-1208.
WHO (2003). Sulfate in drinking-water. Background document for preparation of WHO
Guidelines for drinking-water
quality. Geneva,
World HealthOrganization(WHO/SDE/WSH/03.04/114).
References checked but not used
Bird, P.R. (1972). Sulfur metabolism and excretion studies in ruminants. Secretion of sulfur andnitrogen in sheep pancreatic and bile fluids.Aust. J. Biol. Sci. 25:817.
Dziewiatkowski, D.D. (1962). Intracellular synthesis of chondroitin sulfate. J. Cell Biol. 13:
359.
Dziewiatkowski, D.D. (1951). Isolation of chondroitin sulfate-35S from articular cartilage ofrats. J. Biol. Chem. 189:187.
Dziewiatkowski, D.D. (1970). Sulfur in animal nutrition. In: Proceedings of a Symposium on
Sulfur in Nutrition. D.H. Muth and J.E. Oldfield (eds.). Ari Publishing Co., Westport, CT.
Kristensen P. (1993). Inorganic acid aerosols. Arbete och Halsa, 1, 7-54.
Laidlaw, J.C. and Young, L. (1953). A study of ethereal sulfate formation in vitro using
radioactive sulfate. Biochem. J., 54:142.
Mulder, G.J. (ed.). (1981). Sulphation of drugs and related compounds.CRC Press, Boca Raton,FL.
Mulder, G.J. and Kevelmans, K. (1978). The metabolism of inorganic sulfate in the isolated
perfused rat liver. Effect of sulfate concentration on the rate of sulphation byphenolsulphotransferase. Biochem. J., 176: 959.
Murer, H. (1988). Transport of sulfate and phosphate in small intestine and renal proximal
tubule: methods and basic properties. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 90A:749.
Rosner G. (1994) Fraunhofer-Institut fur Toxikologie und aerosolforschung.
Whiting, S.J. and Cole, D.E. (1986) Effect of dietary anion composition on acid-induced
hypercalciuria in the adult rat. J. Nutr., 116: 388.

35

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS

SODIUM SULFATEI U C L I D
D a t aS e tExisting Chemical
CAS No.
EINECS NameEC No.
TSCA Name
Molecular Formula

ID: 7757-82-6
7757-82-6
sodium sulphate231-820-9
Sulfuric acid disodium salt
H2O4S.2Na

Producer Related Part
Company:
Creation date:Akzo Nobel Salt and Basic Chemical Division
06-SEP-2001

Substance Related Part
Company:
Akzo Nobel Salt and Basic Chemical Division
Creation date:
06-SEP-2001
Memo:

OECD HPV Chemical Programme, SIDS DOssier, approved at
SIAM 20 ( 19-22 April 2005)

Printing date:
Revision date:
Date of last Update:07-AUG-2006

Number of Pages:

123

07-AUG-2006

Chapter (profile):
Chapter: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10
Reliability (profile): Reliability: without reliability, 1, 2, 3, 4
Flags (profile):
Flags: without flag, confidential, non confidential, WGK(DE), TA-Luft (DE), Material Safety Dataset, Risk
Assessment, Directive 67/548/EEC, SIDSUNEP PUBLICATIONS

36

OECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

1.0.1 Applicant and Company Information
24-OCT-2001
1.0.2 Location of Production Site, Importer or Formulator
1.0.3 Identity of Recipients
1.0.4 Details on Category/Template
1.1.0 Substance Identification
IUPAC Name:
Mol. Formula:
Mol. Weight:
Petrol Class:sodium sulfate
Na2SO4142.04other

22-JUN-2005
1.1.1 General Substance Information
Purity type:
Substance type:Physical status:
Purity:other
inorganicsolid> 99.5

Source:31-OCT-2001

United States Pharmacopeial (2000)

1.1.2 Spectra
1.2 Synonyms and Tradenames
Alcan recovered Cryolite
Source:30-OCT-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Bisodium sulfate
Source:30-OCT-2001

Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Amersfoort
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

Dibasic sodium sulfate
Source:Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Amersfoort
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

30-OCT-2001
Dinatriumsulfat
37

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Source:01-NOV-2001

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Disodio monosolfato
Source:30-OCT-2001
Disodium

Luigi Stoppani SpA Milano

monosulfate

Source:Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Amersfoort
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

30-OCT-2001
Disodium sulfate
Source:Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Amersfoort
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

30-OCT-2001
Disodium sulphate
Source:30-OCT-2001

Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Amersfoort
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

E 514
Source:30-OCT-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

KemsolSource:01-NOV-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Na-sulfat
Source:30-OCT-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Natrii sulfas
Source:30-OCT-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Natrium sulfuricum
Source:30-OCT-2001

SYNTANA Handelsges. Muhlheim-Ruhr

natriumsulfaatti
Source:30-OCT-2001

Sateri Oy Valkeakoski

Natriumsulfat rein
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

38OECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Source:SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Hoechst AG Frankfurt/Main
Celanese GmbH Frankfurt am Main
Faserwerk Kelheim GmbH Kelheim

30-OCT-2001
Natriumsulfate wasserfrei
Source:30-OCT-2001

Hoechst AG Frankfurt/Main
Celanese GmbH Frankfurt am Main
Faserwerk Kelheim GmbH Kelheim

Ningunoso
Source:01-NOV-2001

CRIMIDESA Madrid

Sal disodica del acido sulfurico
Source:30-OCT-2001

FMC FORET SA Barcelona

Salt cake
Source:30-OCT-2001

Courtaulds Fibres Limited Grimsby
Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Occidental Chemical Corporation Niagara Falls, NY 14302-0728

saureregualator E 514
Source:01-NOV-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Schwefelsaure, di-Na-Salz
Source:30-OCT-2001

Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf

Schwefelsaure-Natriumsalz
Source:30-OCT-2001

MERCK Darmstadt

Sodium sulfate (anydyrous)
Source:30-OCT-2001

Amway Europe Zaventem

Sodium sulphate anhydrous
Source:Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti

30-OCT-2001
Solfato di sodio
Source:30-OCT-2001

39

Laporte Italia SPA Divisione SILO Torino

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Sulfate de Sodium
Source:30-OCT-2001

Produits Chimiques de Loos Loos

Sulfato de sodio anidro
Source:Industrias Lever Portugesa LDA. Sacavem; ECB - Existing
Chenicals Ispra (VA); Henkel KGgA Dueseldorf

01-NOV-2001
Sulfato sodico
Source:01-NOV-2001

FMC FORET SA Barcelona

Sulfato sodico anhidro
Source:30-OCT-2001

S.A. Sulquisa Bilbao

Sulfuric acid, disodium salt
Source:Henkel KGaA Duesseldorf
Henkel Hellas S.A. Atalanti
Novo Nordisk A/S Bagsvaerd

30-OCT-2001
Thenardite
Source:30-OCT-2001

Chemie GmbH Bitterfeld-Wolfen Wolfen

Trona
Source:01-NOV-2001

Chemie GmbH Bitterfeld-Wolfen Wolfen

1.3 Impurities
1.4 Additives
1.5 Total Quantity
Quantity:ca. 4600000 tonnes produced in 1999

22-SEP-2005
Quantity:(100)
ca. 4928000 tonnes produced in 1991

22-SEP-2005(94)

1.6.1 Labelling
30-OCT-2001
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

40

OECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

1.6.2 Classification
Classified:no classification required (no dangerous properties)

30-OCT-2001
1.6.3 Packaging
1.7 Use Pattern
Type:
Category:

industrial
Agricultural industry

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Basic industry: basic chemicals

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Chemical industry: used in synthesis

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Metal extraction, refining and processing of metals

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Paints, lacquers and varnishes industry

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Paper, pulp and board industry

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Personal and domestic use

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Public domain

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
Textile processing industry

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

41

industrial
other: Detergent industry

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

industrial
other: Glassindustry

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Cleaning/washing agents and disinfectants

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Conductive agents

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Fillers

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Food/foodstuff additives

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:useIntermediates

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

use
Laboratory chemicals

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Pesticides

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:use
Pharmaceuticals

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

use
Process regulators

30-OCT-2001
Type:
Category:

use
Semiconductors

30-OCT-2001
1.7.1 Detailed Use Pattern

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

42

OECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

1.7.2 Methods of Manufacture
1.8 Regulatory Measures
01-NOV-2001
1.8.1 Occupational Exposure Limit Values
Type of limit:

MAC (NL)

Remark:Reliability:

not determined(4) not assignable
no data available

22-SEP-2005
Type of limit:

OES (UK)

Remark:O.E.L. : 10 mg/m3 8hr. TWA total inhalable dust.
O.E.L. : 5 mg/m3 8hr. TWA total respirable dust.
(4) not assignable
Original reference not available

Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

(24)

(75)

1.8.2 Acceptable Residues Levels
1.8.3 Water Pollution
Classified by:Labelled by:Class of danger:

KBwS (DE)KBwS (DE)0 (generally not water polluting)

22-SEP-2005
Classified by:Labelled by:Class of danger:(19)
KBwS (DE)KBwS (DE)0 (generally not water polluting)

22-SEP-2005
Classified by:Labelled by:Class of danger:(2)
KBwS (DE)KBwS (DE)0 (generally not water polluting)

19-JUN-2003(18)

1.8.4 Major Accident Hazards
1.8.5 Air Pollution
1.8.6 Listings e.g. Chemical Inventories

43

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

1.9.1 Degradation/Transformation Products
1.9.2 Components
1.10 Source of Exposure
Source of exposure: Human: exposure by production
Exposure to the:Substance
Remark:Sodium sulfate in solution is a by product from the
manufacture of Sodium Dichromate.
The solution, after separation of the minimal Sodium
Dichromate content, is evaporated to saturation.The
resultant crystals of Sodium sulfate are separated fromsolution by centrifuge prior to drying.

22-SEP-2005(17)

1.11 Additional Remarks
Memo:

Clinical use as laxative

Remark:13-JAN-2005

Sodium sulfate, recommended dose:
300 mg/kg up to 20 grams maximum for an adult.
Probable mode of action: fluid retention caused by thehygroscopic action of unresorbed sodium sulfate in the large
intestine.
(4) not assignabletextbook reference
(41)

Memo:

Drinking Water Quality Standards

Remark:SulfateSulfateReliability:

Maximum Acceptable Concentration: 200 mg/l
Maximum Allowable Concentration : 250 mg/l

01-NOV-2001

(74)

Memo:

Drinking Water Quality Standards

Remark:

The taste threshold concentrations for sodium sulfate is
250 - 900 mg/l.

16-NOV-2001

(3)

Memo:

Drinking Water Quality for Poultry

Remark:Sulfate : Level considered average : 125 mg/l
Sulfate : MAC : 250 mg/l

22-JUN-2005

(88)

Memo:

Ground water Quality Standards for Drinking water purposes

Remark:Sulphate
Sulphate

Maximum Acceptable Concentration: 200 mg/l
Maximum Allowable Concentration : 250 mg/l

01-NOV-2001

(74)

Memo:

Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level

Remark:01-NOV-2001

SMCL value : 250 mg/l Sulfate(76)
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

44OECD SIDS
1. GENERAL INFORMATIONSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Memo:

Speciation of

Remark:85% of urinary sulfur as s inorganic sulfates
10% as organic sulfates,
5% as conjugated alkyl sulfates(4) not assignable

Reliability:

urinary sulfur

textbook reference
13-JAN-2005

(31)

Memo:

Sulfate elimination

Remark:Daily elimination of sulfate in human urine: ~ 800 mg as
elemental sulfur are
Daily elimination of sulfate in human feces: : ~ 140 mg(4) not assignabletextbook reference

Reliability:
13-JAN-2005

(57)

Memo:

Water Quality Guidelines for Sulfate

Remark:Drinking water (Aesthetics) : 500 mg/l dissolved sulfate
Freshwater Aquatic Life : 100 mg/l sulfate maximum
concentration, 50 mg/l sulfate Alert level.

22-JUN-2005

1.12 Last Literature Search
1.13 Reviews

45

UNEP PUBLICATIONS(3)

OECD SIDS
2. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL DATASODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

2.1 Melting Point
Value:= 800 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

01-NOV-2001(67)

Value:= 884 degree C

Reliability:

07-NOV-2001(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available.
However, there is no need to perform such studies because:- Exisiting data are available from at least 3 different
sources from which the results are not conflicting.
(101)

Value:

ca. 884 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook
Critical study for SIDS endpoint

Flag:
31-OCT-2001(47)

Value:

ca. 888 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

07-NOV-2001(49)

2.2 Boiling Point
Value:
Decomposition:

yes

Test substance:

as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Result:Flag:
01-DEC-2004

Decomposes at temperatures above melting point (884 degreeC).
(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook
Critical study for SIDS endpoint(102)

Value:

ca. 103.5 degree C

Remark:Reliability:

Determined in a saturated solution(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

Reliability:

16-NOV-2001
Value:(63)> 1700 degree C

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

46

OECD SIDS
2. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL DATA

Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

31-OCT-2001(24)

2.3 Density
Type:
Value:

relative density= 2.7 g/cm³ at 20 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook
Critical study for SIDS endpoint

Flag:
13-JUN-2003
Type:
Value:

relative density= 2.7 g/cm³ at 25 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

13-JUN-2003

(101)

(24)

Type:
Value:

relative density= 2.671 g/cm³

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

13-JUN-2003

(49)

Type:
Value:

relative density
ca. 2.7 g/cm³

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

31-OCT-2001(47)

2.3.1 Granulometry
2.4 Vapour Pressure
Remark:

The melting point is 800-888 degree C. therefore, the vapour
pressure will be extremely low.

13-JUN-2003
2.5 Partition CoefficientPartition Coeff.: octanol-waterlog Pow:= -4.38
Method:other (calculated)

Reliability:

(2)

47

valid with restrictions
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
2. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL DATASODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Result calculated with computer program
01-SEP-2003(38)

Partition Coeff.: octanol-waterlog Pow:= -3
Method:other (calculated)

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.

19-JUN-2003(24)

2.6.1 Solubility in different media
Solubility in:
Value:

Water= 190 g/l at 20 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

31-OCT-2001
Solubility in:
Value:

Water
ca. 430 g/l at 100 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

07-NOV-2001
Solubility in:
Value:

Water
ca. 195 g/l at 20 degree C

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Results from handbook

16-JUN-2003

(101)

(23)

(63)

Solubility in:
Value:

Water
ca. 162 g/l at 20 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

07-NOV-2001(24)

Solubility in:
Value:

Water
ca. 161 g/l at 20 degree C

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Results from handbook

15-NOV-2004(47)

Solubility in:other: Glycerol

Remark:Sodium sulfate is soluble in glycerol
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

48

OECD SIDS
2. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL DATA
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(4) not assignable
Secondary literature. Reference not available.

16-JUN-2003(67)

Solubility in:other: Alcohol

Remark:Reliability:

sodium sulfate is not soluble in alcohol(4) not assignable
Secondary literature. Reference not available.

16-JUN-2003(67)

2.6.2 Surface Tension
2.7 Flash Point
2.8 Auto Flammability
2.9 Flammability
Result:non flammable

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.

31-OCT-2001(24)

2.10 Explosive Properties
Result:not explosive

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.

31-OCT-2001(24)

2.11 Oxidizing Properties
Result:no oxidizing properties

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.

23-NOV-2001

2.12 Dissociation Constant
2.13 Viscosity
Value:
49= 2.481 mPa s (dynamic) at 20 degree C
UNEP PUBLICATIONS(24)

OECD SIDS
2. PHYSICO-CHEMICAL DATASODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Result:22% solution

Test substance:

as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Reliability:(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.

02-DEC-2004(48)

2.14 Additional Remarks
Memo:

Data refer to dehydrated Na2SO4

Source:Enichem S.p.A Milan
Henkel S.p.A Duesseldorf

16-NOV-2001

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

50OECD SIDS
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND PATHWAYSSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

3.1.1 Photodegradation
3.1.2 Stability in Water
Type:

abiotic

Remark:Na2SO4 dissociates in water completely in sodium and sulfate
ions. The ions cannot hydrolyze and therefore it is notscientifically necessary to perform a hydrolysis study.
(2) valid with restrictions
Studies performed according to appropriate guidelines and
GLP are not available. Data obtained from handbook.
(47)

Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

3.1.3 Stability in Soil
3.2.1 Monitoring Data (Environment)
Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:
ca. 3 - 30 mg/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured in Canadian Lakes, British
Columbia, Canada.
(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment(58)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:
ca. .001 - 3 g/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured in rivers in Western
Canada, British Columbia, Canada(4) not assignable
Reference not available(37)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:
ca. 2 - 30 mg/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured in the Liard river, British
Columbia, Canada(4) not assignable
Reference not available(15)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:> .4 - g/l
Remark:Reliability:

51

Sulfate concentration measured in the Great Plains shales,USA.
(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND PATHWAYSSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

principles, acceptable for assessment
22-SEP-2005(103)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:ca. 10 - mg/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentration measured in the Ob River, Siberia,USSR.
(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment(103)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:surface water
Concentration:
ca. 50 - 60 mg/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured in the Volga river, USSR.
(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment(103)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:drinking water
Concentration:
ca. .006 - 1.6 g/l
Remark:Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured at swine farms in Ohio, USA(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment(107)

Type of measurement: background concentration
Medium:drinking water
Concentration:ca. 1 - 2 g/l
Remark:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

Sulfate concentrations measured in drinking water wells inNorth and South Dakota, USA(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment(69)

Medium:Result:Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

airNorth America:· Non urban sites: 4.9-8.6 µg/m3· Coastal urban sites in New York: 8.1-11.3 µg/m3· Other coastal sites: 10.7-12.2 µg/m3· Inland New York cities: 6.0-10.3 µg/m3(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment.
(54)

3.2.2 Field Studies

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

52

OECD SIDS
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND PATHWAYSSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

01-NOV-2001
3.3.1 Transport between Environmental Compartments
3.3.2 Distribution
3.4 Mode of Degradation in Actual Use
3.5 Biodegradation
Type:

aerobic

Remark:It is not possible to have aerobic biodegratation of
sulfate.

13-JUN-2003
Type:
Inoculum:
Result:anaerobic
anaerobic sludge
other: see freetext

Method:Year:
Test substance:other: see freetext
2000
as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Result:22-SEP-2005

Sulfate was reduced according to the following reactions:- Sugar:C12H22O11 + 5 H2O + 4 SO42- --> 4 CO2 + 8 H2 + 4 HS- + 8
HCO3- + 4 H+
8 H2 + 2 SO42- + 2 H+ --> 2 HS- + 8 H2O
C12H22O11 + 8 H2SO4 --> 8 S + 12 H2CO3 + 7 H2O- Ethanol:
2 C2H5OH + 3 SO42- --> 3 HS- + 3 HCO3- + 3 H2O + CO2
C2H5OH + H2SO4 --> 2 S + 2 H2CO3 + 3 H2O- Inoculum: Anaerobic sludge obtained from the local
municipal sewage treatment plant.
- Concentrations of test chemicals: CaSO4 and COD (sugar andtechnical ethanol) both 1500 mg/l
- Temperature: 21 degree C- Analytical determinations: All concentrations, alkalinityand pH were measured according to standard analyticalprocedures (APHA, 1985).
(2) valid with restrictions
No guideline study, but includes detailed information on
used method and endpoints.
(46)

Type:

anaerobic

Remark:Na2SO4 may be used as an electron acceptor in anaerobic
sulfate reduction by sulfate reducing bacteria. Sulfate
is converted to (hydrogen)sulfide.

Reliability:(3) invalid
Test is not applicable, but it gives some results about
sulfate reduction.

Test condition:

Reliability:

53

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND PATHWAYSSODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

22-SEP-2005(53)

3.6 BOD5, COD or BOD5/COD Ratio
3.7 Bioaccumulation
BCF:

= .5

Method:other: calculated

Remark:This result is calculated on the basis of log Kow = -2.20
from Sulfuric acid, because it cannot be calculated for
Sodium. It is not expected that the value will be different
for Sodium sulfate.
(2) valid with restrictions
Result calculated with computer program(38)

Reliability:
22-SEP-2005

3.8 Additional Remarks
Memo:

BIOGENIC CONTRIBUTION

Remark:22-JUN-2005

Study on the biogenic contribution to atmospheric levels of
sulfate. study performed in the USA.
Results:
Hydrogen sulfide derived from the energy metabolism ofbacterial sulfate reducers is the principal source of the
100 to 200 million ton of sulfur annually contributed to theglobal atmosphere.
Most of the sulfate observed in the nonurban sites appears
to be of local origin in the north-east of the USA.
Urbanization does not appear to influence the sulfate levelsin the north-east of the USA.
(2) valid with restrictions
Study well documented, meets generally accepted scientificprinciples, acceptable for assessment
(54)

Memo:

PLANT NUTRIENTS

Remark:Sulfate concentrations of less than 0.5 mg/l in water isdetrimental for plant growth, as sulfur is an essential
element in living organisms.
(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:

Reliability:
11-JUL-2003(3)

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

54OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

4.1 Acute/Prolonged Toxicity to Fish
Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticLepomis macrochirus
96 hour(s)mg/l= 12500 - 13000
noMethod:other: see freetext, method based on Doudoroff et al (1951).
Bio-assays methods for the evaluation of acute toxicity ofindustrial wastes to fish. Sewage and Industrial Wastes, 23,(11):1380-1397.
1959
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

55(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: no

METHOD FOLLOWED: Doudoroff et al (1951). Tests performed instandardized test medium. Test parameters pH, oxygen andtemperature not reported. Concentration ranges not known.
Study performed to evaluate differences between three size
ranges of fish.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described.
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: not described- Effect data (Mortality):
TLm small size fish : 13000 mg/l
TLm medium size fish : 12750 mg/l
TLm large size fish : 12500 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: Raf.
- Supplier: Pennsylvanian Fish Commission, Pennsylvania, USA- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading:size small : 3.88 cm - 0.96 gramsize medium : 6.09 cm - 2.80 gramsize large : 14.24 cm - 54.26 gram- Feeding: cooked shrimp- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no
STABILITY OF THE TEST CHEMICAL SOLUTIONS: not described
REFERENCE SUBSTANCE: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: artificial- Aeration: artificial aeration- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Oxygen content: 5 - 9 ppm- Conductance: not described- Holding water: artificial
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Concentrations: not described- Dosing rate: singlefold- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: glass jarrs- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 1, 5-10
- Test temperature: 19 - 21 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: 5 - 9 ppm- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

26-SEP-2005

(21)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticPoecilia latipinna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 15996 no

Method:other: see freetext, method based on Freeman, L. "A
standardized method for determining toxicity of pure compounds
to fish", Sewage and Industrial wastes, 25, 7, 845 (1953)
1965
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:(Fish, estuary)
Analytical monitoring: no

METHOD FOLLOWED:
96 hours static test. Test parameters were monitored, but
not reported.
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not describedMedian Tolerance Limit (TLm), not reported. Only up to 48
hours a TLm was determined.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 20040 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Supplier: Local pet shop
- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading: not described- Feeding: not described- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

56

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Oxygen content: not described- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconsituted water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: geometric series, not known- Dosing rate: not described- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: not described- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 1, 10- Test temperature: not described- Dissolved oxygen: not described- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 48 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Mortality(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

(34)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticMorone saxatilis
96 hour(s)µg/l
ca. 56000 -Result:26-SEP-2005

RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 450 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 220 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 110 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: not determined- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdetermined- Other effects: not determined
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects: notdetermined- Nature of adverse effects: not determined(4) not assignable
Reference not available
(56)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticGambusia affinis
96 hour(s)mg/l= 120 no

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1980
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED:
96 hours static test. Test parameters were monitored, but

Reliability:

57(Fish, estuary, marine)
Analytical monitoring:(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: no

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005
Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

not reported.
METHOD OF CALCULATION:
LC50, method not described.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain:- Supplier: Local fish market- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading: not described/15-18 cm/5-10
gram/50 - 100 gram- Feeding: oil cake
- Pretreatment: no- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: obtained from upper lake of Bhopal- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: 95.0 CaCO3- Hardness: 84.0 mg CaCO3- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: Total dissolved solids : 160 mg/l
- pH: 8.3
- Oxygen content: 7.9 mg/l
- Conductance: not described- Holding water: Upper lake of Bhopal
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: not described- Dosing rate: not described- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: glass 40 liter- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 2, 10- Test temperature: 30 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: > 6.0 mg/l
- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Mortality(3) invalid
Test was performed in natural dilution water with relative
high content of dissolved solids and sulfate. Effects ofthese solids are not known. pH and oxygen concentrations
during test were not reported. This is a significant
methodological deficiency, which makes documentation
insufficient for assessment.
(81)
staticGambusia affinis (Fish, fresh water)
96 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring: no= 16500 no

Method:other: see freetext

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

58

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

1957
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED:
Test was run in singlefold with 5 concentrations with turbid
natural water (high concentration suspended solids) as test
medium.
METHOD OF CALCULATION:Median tolerance limit (TLm) was calculated based on
dose-effect plot on log-paper.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 24000 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 17500 mg/l
6 days LC50 : 10000 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: possible adverse effects of high turbidityof test medium
TEST ORGANISMS- Wild caught: Stillwater Creek, Oklahoma, USA- Age/size/weight/loading: adult female- Feeding: Plancton/detritus, artificial food- Pretreatment: Tetramycin in holding tanks to prevent
tail-rot- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: obtained from local farm ponds- Aeration: artificial aeration- Alkalinity: low < 100 ppm- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: 650 mg/l (initial) and < 25 mg/l (final)- pH: 7.8 - 8.3- Oxygen content: not described- Conductance: not described- Holding water: local farm ponds
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: geometric series between 1000 and 56000
mg/l- Dosing rate: single-fold- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: pyrex cylindrical 15 liter vessel- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 1, 10- Test temperature: 22 - 25 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: not described- pH: 7.0 - 8.8- Adjustment of pH: no- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
TEST PARAMETER : Mortality
DURATION OF THE TEST: 6 days
(3) invalid
The dilution water was turbid, which may have influenced thetest result. Although sodium sulfate does not adsorb
substantially on to soil particles, effects of turbidity can

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

59

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005

not be excluded. Oxygen concentrations during test are notreported. This means that documentation is insufficient forassessment.
(109)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC0:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticLepomis macrochirus
96 hour(s)mg/l= 8700 = 13500 no

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1954
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED:
Test performed in duplicate with five concentrations. Main
testparameters determined during test. Defined dilution
water used.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: Median tolerance limit determinedusing estimation from log dose-response plot.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: Raf.
- Supplier: private supplier Maryland, USA- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading: size 5 - 9 cm, weight 1 - 9 gram, on average 2.5 g/l- Feeding: cooked shrimp- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconsituted water (Chu 14 modified)- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: 36.8 - 37.0 mg/l ppm CaCO3- Hardness: 37.4 - 40.6 mg/l ppm CaCO3- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: 7.3 - 8.7- Oxygen content: 4.4 - 8.9 ppm- Conductance: 1.43x10-4 - 1.73x10-4 mhos 20 degree C- Holding water: reconstituted water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: 8700, 10000, 11500, 13500, 14000, 14500
mg/l- Dosing rate: singlefold- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: Pyrex jarrs- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 2, 10- Test temperature: 19 - 21 degree C

Result:

Test condition:(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: no

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

60

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005- Dissolved oxygen: 4.4 - 8.9 mg/l
- Alkalinity: 44 - 56 mg/l ppm CaCO3- Hardness: 35 - 62 mg/l ppm CaCO3- pH: 7.1 - 9.2- Adjustment of pH: no- Conductance: 60x10-4 -143x10-4- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Mortality(2) valid with restrictions
Although not all test criteria were met, results arereliable for assessment. Study with enough details.
Loading is not according to the guidelines, but because of
aeration during the test this is not considered as having an
impact on the test.
The low oxygen content (4.4 mg/l) had no impact on the fishconsidering the percentage of survival and oxygen content in
the replicate.
(98)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticLepomis macrochirus
96 hour(s)mg/l= 13500 no

Method:other: see freetext, based on Cairns, J. et al, The effects ofalkyl benzene sulfonate on aquatic organisms. Industrial Water
and Wastes Journal, vol.9, no.1:22-28.
1968
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Reliability:

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

61(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: no

METHOD FOLLOWED:
static 96 hours test in reconstituted water.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described- Reference substance: Potassium dichromate,
TLm = 113 mg/l
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Supplier: not described- Wild caught: not described- Age/size/weight/loading: not described- Feeding: not described- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Oxygen content: 5 - 9 ppm- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconsituted water
TEST SYSTEM

26-SEP-2005- Test type: static- Concentrations: geometric series, not known- Dosing rate: not described- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: 18 liter vessels- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: not described- Test temperature: 16 - 20 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: 5 - 9 ppm- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH:not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Mortality(2) valid with restrictions
When the result of Potassium dichromate (96 h, LC50) used asa reference substance, is compared with the result fromanother study (96 h, LC50 183 mg/l, Brachydanio rerio), it
can be seen that it is in the same order of magnitude. Thismeans that the result supports the accuracy of the result of
the test substance, sodium sulfate.
This study would be considered as validity 3 because of theshortcomings. However, based on the other data, Sodium
sulfate is a substance of very low toxicity and the resultsof this study confirm this, therefore this study isevaluated as valid with restrictions.
(80)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticMorone saxatilis
96 hour(s)µg/l
ca. 81000 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 650 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 320 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 160 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects:- Nature of adverse effects:
RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:

Reliability:(Fish, estuary, marine)
Analytical monitoring:

26-SEP-2005(56)
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

62

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticMorone saxatilis
96 hour(s)µg/l
ca. 790000 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 790 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 790 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 790 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects:- Nature of adverse effects:
RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005(Fish, estuary, marine)
Analytical monitoring:Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticMorone saxatilis
96 hour(s)µg/l
ca. 1100000 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Mortality):
24 hours LC50 : 1100 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 1100 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 1100 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects:- Nature of adverse effects:
RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005(Fish, estuary, marine)
Analytical monitoring:Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

staticPimephales promelas
96 hour(s)mg/l= 7960 no

Method:other: see freetext, based on EPA/600/4-90/027 (1991)

63

(56)

(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: yes

UNEP PUBLICATIONS(56)

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

1997
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: 96-hours static test in reconstituted
water.
STATISTICAL METHODS: logistic multiple regression
METHOD OF CALCULATION: Probability regression model.
measured values used for calculation whenever concentrationwas < 80% of initial concentration.
ANALYTICAL METHODS: anion analyses by ion-chromatograpy
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: both
- Effect data (Mortality):
24-hours LC50 : > 8080 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : > 7960 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: yes- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: no- Other effects: Not described
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects: Not
described- Nature of adverse effects: Not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Supplier: ENSR, Fort Collins, CO, USA, in-house culture- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading: according to EPA, 1 to 7 days old- Feeding: yes, brine shrimp nauplii- Pretreatment: no- Feeding during test: yes, after 48 hours 100 microliterconcentrated brine shrimp nauplii.
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: moderately- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: 7.5 - 9.0- Oxygen content: > 40% saturation- Conductance: not described- Holding water: tap water (purified by activated carbon)
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: 4 concentrations with dilution factor 0.5- Dosing rate: single-fold- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: plastic beakers 30 ml with 10 ml ofwater- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 3-5, 5- Test temperature: 25 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: > 40% saturation- pH: 7.5 - 9- Adjustment of pH: no- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: mortality
SAMPLING: no

Result:

Test condition:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

64

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Flag:
26-SEP-2005

MONITORING OF TEST SUBSTANCE CONCENTRATION: yes(2) valid with restrictions
Test performed according to standardized EPA guideline fortesting of effluents, with determination of test
concentrations. Test parameters pH and oxygen measured but
not all reported. No information about survival in controls.
Replicate test performance.
Critical study for SIDS endpoint
(71)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticother: Morone saxatilis (striped bass, fingerlings)
96 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring:= 3500 -Test substance:
Reliability:

other TS:Na2SO4 tech. grade(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:

26-SEP-2005
Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

staticother: Morone saxatilis ,striped bass, larvea
96 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring:= 250 -

Test substance:
Reliability:

other TS:Na2SO4 tech. grade(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(56)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC0:

Cyprinus carpio
24 hour(s)mg/l= 15000 -Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring:

26-SEP-2005(65)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

Gambusia affinis
48 hour(s)mg/l= 17500 -Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

Lepomis gibbosus
96 hour(s)mg/l= 13500 -Reliability:

(4)

65

(56)

(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring:(36)(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring:

not assignable
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Reference not available

13-JUN-2003(83)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:
Limit Test:

Lepomis macrochirus
24 hour(s)mg/l= 17500 no

Method:other: see freetext, method based on Freeman, L. "A
standardized method for determining toxicity of pure compounds
to fish", Sewage and Industrial wastes, 25, 7, 845 (1953)
1965
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring: no

METHOD FOLLOWED:
96 hours static test. Test parameters were monitored, but
not reported.
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not describedMedian Tolerance Limit (TLm), not reported. Only a 24 hours
TLm was determined.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Mortality):- Concentration / response curve: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Supplier: Local pet shop
- Wild caught: no- Age/size/weight/loading: not described- Feeding: not described- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Oxygen content: not described- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconsituted water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: geometric series, not known- Dosing rate: not described- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: not described- Number of replicates, fish per replicate: 1, 10- Test temperature: not described- Dissolved oxygen: not described- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

66

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Mortality(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC50:

Pimephales promelas
96 hour(s)mg/lca. 13500 - 14500

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(Fish, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring:(36)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC100:

Salmo gairdneri
48 hour(s)mg/l= 7000 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:
24 hours: LC50 705 mg/l
- Effect data (Mortality):- Concentration / response curve:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS: CONTROL- Number/percentage of animals showing adverse effects:- Nature of adverse effects:
RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:(Fish, estuary, fresh water)
Analytical monitoring:

26-SEP-2005(65)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
LC0:

other: Cyprinus carpio
24 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring:< 2000 -Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not translated

26-SEP-2005(99)

Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
MLc :

other: Notropis spilopterus
120 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring:= 100 -

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005

67

(34)

(105)

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

4.2 Acute Toxicity to Aquatic Invertebrates
Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:
Limit Test:

staticDaphnia magna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 9124 no

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1995
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: 48-hours static test in reconstituted
water.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
ANALYTICAL METHODS: no
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Immobilisation): not described- Concentration / response curve: not described- Cumulative immobilisation: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Breeding method: in-house in reconsituted water- Age: < 24 hours- Feeding: no- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no- Control group: yes
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: not described- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- Ca/Mg ratio: not described- Na/K ratio: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Oxygen content: not described- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconstituted water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: semi-static- Concentrations: not described- Renewal of test solution: yes- Exposure vessel type: 100 ml solution- Number of replicates, individuals per replicate: 2, 10- Test temperature: 20 degree C

Result:

Test condition:(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring: no- Dissolved oxygen: not described- pH: not described- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: dark
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

68OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
DURATION OF THE TEST: 48 hours
TEST PARAMETER: immobility
SAMPLING: no
MONITORING OF TEST SUBSTANCE CONCENTRATION: no(3) invalid
documentation was insufficient for assessment

26-SEP-2005

(8)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:
Limit Test:

staticDaphnia magna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 2564 no

Method:other: see freetext, based on Anderson, B.G. et al. The
evaluation of aquatic invertebrates as assay organisms for thedetermination of the toxicity of industrial wastes. Report of
the Ohio State University (1948)
1965
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring: no

METHOD FOLLOWED:48 - 96 hours static test. Test parameters were monitored,
but not reported.
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not describedMedian Tolerance Limit (TLm), not reported.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours EC50 : 8384 mg/l
72 hours EC50 : 725 mg/l
96 hours EC50 : 630 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: not described- Cumulative immobilisation: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Source/supplier: Put-In Bay, Ohio, USA- Breeding method: In-house, not described- Age: not defined, but designated as a) young, b) adult.
- Feeding: not described- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no- Control group: not described(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

26-SEP-2005

(34)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:
Limit Test:

staticDaphnia magna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 4580 no

Method:other: see freetext, based on EPA/600/4-90/027 (1991)

69(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring: yes

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
guideline
1997
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4
METHOD FOLLOWED: 48-hours static test in reconstituted
water.
STATISTICAL METHODS: logistic multiple regression
METHOD OF CALCULATION: Probability regression model.
Measured values used for calculation whenever concentrationwas < 80% of initial concentration.
ANALYTICAL METHODS: anion analyses by ion-chromatograpy
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: both
- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours EC50 : 6290 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve: yes- Cumulative immobilisation: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Source/supplier: ENSR, Fort Collins, CO, USA- Breeding method: in-house in reconsituted water at 20
degree C- Age: < 24 hours- Feeding: yeast/cerophyl/trout chow (YCT)- Pretreatment: no- Feeding during test: yes, 100 microliter concentrated
algae/ YCT 1:1 mixture at start test
- Control group: yes
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted hard water (EPA)- Aeration: yes- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- Ca/Mg ratio: not described- Na/K ratio: not described- TSS: not described- pH: 7.5 - 9.0- Oxygen content: > 40% of saturation value- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconstituted water (hard, EPA)TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: 4 concentrations in geometric series withfactor 0.5- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: plastic vessels 30 ml with 10 ml
dilution water.
- Number of replicates, individuals per replicate: 3-5, 5- Test temperature: 20 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: > 40% saturation- pH: 7.5 - 9.0- Adjustment of pH: no- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: 16:8 hour light-dark
DURATION OF THE TEST: 48 hours
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

70

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Flag:
26-SEP-2005

TEST PARAMETER: immobility
SAMPLING: no
MONITORING OF TEST SUBSTANCE CONCENTRATION: yes(2) valid with restrictions
Test performed according to standardized EPA guideline fortesting of effluents, with determination of test
concentrations. Test parameters pH and oxygen measured but
not all reported. No information about controls. Replicate
test performance.
Critical study for SIDS endpoint
(71)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:
Limit Test:

staticDaphnia magna
96 hour(s)mg/l= 4547 no

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other:see freetext
1953
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: A 100 hours static test with 9
concentrations in three-fold.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: Toxicity Threshhold, defined byAnderson et al., Report by Ohio State Univ. Research Found.
To Amer. Petrol. Inst., New York, N.Y. (1948). Toxicity
Threshold is comparable with LC50 value.
ANALYTICAL METHODS: not described
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Immobilisation):- Concentration / response curve: not described- Cumulative immobilisation: not described- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: not described- Source/supplier: West Virginia University, USA- Breeding method: in-house- Age: < 12 hours- Feeding: yeast- Pretreatment: not described- Feeding during test: no- Control group: yes
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: not described- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- Ca/Mg ratio: not described- Na/K ratio: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Oxygen content: not described

Reliability:

Result:

Test condition:

71(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring: no

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Conductance: not described- Holding water: reconsituted water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: 9 concentrations, not defined- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: pyrex vessels, 100 ml- Number of replicates, individuals per replicate: 3, 10- Test temperature: 22 - 24 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: not described- pH: < 7.7- Adjustment of pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
DURATION OF THE TEST: 100 hours
TEST PARAMETER: Immobility(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

26-SEP-2005

(36)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:

staticDaphnia magna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 2564 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours EC50 : 8384 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Cumulative immobilisation:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS CONTROL:RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring:Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC100:

staticDaphnia magna
48 hour(s)mg/l= 5200 -Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(33)(Crustacea)
Analytical monitoring:(65)

4.3 Toxicity to Aquatic Plants e.g. Algae
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC100 :

Chlorella pyrenoidosa
8 day(s)mg/l= 57700 -(Algae)Analytical monitoring:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

72

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Method:other

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not translated

26-SEP-2005
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC50:
Limit Test:

other algae: Nitzschia linearis
120 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring: no= 1900 no

Method:other: see freetext, based on Cairns J. et al. Industrial
water and Wastes Journal. 9 (1), 22-28 (1964).
1968
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

73

(77)

METHOD FOLLOWED:a static 120 hours test in defined test medium.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: Median tolerance limit (TLm) method
not defined.
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data/Element values: growth (cell counts)- Cell density data: not described- Growth curves: not described- Reference substance: Potassium dichromate,
TLm = 0.208 mg/l
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: W.Sm.
- Source/supplier: not described- Laboratory culture: not described- Method of cultivation: not described- Pretreatment: no- Controls: yes- Initial cell concentration: not described
DILUTION WATER- Source: reconstituted water- Aeration: not described
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: geometric series- Renewal of test solution: no- Exposure vessel type: 150 ml glass- Number of replicates: not described- Concentrations: not described- Test temperature: 16 - 22 degree C- pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: not described
TEST PARAMETER: growth(2) valid with restrictions
In this test a different algae species is used thanrecommended in the OECD-guidelines. When the results ofPotassium dichromate (72 h, EbC50) used as a reference
substance, are compared with the results given in the
EC-directive 92/69/EEC (mean 0.53 mg/l, range 0.20 - 0.75mg/l) the sensitivity of Nitzschia linearis is not
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
significantly different from that of Selenastrum
capricornutum or Scenedesmus subspicatus.
It is recognised that the duration of this study was greaterthan the recommended OECD study time but as the reference
result from this study is on the lower boundary of the EC
recommendation, the two results are considered comparable.

Flag:
26-SEP-2005

This study would be considered as validity 3 because of theshortcomings. However, based on the other data, Sodium
sulfate is a substance of very low toxicity and the resultsof this study confirm this, therefore this study isevaluated as valid with restrictions (2).
Critical study for SIDS endpoint(80)

Species:other aquatic plant: Myrophilium spicatum (Eurasianwatermilfoil)
Endpoint:
other: root weight
Exposure period: 32 day(s)
Unit:
mg/l
Analytical monitoring: no
EC50:= 10228 EC50 shoot length := 4120 EC50 shoot weight := 9376 EC50 root length := 10370 Limit Test:
no
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1974
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED:A 32 days test with plants cultivated in liquid/soil medium
under continuous illumination.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: root weight and shoot length,
quotient of effect of test substance added in soil fractionand effect of test substance added to water phase, corrected
for control effect
ANALYTICAL METHODS: not described
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data/Element values: not described- Cell density data: not described- Growth curves: yes
TEST ORGANISMS- Strain: L.
- Source/supplier: Clone from Friesland, The Netherlands- Laboratory culture: yes- Method of cultivation: cultivated in greenhouse in woods
earth/ferric silicate/tap water mixture- Pretreatment: CuSO4 to reduce algae growth- Controls: yes- Initial cell concentration: not described
DILUTION WATER- Source: Tap water- Aeration: no

Result:

Test condition:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

74

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
GROWTH/TEST MEDIUM CHEMISTRY- Alkalinity: not described- Hardness: not described- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- EDTA: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described- Dissolved oxygen: not described
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: static- Concentrations: not described- Renewal of test solution: not described- Exposure vessel type: flatt-bottom tubes 200 ml- Number of replicates: 10- Concentrations: not described- Test temperature: 20 degree C- pH: not described- Intensity of irradiation: 300 fc- Photoperiod: continuous
TEST PARAMETER: root weight and shoot length(3) invalid
Non-standardized test method, and insufficient documentation(92)

4.4 Toxicity to Microorganisms e.g. Bacteria
Type:Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
NOEC:

aquatic
activated sludge
37 day(s)g/lca. 26 -Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1986
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Test condition:

TEST ORGANISMS- Bacteria in activated sludge- Supplier: obtained from a local municipal wastewater
treatment plant.
- Pretreatment: acclimated for a period of over a month.
- Substrate: synthetic substrate
TEST SYSTEM

Reliability:

26-SEP-2005
75

Analytical monitoring:- Concentrations: concentrations were increased from 8 to 35
g/l over a time period of 37 days. Concentration steps were2 - 5 g/l.
- Exposure vessel: 10 l reactor of which 8 l were aerationchamber and 2 l settling basin.
- Analyses: BOD, COD, TSS etc. analyses were done according
to APHA standard methods.
- Dissolved oxygen: 6 - 8 mg/l
- Temperature: 18.5 - 22.5 degree C(2) valid with restrictions
Although it is not a standard test and not all test
parameters were reported, the results are reliable forassessment. Study with enough details.
(95) (96)UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
NOEC:

aquatic
activated sludge
37 day(s)g/lca. 26 -Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1986
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Test condition:

26-SEP-2005

TEST ORGANISMS- Motile protozoa in activated sludge- Supplier: obtained from a local municipal wastewater
treatment plant.
- Pretreatment: acclimated for a period of over a month.
- Substrate: synthetic substrate
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: concentrations were increased from 8 to 35
g/l over a time period of 37 days. Concentration steps were2 - 5 g/l.
- Exposure vessel: 10 l reactor of which 8 l were aerationchamber and 2 l settling basin.
- Analyses: BOD, COD, TSS etc. analyses were done according
to APHA standard methods.
- Dissolved oxygen: 6 - 8 mg/l
- Temperature: 18.5 - 22.5 degree C(2) valid with restrictions
Although it is not a standard test and not all test
parameters were reported, the results are reliable forassessment. Study with enough details.
(95) (96)Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
NOEC:

aquatic
activated sludge
37 day(s)g/lca. 8 -

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1986
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Test condition:

TEST ORGANISMS- Stalked ciliates in activated sludge- Supplier: obtained from a local municipal wastewater
treatment plant.
- Pretreatment: acclimated for a period of over a month.
- Substrate: synthetic substrate
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: concentrations were increased from 8 to 35
g/l over a time period of 37 days. Concentration steps were2 - 5 g/l.
- Exposure vessel: 10 l reactor of which 8 l were aerationchamber and 2 l settling basin.
- Analyses: BOD, COD, TSS etc. analyses were done according
to APHA standard methods.
- Dissolved oxygen: 6 - 8 mg/l
- Temperature: 18.5 - 22.5 degree C

Reliability:

Analytical monitoring:

Analytical monitoring:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

76

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005(2) valid with restrictions
Although it is not a standard test and not all test
parameters were reported, the results are reliable forassessment. Study with enough details.
(95) (96)Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
NOEC:

aquatic
activated sludge
40 day(s)g/lca. 30 -Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1980
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Test condition:

26-SEP-2005

TEST ORGANISMS- Activated sludge- Supplier: not described- Pretreatment: not described- Substrate: not described
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: concentrations were increased from 10 to
40 g/l over a time period of ca. 40 days. Concentration
steps were 10 g/l.
- Exposure vessel: 10 l
- Analyses: effluent analyses were done according to APHA
standard methods.
- pH: 7 - 7.5- Temperature: 20 - 23 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: 2.3 - 3.5 mg/l(2) valid with restrictions
Although it is not a standard test and not all test
parameters were reported, the results are reliable forassessment. Study with enough details.
(40)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC0:

aquatic
Pseudomonas fluorescens (Bacteria)
24 hour(s)mg/lAnalytical monitoring:= 10000 -Method:other: Bestimmung der biologichen Schadwirkung toxischer
Abwaesser gegen Bakterien. DEV, L8 (1968) modifiziert

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:

Analytical monitoring:

13-JUN-2003

(14)

Type:
Species:
Exposure period:
Unit:
EC10:

aquatic
Pseudomonas putida
16 hour(s)mg/l> 1000 -Method:other: DIN 38412 Teil 8

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

77(Bacteria)
Analytical monitoring:

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005(55)

4.5 Chronic Toxicity to Aquatic Organisms
4.5.1 Chronic Toxicity to Fish
4.5.2 Chronic Toxicity to Aquatic Invertebrates
TERRESTRIAL ORGANISMS
4.6.1 Toxicity to Sediment Dwelling Organisms
Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Lymnaea (Pond snail)Mortality
96 other: hours
other: mg/l
= 1151 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours LC50 : 1750 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 1750 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 1750 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Cumulative immobilisation:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS CONTROL:RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005(33)

Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Lymnaea (Pond snail)Mortality
96 other: hours
other: mg/l
= 799 -

Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours LC50 : 1215 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 1215 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 1215 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Cumulative immobilisation:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS CONTROL:RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(4) not assignable

Reliability:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

78

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(33)

Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Ophryotrocha labronica (Polychaete)
Mortality
20 other: hours
other: mg/l
= 5.4 -

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(85)

Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Lymneae sp. (eggs)
Mortality
96 other: hour(s)other: mg/l
= 3553 -Result:RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours LC50 : 5401 mg/l
48 hours LC50 : 5400 mg/l
72 hours LC50 : 5400 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Cumulative immobilisation:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS CONTROL:RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005(34)

Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Trycorythus sp.
Mortality
96 other: hours
other: g/l= .66 -

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1996
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: 96-hours acute semi static test in riverwater.
STATISTICAL METHODS: one-way ANOVAMETHOD OF CALCULATION: probit analysis
ANALYTICAL METHODS: nutrient concentrations byspectrophotometer
Full chemical analyses by ICP-ES, AAS and autoanalyzer
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations: nominal- Effect data (Immobilisation):
96 hours LC50 : 0.66 g/l

Result:79

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Test condition:

Reliability:

Flag:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
NB. The probit analysis could not be used since there was nonormal distribution of concentration response data.
- Concentration / response curve: no- Cumulative immobilisation: yes- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility: notdescribed- Other effects: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Source/supplier: Sabie river, Kruger national park, South
Africa- Pretreatment: 25 individuals were acclimated unfed per
raceway for 36 h. All dead animals were removed and numbers
were equalized between the raceways, before addition of salt
solutions.
- Feeding during test: no- Control group: yes
DILUTION WATER- Source: Sabie river water- Salinity: not described- TOC: not described- Ca/Mg ratio: not described- Na/K ratio: not described- TSS: not described- pH: not described
Conductance: not described- Holding water: Sabie river water
TEST SYSTEM- Test type: semi static- Concentrations: 4 concentrations, 0.20, 0.66, 1.46 and4.40 g/l.
- Renewal of test solution: yes, 20% of the water was
replaced daily.
- Exposure vessel type: 12.5 l perspex experimental stream
system; raceways. Four kaolinite stones were placed in thechannel to serve as a substrate.
- Number of replicates, individuals per replicate: 3, not
known- Current: 0.75 or 1 m/s- Test temperature: 9-16 degree C- Dissolved oxygen: 65.0-105.0% saturation- pH: 6.93-7.20- Adjustment of pH: no- Aeration: no- Alkalinity: 62-101 mg/l
- Hardness: approx. 69.4 mg/l
- Intensity of irradiation: not described- Photoperiod: 12:12 hour light-dark
DURATION OF THE TEST: 96 hours
TEST PARAMETER: immobility(2) valid with restrictions
No standard test, but test with a lot of detailed
information. The test results did not give a normal dose
respons curve.
Critical study for SIDS endpoint(42)

4.6.2 Toxicity to Terrestrial Plants
Species:
Endpoint:

other terrestrial plant: Capsicum annuum L.
other: Number and size of fruit
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

80

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Expos. period:

4 monthMethod:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
2000
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED
A 4 months test in a greenhouse.
- Endpoints: Fruit was collected at ripening (at the red
stage) and weight, total number and yield were recorded.
STATISTICAL METHOD
Data were statistically analysed by ANOVA.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Fruit number: Increased with concentration
Fruit size: decreased with concentration
Yield: decreased with concentration
Fructose, glucose and amino acids significantly decreased
with higher concentrations.
The pulp thickness became less with increasing
concentration.
TEST SPECIES- Capsicum annuum L.
- Source: not known- pretreatment: No- Substrate: Hoagland nutrient solution
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 2 (control), 3, 4, 6 and 8 dS/m solution(this is 0, 6.1, 12.2, 24.1 and 36.7 mM Sodium sulfate) in
Hoagland nutrient solution.
- Test vessel: 120 l container- Number of plants per replicate: 1- Replicates: 5- Temperature: 18-35 degree Celsius- Relative humidity: 55-75%- pH: 5.5-6.0- Photoperiod: not known- Watering: daily addition of deionized water- Solutions were analysed weekly and readjusted to initialnutrient concentrations(3) invalid
No standard method. The method is described in detail but
the results are not in much detailed. It is not clear atwhat concentration a significant decrease or increase
occurs.
(72)

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

26-SEP-2005
Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:

other terrestrial plant: Picea glauca
other: emergence, survival, shoot and root length, number oflateral roots, leaf necrosis, fresh weight and photosynthesis
42 day(s)Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
2000
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED
A six weeks test in sand.
- Endpoints: Percentage emergence was noted daily. After six

81

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005
Species:
Endpoint:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
weeks survival, leaf necrosis, shoot and root length, numberof lateral roots, fresh weight and photosynthesis wererecorded.
Photosynthesis was determined spectrophotometrically frommethanol extract and calculated using MacKinney equation.
STATISTICAL METHOD- Emergence data was analyzed using a general linear model(GLM) repeated measure technique.
- Growth data were analyzed with a glm using one-way ANOVA.
- The means were compared using Duncan's multiple range
test.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Emergence: percentage germination was significantly less in
20 mM and higher
Survival: significant decrease at 50 mM and higher
Root length: significant reduction in length from 20 mM andhigherNumber of lateral roots: significant decrease from 50 mM andhigherLeaf necrosis: significant necrosis in 50 mM and higher
Fresh weight: reduction in 50 mM and higher
Photosynthesis: Chlorophyll content did not change comparedto the control
TEST SPECIES- Picea glauca- Source: Pine Ridge Nursery, Alberta, Canada (seedlot DL
68-12-4-83)- pretreatment: No- Substrate: quartz-feldspar sand (particle size range
0.19-3 mm)
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 0, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 250 mM solution indeionized water.
- Test vessel: 4 l germination trays.
- Number of seeds per replicate: 40- Replicates: 5 trays per concentration.
- Moisture content of sand: 13%- Thermoperiod: 20/15 degree Celsius- Photoperiod: 18 hours- High humidity was obtained by covering the trays withtransparant plastic lids
- After two weeks the lids were removed- Watering: Every other day after removing the lids, 500 mlof deionized water was sprayed over the sand. Every sevendays 50 ml of Hoagland's mineral solution was sprayed on thesand.
(2) valid with restrictions
No standard method, but study with enough details.
(28)

Expos. period:

other terrestrial plant: Pinus banksiana
other: emergence, survival, shoot and root length, number oflateral roots, leaf necrosis, fresh weight and photosynthesis
42 day(s)Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
2000
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

82

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY
Method:Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005
Species:
Endpoint:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
METHOD FOLLOWED
A six weeks test in sand.
- Endpoints: Percentage emergence was noted daily. After six
weeks survival, leaf necrosis, shoot and root length, numberof lateral roots, fresh weight and photosynthesis wererecorded.
Photosynthesis was determined spectrophotometrically frommethanol extract and calculated using MacKinney equation.
STATISTICAL METHOD- Emergence data was analyzed using a general linear model(GLM) repeated measure technique.
- Growth data were analyzed with a glm using one-way ANOVA.
- The means were compared using Duncan's multiple range
test.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Emergence: germination was significantly enhanced at 20 mM.
At 250 mM the germination was only 7%
Survival: significant decrease at 50 mM and higher
Shoot length: significant reduction in 50 mM and higher
Root length: significant reduction in length from 10 mM andhigherNumber of lateral roots: significant decrease from 10 mM andhigherLeaf necrosis: significant from 50 mM on
Fresh weight: reduction in 50 mM and higher
Photosynthesis: Chlorophyll content did not change comparedto the control
TEST SPECIES- Pinus banksiana- Source: Pine Ridge Nursery, Alberta, Canada (seedlot SJ
75-15-4-77)- pretreatment: No- Substrate: quartz-feldspar sand (particle size range
0.19-3 mm)
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 0, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 250 mM solution indeionized water.
- Test vessel: 4 l germination trays.
- Number of seeds per replicate: 40- Replicates: 5 trays per concentration.
- Moisture content of sand: 13%- Thermoperiod: 20/15 degree Celsius- Photoperiod: 18 hours- High humidity was obtained by covering the trays withtransparant plastic lids
- After two weeks the lids were removed- Watering: Every other day after removing the lids, 500 mlof deionized water was sprayed over the sand. Every sevendays 50 ml of Hoagland's mineral solution was sprayed on thesand.
(2) valid with restrictions
No standard method, but study with enough details.
(28)

Expos. period:

other terrestrial plant: Picea mariana
other: emergence, survival, shoot and root length, number oflateral roots, leaf necrosis, fresh weight and photosynthesis
42 day(s)Method:other: see freetext

83

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

2000
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED
A six weeks test in sand.
- Endpoints: Percentage emergence was noted daily. After six
weeks survival, leaf necrosis, shoot and root length, numberof lateral roots, fresh weight and photosynthesis wererecorded.
Photosynthesis was determined spectrophotometrically frommethanol extract and calculated using MacKinney equation.
STATISTICAL METHODResult:

Test condition:

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005- Emergence data was analyzed using a general linear model(GLM) repeated measure technique.
- Growth data were analyzed with a glm using one-way ANOVA.
- The means were compared using Duncan's multiple range
test.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Emergence: percentage germination was significantly less in
100 mM.
Survival: significant decrease at 100 mM and higher
Shoot length: significant reduction in 50 mM and higher
Root length: significant reduction in length from 20 mM andhigherNumber of lateral roots: significant decrease from 50 mM andhigherLeaf necrosis: no significant necrosis
Fresh weight: reduction in 50 mM and higher
Photosynthesis: Chlorophyll content did not change comparedto the control
TEST SPECIES- Picea mariana- Source: Pine Ridge Nursery, Alberta, Canada (seedlot MW
61-13-5-9)- pretreatment: No- Substrate: quartz-feldspar sand (particle size range
0.19-3 mm)
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 0, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 250 mM solution indeionized water.
- Test vessel: 4 l germination trays.
- Number of seeds per replicate: 40- Replicates: 5 trays per concentration.
- Moisture content of sand: 13%- Thermoperiod: 20/15 degree Celsius- Photoperiod: 18 hours- High humidity was obtained by covering the trays withtransparant plastic lids
- After two weeks the lids were removed- Watering: Every other day after removing the lids, 500 mlof deionized water was sprayed over the sand. Every sevendays 50 ml of Hoagland's mineral solution was sprayed on thesand.
(2) valid with restrictions
No standard method, but study with enough details.
(28)

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

84

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Species:
Endpoint:

other terrestrial plant: Medicago sativa L.
other: plant growth, nodule number and weight

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1995
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWEDA 55 days test in a greenhouse.
- Endpoints: Plant dry weight and nodule number and dryweight.
STATISTICAL METHOD
Data were statistically analysed by ANOVA.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Plant growth: decreased with concentration, dry weight was
50% of control at 130 mOsm at the end of the test.
Nodule specific weight: did not change much at any osmotic
level
Number of nodules: decreased with concentration, 71%
reduction in the highest concentration.
TEST SPECIES- Medicago sativa L.
- Source: not known- pretreatment: seeds were surface-steriized with 70%
ethanol for 7 minutes, rinsed in sterile distilled water,
and allowed to germinate on 1% water agar for 20 h.
10 germinated seeds were planted in a sterile-modified
Leonard jar containing sand, and inoculated with R.
meliloti. Plants were thinned out to 5 plants per jar, 14days after planting.
- Substrate: Hoagland nutrient solution
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 0, 70, 130, 200 or 250 mOsm in N-freenutrient solution. Salt was added 72 h after planting andchecked weekly- Number of plants per replicate: 5- Replicates: 6- Temperature: 27/21 degree Celsius (day/night)- Relative humidity: not known- Photoperiod: 14 h
- Plants were watered every following day- Watering: daily addition of deionized water- Solutions were analysed weekly and readjusted to initialnutrient concentrations(3) invalid
No standard method. The method is described in detail but
the results are not in much detailed. It is not clear atwhat concentration a significant decrease or increase
occurs.
(11)

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

26-SEP-2005
Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:

other terrestrial plant: Altriplex prostrata
other: survival, height, nodes, branches, leaves, dry mass andphotosynthesis
1 monthMethod:Year:
GLP:

other: see freetext
1996
no

85

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Test substance:

as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED
A one month semi static test in defined test medium.
- Endpoints: Plant height, number of leaves, nodes andbranches were recorded weekly. Photosynthesis was measured
once before harvesting and dry mass was determined after one
month.
Photosynthesis was measured using a infra-red gas analyzer.
STATISTICAL METHOD
Two-way ANOVA was used to determine differences among
treatments.
The Bonferroni test was used for other comparisons.
RESULTS- Effect data:
Survival: All plants survived in every concentration
Plant height: The height decreased as osmotic potential was
loweredNumber of nodes: The number decreased as osmotic potential
was lowered
Number of branches: The number decreased as osmotic
potential was lowered
Number of leaves: The number decreased from -1.00 MPa on
Dry mass: Mass decreased from -1.00 MPa on
Photosynthesis: Photosynthesis decreased from -1.00 MPa on
TEST SPECIES- Atriplex prostrata- Source: Salt marsh in Rittman, Ohio (Wayne county)- Size of seeds: 1.5-2.0 mm diameter- pretreatment: Seeds were germinated in an incubator.
12h thermoperiod of 5:25 degree celcius.
12h photoperiod 20.0 micromol/m2/s, 400-700 nm.
Acclimated to greenhouse conditions for two days inindividual pots. Grown for 15 days under natural light
conditions. Plants were acclimated to the test solutions byplacing them at lower osmotic potential every two days until
the final osmotic potential was reached- Substrate: Sand
TEST SYSTEM- Concentrations: 0.00, -0.75, -1.00 and -1.50 MPa solution,
dissolved in half strength Hoagland and Arnon's no. 2
solution. Solutions were replaced after two weeks.
- Test vessel: 9x9 cm black plastic pots.
- Replicates: 10 per concentration.
(3) invalid
Study with a lot of details on the method, but in the
results no statistics is mentioned. It is not clear weresignificant differences were found.
(35)

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:

26-SEP-2005

4.6.3 Toxicity to Soil Dwelling Organisms
4.6.4 Toxicity to other Non-Mamm. Terrestrial Species
Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Culex
mortality
48 hour(s)other: mg/l
= 4325 -(Mosquito)

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

86OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

Result:Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
RESULTS: EXPOSED(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005(33)

Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Culex (Mosquito)
mortality
48 hour(s)other: mg/l
= 3004 -Result:Reliability:

RESULTS: EXPOSED(4) not assignable
Reference not available

26-SEP-2005
Species:
Endpoint:
Expos. period:
Unit:
LC50:

other: Culex sp. larvea
mortality
48 hour(s)other: mg/l
= 13350 -Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: not described in detail.
METHOD OF CALCULATION:
not described
RESULTS: EXPOSED- Nominal/measured concentrations:- Effect data (Immobilisation):
24 hours LC50 : 11430 mg/l
- Concentration / response curve:- Cumulative immobilisation:- Effect concentration vs. test substance solubility:- Other effects:
RESULTS CONTROL:RESULTS: TEST WITH REFERENCE SUBSTANCE- Concentrations:- Results:(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

Result:Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

(33)

(34)

4.7 Biological Effects Monitoring
4.8 Biotransformation and Kinetics
4.9 Additional Remarks
Memo:

TOXICITY TO FISH

Remark:Method:Acute toxicity to Lake Emerald shiner (Notropis a.
atherinoides) and spotfin shiner (Notropis spilopterus). 96
hours testing according to Powers, E.B. Biol. Monograpgs IV,
No. 2 pp.1-73 (1917). 18 degree C in 2-liter vessels. Oxygen> 4 mg/l.

87

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

26-SEP-2005

Results:
Minimum Lethal Concentration (NOEC) : 100.0 mg/l for bothfish. 100% survival in controls.
(106)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO INVERTEBRATES

Remark:15-OCT-2001

Method:Static bioassay, 28.5 +/-1.5 degree C:
Effect parameters determined graphically. Tests with three
replications + control. Dilution water: Unchlorinatedbore-hole water.,pH=7, DO 7.5 mg/l, alkalinity 110 mg/l
CaCO3.
Results: 96h; LC 100 - LC 50 - LC 0 (mg/l).
Branchiura sowerbyi (worm) 12000 - 7700 - 4750
Cyclops viridis (plankton) 4500 - 2000 - 1000
Lymnaea luteola (mollusc) 9500 - 8250 - 4000
(44)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO INVERTEBRATES

Remark:Method:Static test with Daphnia magna, 48 hours in Lake Erie (USA)water. Method according to Anderson, B.G. Sewage Works J.
16(6):1156-1165 (1944).
Results:
Threshold concentration for immobilization:
5960 mg/l (16 hours)
7105 mg/l (48 hours)

15-OCT-2001

(6)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO INVERTEBRATES

Remark:Marine invertebrates; salinity of sea water 30g/kg, static===========================================================
length 24h EC50mm
mg/l----------------------------------------------------Annelida:
Lepidonotus squamatus
15>6400
Polydora sp.
>6400
Crustacea:
Balanus crenatus (Rock barnacle)
6>6400
Eupagurus bernhardus (Hermit crab)
11.4
>6400
Carcinus maenas (shore or green crab)
12.6
>6400
Mollusca:
Lepidochitona cinerea (Chiton)
6.5>800
Acmaea testudinalis (Limpet)
2.5
>6400
Aphorrhais pes–pelicani (Pelican’s foot) 43>3200
Thais (Nucella) lapillus (Dow whelk)
15>6400
Buccinum undatum (Large whelk)
31>6400
Onchidoris fusca (Sea slug)
13>6400
Mytilus edulis (Common bay mussel)
28>6400
Anomia ephippium (False saddle oyster)
6.5
>6400
Hiatella (Saxicava) arctica (Red nose)
23>1600
Echinodermata:Asterias rubens (Starfish)59>6400
Psammechinus miliaris (Sea urchin)
31>6400
Urochordata:
Ascidiella scabra (Sea squirt)>6400

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

88

OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

17-OCT-2001

(82)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO INVERTEBRATES

Remark:Toxicity of sodium sulfate in vitro on the fish nematode
Procamallanus sp. was examined. Complete mortality wasobserved after 48 hours with 0.5% solution, and after 20hours in 1.0% solution.

11-JUL-2003
Memo:

(61)
TOXICITY TO INVERTEBRATES

26-SEP-2005

(5)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO MICROORGANISMS

Remark:15-OCT-2001

Stimulation of growth (117 - 120 %) of Spruce seedlings wasobserved after addition of sodium sulfate (84 mg NaSO4
added to vessel of 110x230 mm with 150 mm soil layer) tosoil, due to activation of soil microflora. The total test
period was 107 days.
(64)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO PLANTS

Remark:48 hours test with bulbs/seeds in a liquid test medium andwith Na2SO4 in a semi-static test. Test parameter root
length.
Allium cepa, bulbs (Modified Allium test) : 7756 mg/l IC50
Lepidium sativum, seeds (Lepidium test): 8533 mg/l IC50

15-OCT-2001

(8)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO PLANTS

Remark:15-OCT-2001

Method: greenhouse equipped with an activated charcoal
air filtration system,
22 degree C day/18 degree C night, 50-55 % rel. air
humidity, 12h photoperiod,
treatment 3 x/week:
0.5, 1, 3, 5 g Na2SO4 as dust / 6 moistened plants
Pinto-beans, 28d old"Veemore" tomatoes, 35d old
Results:
Pinto-beans; Progressive decrease in growth and dry weightwith increasing Na2SO4 conc. over 4w"Veemore" tomatoes;
1w with 3 and 5 g/l or 2w with 1 g/l : growth inhibition
3w with 0.5 g/l : no inhibition
(93)

Memo:

TOXICITY TO PLANTS

Remark:Effect of Na2SO4 on the symbiotic effectiveness of the hostVigna radiata (mungo bean) and Rhizobium, 30 d:
Initiation of nodulation was delayed by one day at 0.05 %;Total number of nodules and total nitrogen content of plant
was maximum at 0.05 %;Nodulation was caused only upto 0.3 %.
Method: Test tube method acc. to:Vincent, J.M.: Manual for the practical study of root nodule

89

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

24-OCT-2001

bacteria, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford (1970)
(10)

Memo:

TOXICTY TO AQUATIC PLANTS / INVERTEBRATES

Remark:Na2SO4, dissolved in tap water, neutralized with Ca(OH)2:============================================================
Hydra oligactis (Coelenterata):
disintegration in 0.5% within 20-36h
Turbellaria:
Planaria gonocephala: death and disintegration in 1% after
48 hStenostomum: death and disintegration in 0.5% after 24h
Mollusca:
Limnaea stagnalis
Planorbis carinata in 1.5% after 24h dead, in 1% within
Valvata piscinalis 3-14d deadBythinia tentaculata
Crustacea:
Daphnia hyalina 0.25% lethal
Insects:
Limnophilus (Caddisfly,larvae): in 0.5% within 15-19d dead,in 1 und 1.5% within 4d deadFishes:Carassius vulgaris (Gold fish): 0.5-1.25% no effect;
1.5% within 24d dead;
2% within 7-8d deadTinca vulgaris (Tench) : 0.5% no effect;
1% within 21d dead;
2% within 1-2d dead
Perca fluviatilis (Perch) : 0.5% no effect;
in 2% within 2-7d dead
Alburnus bipunctatus (Bleak) : in 1% within 16-17d deadScardinius erythrophtalmus(Rudd) : in 1.5% within 7d deadSqualis leuciscus (Chub) : in 2% within 2d dead
Salmo fario and : in 1.5% after 48h dead;
Salmo gairdneri (Trout) 15-20 cm in 2% after 36h deadTadpoles in 2% after 3.25-9h dead;in 1.1 % after 6h deadSubmerse plants:
Potamogeton luceus (pondweed):in 1.5 and 2% within 26d disintegration
Ceratophyllum demersum (horn wort):
in 0.3% no damage;in 1.5% within 40d disintegration
Myriophyllum verticillatum (milfoil):in 1.5% within 12d dead;in 1% within 40d disintegration
Elodea canadensis (pondweed):in 0.1% no damage;in 0.25% within 18d disintegration
Lemna minor (duckweed):
in 1% after 30d end of leaf reproduction;
in 0.5% no damage
Callitriche: in 0.8% permanent damage and deformation;
in 1% dead
Fontinalis : in 0.8% within 25d no damage;in 1.5% dead and disintegrated
Chara foetida (filamentous green alga):
in 0.5 and 0.75% up to 60d increased growth;
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

90OECD SIDS
4. ECOTOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
within 72d dead

26-SEP-2005(86)

09-NOV-2001

91

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

5.0 Toxicokinetics, Metabolism and Distribution
In Vitro/in vivo:
Type:
Species:No. of animals, males:
No. of animals, females:
Doses, males:
Route of administration:
Exposure time:

In vivo
Absorption
other: homo sapiens
7013.9 g (8.6 g of the anhydrous salt)
oral unspecified
3 hour(s)

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:1983
noother TS: Mg2SO4

Remark:Conclusion: Magnesium sulfate is less completely absorbed
than sodium sulfate as described by Cocchetto et al, 1981prior to study, three consecutive 24-hour periods for urine
volume determination (twice, one -week interval). Subjects
received either above dose in four hourly increments or justwater; one week later the alternative.
72 -hour urine was collected at 4-hourly intervals (8 atnight) Urinary sulfate excretion corrected for baselien was
about 30.2% +- 17.2 in the first 24 hours, negligible in thefollowing 48 hours. All subjects given the sulfate had
gastro-intestinal complaints and loose stools or diarrhea.
Frequency of treatment: once
Post exposure period: 72 hours
Control group: No; subject as own control(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard study(70)

Result:

Test condition:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

In Vitro/in vivo:
Type:
Species:No. of animals, males:
No. of animals, females:
Doses, males:
Route of administration:

In vivo
Distribution
other: homo sapiens
8060-80 microCurie
other: intravenously and oral

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

1976
noother TS: Na2SO4 (35S-labeled)Result:Volunteers received above dose IV, followed by 24-hours
fluid restriction and blood and urine collection todetermine radio-activity and creatinine concentration
Same volunteers received same amount orally 14 days later,
followed by same regimen.
Plasma equilibrium iwas reached within 90 and 105 minutes
respectively.
Calculated mean extracelluar fluid space was 16.8 +- 1.1 and15.3 +- 1.2 respectively or only 9%.
Conclusion: 35S-labeled sulfate is absorbed completely andrapidly.
Exposure period: single dose I.Vl, single dose oral 14 days
later
Frequency of treatment: once daily
Post exposure period: 24 hours
Control group: No; subject as own control

Test condition:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

92

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard study(12)
In Vitro/in vivo:
Type:
Species:No. of animals, males:
No. of animals, females:
Doses, males:
Route of administration:

In vivo
Absorption
other: homo sapiens
5018.1 g Na2SO4 decahydrate (800 g of the anhydrous
salt)oral unspecified

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

1981
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Remark:Conclusion: Sodium sulfate is better absorbed from theintestine when given in divided dose than from a single
large dose, indicating saturation of the transport system.
Prior to exposure three separate 24-hour periods forurine volume and baseline sulfate excretion determination(twice, one -week interval). Subjects received either above
dose in a single dose or in four hourly increments; one week
later the alternative dosing schedule.
72 -hour urine was collected in 24-hour portions. Urinary
free sulfate excretion corrected for baseline was about 53.4+-16.8 for the single dose and 61.8 +-7.8 for the divided
dose. Single dose causeds severe diarrhoea, divided dose did
not. Excretion of free sulfate is not influenced by urine
flow, but excretion of organicaly bound sulfate is.in a
linear fashion.
Exposure period: single oral dose or divided over threehours
Frequency of treatment: twice with one week interval
Post exposure period: 72 hours
Control group: No; subject as own control(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard study(27)

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005
Type:
Species:
26-SEP-2005
Result:Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

93

Absorption
rat
Absorption of inorganic sulfate after ingestion in rats
(male, Wistar (30-330 g body weight) was investigated. A
inorganic sulfate concentration was measured in the serum
after 2 hours of oral administration of 5 mmol Na2SO4. A
threefold increase in serum sulfate concentration wasmeasured. Compete absorption from the gastrointestinal tract
was measured using 35S labelled sulfate.
(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard study(60)

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

5.1 Acute Toxicity
5.1.1 Acute Oral Toxicity
Type:Species:No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Doses:
Value:

LD50
rat
10
water
2-5 ml/100 g body weight oral
> 10000 mg/kg bw

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not defined1971
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: not described
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
MORTALITY:- Time of death: after 8 days
- Number of deaths at each dose: not described
CLINICAL SIGNS: no clinical signs observed
NECROPSY FINDINGS: not described
POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: not described
SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES: not described
TEST ORGANISMS:- Source: not described- Age: not described- Weight at study initiation: mean weight 270 gram- Controls: not described
ADMINISTRATION:- Doses: as described- Doses per time period: not described- Volume administered or concentration: 2-5 ml- Post dose observation period: 8 days

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:
27-SEP-2005

EXAMINATIONS: not described(4) not assignable
Original reference not available

Type:
Species:Value:

LD50
mouse= 5989 mg/kg bw

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

1963
no dataas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Original reference in Japanese not available

27-SEP-2005
Type:
Species:Sex:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Doses:(52)(78)
other: human drinking-water study
humanmale/female
10
waterdose ranging study: 0, 400, 600, 800, 1000 and 1200 mg/l.
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

94

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Single dose study: 0 and 1200 mg/l.

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

other
1997
no
as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: 10 Normal Human Subjects, 80% caucasian.
- Source: - Age: 24-45 years- Weight at study initiation: - Controls: ADMINISTRATION:- Doses: dose ranging study: 0, 400, 600, 800, 1000 and 1200
mg/l. Single dose study: 0 and 1200 mg/l.
- Doses per time period: dose ranging study: 4 subjects (2male, 2 female) received a dialy dose in the order listed
above for 6 consectutive 2 day periods. Single dose study: 6
subjects (3 male, 3 female) received a dialy dose of 0 and
1200 mg/l for 2 consecutive 6 day periods.
Colored markers were given at the beginning of each change
in drinking water sulfate concentration.
- Volume administered or concentration: volume 36 ml/kg/d.
- Post dose observation period:
EXAMINATIONS: The health of the subjects was determined bystudying their history, physical examination, urineanalysis,
blood cell counts and serum chemistries. During the study
stool mass, frequency and consistency in mouth to anus
appearance of colored markers were measured.

Result:Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare theeffects of specific concentrations of sulfate compared to
distilled water.
MORTALITY: - Time of death: - Number of deaths at each dose: CLINICAL SIGNS: No significant change in bodyweight. All
blood and urine test results were normal. At 1200 mg/l 8
subjects rated the taste of the water as neutral-slightly
unpleasant, 1 subject as moderately unpleasant and 1 subject
as very unpleasant.
Dose ranging study:
Increasing the sulfate concentration in drinking water every
48 hours from 0 - 1200 mg/l produced no significant trend instool mass per hours (based on Page's L-statistic test).
During the six periods the mean number of stools were 2.5,
3.0, 2.3, 3.0 2.0 and 2.8 respectively, and the meanconsistency ratings were 3.5, 3.3, 3.1, 3.4, 3.0 and 2.7
respectively. There was a significant trend toward
decreasing mouth to anus appearance time with increasing
sulfate concentration. The mean appearance times were(hours) 27.3, 17.9, 26.0, 16.1, 19.2, 17.2 respectively.
No diarrhea during daily diaries were reported during theentire study. Mild abdominal cramps were reported by one
subject for two days while receiving distilled water.
Single dose study:
Compared to distilled water, water containing 1200 mg/l
sulfate produced a statistically significant increase in the

95

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
mean stool mass per six-day pool, from 629 to 922 g and inmean stool mass per hour from 4.8 to 6.6 g. Each subject
showed an increase in stool mass per pool and in stool mass
per hour. Stool frequencey, stool consistency, and mouth toanus appearance time were not significantly different. Twoof the six subjects reported abdominal cramps, no othersymptoms were recorded.

Test substance:
Reliability:

27-SEP-2005

When combing the results from both studies for 0 an 1200
mg/l significant decreases in stool consistency andappearance time were noted at 1200 mg/l.
NECROPSY FINDINGS: POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES: Anhydrous sodium sulfate from UPS was used.
(2) valid with restrictions
Acceptable, well documented study.
The results of the blood and urine test an bodyweights are
not shown.
(51)

5.1.2 Acute Inhalation Toxicity
Type:Species:
Strain:LCLo
rat
Sprague-Dawley

Sex:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Doses:
Exposure time:
Value:

male
6
water
10 mg/m3
72 hour(s)> 10 mg/m³

Method:other: see freetext, not a guideline study: method according
to Last and Cross, J. Lab. Clin. Med. 91:328-339 (1978)1980
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:

METHOD FOLLOWED: rats were exposed to well characterizedaerosols of sodium sulfate at levels of 10 mg/m3 andparticle sizes of around 1 micron. the responses tobreathing these aerosols for three days were evaluated bymeasurements of glycoprotein, RNA and DNA contents ofhomogenates of the lungs and quantification of wet to dry
weight ratios of the lung lobs.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
ANALYTICAL METHODS: Ion chromatography as described by
Asgupta et al., Amer. Ind.Hyg. Assn. J. (1980) in prep.
MORTALITY: no death reported
CLINICAL SIGNS: RNA, DNA and protein levels in lunghomogenates (control = 100)
RNA: 99, DNA: 100, protein content: 107. (mean values form 6
rats)
NECROPSY FINDINGS: Lung wet to dry ratio: (control = 4.5).
4.35 and 4.5 for exp. 1 and 2 resp.
POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: Lungs
SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES: not determined
TEST ORGANISMS: rat
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

96

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Source: Charles River, Portage, MI, USA- Age: 70-80 days
- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: 6 rats per exposure- Controls: yes
ADMINISTRATION:- Type of exposure: inhalation- Concentrations: 10 mg/m3- Particle size: app. 1 µm
- Type or preparation of particles: Babington (1-15 mg/m3)
and Retec nebulizers (> 0.1 mg/m3)
EXAMINATIONS: Lungs: RNA, DNA, protein from homogenates.
Quantification of wet to dry weight ratios of right apicallung lobs.
(2) valid with restrictions
Acceptable, well documented study.

27-SEP-2005

(62)

Type:
Species:
Vehicle:Doses:
Exposure time:other: effect on pulmonary function
human
other
1, 2 and 3 mg/m3
10 minute(s)Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: unspecified
1979
nono data

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: human- Source: - Age: - Weight at study initiation: - Number of animals: 5 astmatic and 5 normal humans and 6
astmatic and 6 normal humans- Controls: ADMINISTRATION:- Type of exposure: aerosols- Concentrations: 1, 2, 3 mg/m3 and 3 mg/m3 in the second
experiment- Particle size: 0.5 micrometer mass mediam aerodynamic
diameter- Type or preparation of particles: particles were generated
by an ultrasonic nebulizer and sized by elctron micrographs
and an electrical aerosol size analyzer.
EXAMINATIONS:
Respiratory resistance (Rrs) was meaured continuesly duringexposure. Rrs, Forced Expiratory Volume1 and VC were
measured 5, 15, 30, 45 and 60 minutes after exposure. In thesecond experiment lung volumes by spirometer andplethysmography, dynamic mechanisms of breathing by Rrs:
specified airway conductance and flow volume curve,
distribution of ventilation by single and multiple breath
nitrogen washouts, random noise oscillations and diffuse
capacity.
MORTALITY:- Time of death: - Number of deaths at each dose: CLINICAL SIGNS:
In the first experiment 2 of 5 astmatic people experienced a

Result:97

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Test substance:
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
15-20% fall in FEV1 at 1 mg/m3. This did not get worse at
higher concentrations. The groups means were not altered as
comapred with NaCl. In the second experiment no adverse
effect on pulmonary function was found over 3 hours comparedto NaCl. 2 of 6 astmatic people experienced a 15-20% fall in
FEV1 at 1 mg/m3 after breathing NaCl and sodium sulfate
aerosols.
NECROPSY FINDINGS: POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES: No data on sodium sulfate supplier, purity or storage.
(4) not assignableNot assignable. Only abstract available.

26-SEP-2005

(84)

Type:
Species:
Strain:Sex:
No. of Animals:
Doses:
Exposure time:other: irritant potency (mucociliary clearance)
rabbitother: mixed breedmale5
1800-1950 microgram particles/m3
1 hour(s)Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

other
1984
no
no data

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: Mixed breed rabbits.
- Source: - Age: - Weight at study initiation: 2.5-2.7 kg- Number of animals: 5 males- Controls: animals served as their own controls in'sham'-control experiments. 10 of these experiments were
performed exposing the animals for 1 hour to temperature andhumidity conditioned air.
ADMINISTRATION:- Type of exposure: inhalation.
- Concentrations: 1800-1950 microgram particles/m3.
- Particle size: mean mass aerodynamic diameter 0.4
micrometer.
- Type or preparation of particles: Aerosols were prpared bynebulization using a Laskin nebulizer. The aerosols weremixed with filtered room air which had been temperature andhumidity conditioned.
EXAMINATIONS: The bronchial mucociliary clearance wasmeasured by brief inhalation of radiolabelled, insoluble
tracer microspheres (99mTc-tagged ferric oxide). The
thoracic retention was measured externally in vivo.
These measuerments began within 2 min. After the inhalation
and were repeated after 24 hours to determine a value forresidual activity (R24). It is expected that the tracer iscompletely cleared after 24 hours. The mucociliary clearance
was determined as mean residence time (MRT) of the tracer.
MORTALITY: - Time of death: - Number of deaths at each dose: CLINICAL SIGNS: No effect on mucociliary clearence was found(one way ANOVA, two tailed).

Result:UNEP PUBLICATIONS

98

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Test substance:
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
NECROPSY FINDINGS: POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES:No details on where the sodium sulfate was obtained or on
purity are given.
(2) valid with restrictions
Limited documentation but sufficient for assessment ofprimary effects.

27-SEP-2005

(87)

Type:
Species:
Strain:Sex:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Doses:
Exposure time:other: irritant potency
guinea pig
other: random bredno data10no data
0.90 +/- 0.11 mg/m3
1 hour(s)Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

other
1978
no
no data

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: guinea pigs
- Source: - Age: - Weight at study initiation: 200-300 g- Number of animals: 10- Controls: during a 30 min. control period before exposure
to the test substance measurements were taken every 5 min.
The same animals were used in the exposure.
ADMINISTRATION:- Type of exposure: inhalation.
- Concentrations: 0.90 +/- 0.11 mg/m3- Particle size: 0.11 micrometer- Type or preparation of particles: aerosols were preparedwitha Dautrebande D30 aerosol generator.
EXAMINATIONS:
The respiratory meachanisms of the guinea pigs were
measured. Intrapleural pressure, tidal volume, and rate flowof gas in and out of the respiratory system are recorded.
From these data the pulmonary flow resistance may beobtained. Pulmonary flow resistance and the compliance arein cm water/ml/s and mm/cm water, respectively.
MORTALITY: - Time of death: - Number of deaths at each dose: CLINICAL SIGNS: Pulmonary resistance and compliance of
sodium sulphate was not significantly different from thecontrol.
NECROPSY FINDINGS: POTENTIAL TARGET ORGANS: SEX-SPECIFIC DIFFERENCES: No details on where the sodium sulfate was obtained or on
purity are given.
(4) not assignable
Documentation insufficient for assessment(4)

Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:
27-SEP-2005

99

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

5.1.3 Acute Dermal Toxicity
5.1.4 Acute Toxicity, other Routes
Type:Species:Route of admin.:Value:

LD50
rat
i.p.
3000 - 4100 mg/kg bw

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not translated

26-SEP-2005

(20)

Type:
Species:Route of admin.:Value:

LD50
mouse
i.p.
2400 - 3400 mg/kg bw

Reliability:(4) not assignable
Reference not translated

26-SEP-2005(20)

5.2 Corrosiveness and Irritation
5.2.1 Skin Irritation
Species:
Concentration:
Exposure:
Exposure Time:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Result:EC classificat.:rabbit
500 mgOcclusive
4 hour(s)3other: polyetyleneglycol 400
not irritating
not irritating

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

OECD Guide-line 404 "Acute Dermal Irritation/Corrosion"1991
yes
as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: Determination of irritant/corrosive effects
were examined using rabbits, according to OECD 404.
DEVIATIONS FROM GUIDELINE: no deviations reported
GLP: yes
STATISTICAL METHODS: DRAIZE score system was used
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
ANALYTICAL METHODS: not applied
AVERAGE SCORE- Erythema: score = 0, after 14 days
- Edema: score = 0 after 14 days
REVERSIBILITY: not described
OTHER EFFECTS: Irrit. index : edema = 0.0; erytheme = 0.0.
Body weight, 3.7 - 4.2 kg
TEST ANIMALS: Rabbits- Strain: HC:NZW- Sex: not described- Source: Interfauna, Ltd, UK

Result:

Test condition:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

100

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Age: adults- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: 3- Controls: Contralateral skin area not treated
ADMINISTRATION/EXPOSURE- Preparation of test substance: 500 mg pulverized in PEG
400- Area of exposure: dorso-lateral areas of the trunk.
- Occlusion: Patches hypoallergenic Hansamed (Beiersdorf)- Vehicle: PEG 400- Concentration in vehicle: 500 mg- Total volume applied: not described- Postexposure period: 14 days
- Removal of test substance: washed with water
EXAMINATIONS- Scoring system: DRAIZE scores- Examination time points: 1, 24, 48, 72 hours, 7, 14 days.
(1) valid without restriction
Guideline study(13)

5.2.2 Eye Irritation
Species:
Concentration:
Dose:
Exposure Time:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Result:EC classificat.:rabbit90 mg
100 other: µl
24 hour(s)3no dataslightly irritating
irritating

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:

Directive 84/449/EEC, B.5 "Acute toxicity (eye irritation)"1991
yes
as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: Determination of irritant/corrosive effects
were examined using rabbits, according to OECD 405.
DEVIATIONS FROM GUIDELINE: no deviations reported
GLP: yes
STATISTICAL METHODS: DRAIZE score system was used
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
ANALYTICAL METHODS: not applied
AVERAGE SCORE- Cornea: 0 no effect (7 days), irrit. index 0.0- Iris: 0 no effect (7 days) irrit. index 0.0- Conjuntivae (Redness): 1 (48 hours) irrit. index 1.0- Conjuntivae (Chemosis): 0 (7 days)- Overall irritation score: 1.3 (slightly irritating)Result:DESCRIPTION OF LESIONS: no
REVERSIBILITY: within 7 days
Test condition:

101

OTHER EFFECTS: TEST ANIMALS: Rabbits- Strain: HC:NZW- Sex: not described- Source: Interfauna, Ltd, UK
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Age: adults- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: 3- Controls: other eye
ADMINISTRATION/EXPOSURE- Preparation of test substance: Pulverized powder- Amount of substance instilled: 90 mg- Vehicle: not described- Postexposure period: 21 days
- exposure : 24 hours

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

EXAMINATIONS- Ophtalmoscopic examination: yes- Scoring system: DRAIZE system- Observation period: 21 days
- Tool used to assess score: optical instrument (hand slit
lamp)(1) valid without restriction
Guideline study(13)

5.3 Sensitization
Type:
Species:
Concentration 1st:
2nd:
No. of Animals:
Vehicle:Result:Classification:

Patch-Test
human
Induction
1.25 % semiocclusive
Challenge
1.25 % semiocclusive
65
water
not sensitizing
not sensitizing

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not specified
1976
noother TS

Method:TEST ANIMALS: human- Strain: - Sex: male/female- Source: - Age: 16-70- Weight at study initiation: - Number of animals: 56 male and 5 female- Controls: ADMINISTRATION/EXPOSURE- Study type: Patch test.
- Preparation of test substance for induction: A 1.25%
aqueous solution was prepared. This concentration represents
a 100 fold increase of the normal use level.
- Induction schedule: Subjects were exposed on their backs.
The test patch unit consited of a strip of two-inch wide
blenderm surgical tape with two rows of five 12.7 mm filter
paper discs each. The first application lasted for 48 hours.
All other inductions were for 24 hours. Reactions toheinitial site were scored 48 and 96 hours after patch
removal. 8 other 24 hour inductions were done on mondays,
Wednesdays and Fridays (3.5 weeks)on 3 alternate sites(unless the reaction or tape irritation was severe than
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

102OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
other sites were used). Reactions were recorded 3-9 hours
before application and 24 hours after patch removal.
- Concentrations used for induction: 1.25% aqueous solution.
- Concentration in Freuds Complete Adjuvant (FCA): - Challenge schedule: On monday in week 7 subjects werechallenged on a previously unpatched site. After 48 hours
the patches were removed. The patches were scored 48 hours
48 following removal.
- Concentrations used for challenge: 1.25% aqueous solution.

Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:

26-SEP-2005- Rechallenge: subjects that showed signs of sentisation in
the challenge phase were tested again after a 2 week rest
period.
At the original concentration under occlusion, in a dilutionof original strenght (1:3) under occlusion, as used inpractice (subject applied the project to the flex part of
the arm 3 times/day for 5 days.
- Positive control: EXAMINATIONS- Grading system: patch reactions were scored byexperienced technitians. According to teh following scoring
system:0
No evidence of any effect+/- Barely perceptible. Minimal faint unifrom spotty
erythema.
1
Mild. Pink unifrom erythema covering most of the contactsite.
2Moderate. Pink-red erythema visibly uniform in the wholecontact site.
3Marked. Bright red erythrema with accompanying edema,
petechiae or papules.
4
Severe. Deep red erythema with vesiculation or weepingwith or without edema.
- Pilot study: RESULTS OF PILOT STUDY: RESULTS OF TEST
- Sensitization reaction: One subject showed a score 1
reaction during the induction period. Other subjects did notreact to the application (data not shown).
- Clinical signs: Mild. Pink unifrom erythema covering mostof the contact site.
- Rechallenge: Data not shown.
Bath salt crystals allegedly containing 80.8% sodium
sulfate.
(4) not assignable
The report is incomplete and unsigned. Lab and authors are
unknown and there is no quality control. Individual data are
not shown.
(22)

5.4 Repeated Dose Toxicity
Type:Sub-acuteSpecies:rat
Sex: male
Strain:Sprague-Dawley
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
4 weeks
Frequency of treatment: diets were provided ad libitum for 4 weeks
103

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Post exposure period:
Doses:

Control Group:
NOAEL:

none
Experiment a 0.88 mmol/kg feed
Experiment b 8.64 mmol/kg feed day 1-8
17.28 mmol/kg feed day 9-16
34.56 mmol/kg feed day 17-24
65.12 mmol/kg feed day 25 for 4-6 days
Experiment c 138 mmol/kg feed
yes, concurrent no treatment
ca. 2000 mg/kg

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not specified
1960
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: Sprague Dawley rats
- Age: weanling, young- Weight at study initiation:- Number of animals: 6 rats per group
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 4 weeks- Type of exposure: oral feed, diet avaialable ad libitum- Post exposure period: none
- Vehicle: basal diet, cornstarch diet, 67% cornstarch, 24%'vitamin free' casein, 5% crisco (cristalized cottonseedoil) and 4% salt mixture (3.8% magnesium sulfate, anhydrous
and 0.02% maganous sulfate. No sodium sulfate.) andvitamins.
- Concentration in vehicle: see doses- Total volume applied: the feed intake in week 4 of therats receiving sodium sulfate is presented: 408 (371-453) g.
- Doses:
Experiment a 0.88 mmol/kg feed
Experiment b 8.64 mmol/kg feed day 1-8
17.28 mmol/kg feed day 9-16
34.56 mmol/kg feed day 17-24
65.12 mmol/kg feed day 25 for 4-6 days
Experiment c 138 mmol/kg feed
SATELLITE GROUPS AND REASONS THEY WERE ADDED: CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY:- Clinical signs: records of any diarrhea that occurred were
kept. In experiment c teeth were examined.
- Mortality: - Body weight: at the beginning of the study, at the end ofeach week and just before study termination.
- Food consumption: feed intakes and feed:gain ratios wereobtained for each week.
- Water consumption: In experiment c the amount of water
drunk during the first 48 h of the third week was recorded.
- Ophthalmoscopic examination: - Haematology: In experiment c blood was colelcted from thetail after 3.5 weeks for red and white bloodcell counts andhemoglobin was determined. At termination of the study bllod
was collected from the neck vain and analyzed for alkaline
phosphate, inorganic phosphate and protein.
- Biochemistry: - Urinalysis: In experiment c the volume of urine wasdetermined.
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Macroscopic: gastrointestinal organs were examined. The
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

104

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
small intestine and colon plus rectum were hung full length
were measured. Organs were clenaed dried and weighed. I- Microscopic: In experiment c a small snip of the stomach
was removed for histological examination.
OTHER EXAMINATIONS: STATISTICAL METHODS:
In experments b and c the numerical results were analyzed
statistically by analysis of variance, the hypothesis in
every case being that the groups were equal. A multiple
range test was performed when it was indicated that there
was a difference among the groups at the 5% level or less.
results were significantly different if P<0.05.
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): At the top dose, the foodcontained around 2% of the respective sulfates, calculated
to be around 2000 mg/kg/d.
ACTUAL DOSE RECEIVED BY DOSE LEVEL BY SEX:- Time of death: - Number of deaths at each dose: 0
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:
Data for experiment a are not presented in the article
because at this low dose level no effects were seen.
- Mortality and time to death: - Clinical signs: Experiment c teeth: no changes comparedwith control group. Two slight cases of diarrhea that lasted
for a day were observed in experiment b in the sodium
sulfate group. One rat in experiment c showed diarrhea on 4
different days (3 conseccutive days) in the middle of thefeeding period.
- Body weight gain: Experiment b and c: no changes comparedwith control group.
- Food/water consumption: Experiment c: no changes comparedwith control group.
- Ophthalmoscopic examination: - Clinical chemistry: - Haematology: Experiment c: no changes compared with
control groups or other dose groups In red or white blood
cell counts, hemoglobin, protein, alkaline phosphataseorminorganic phosphatase.
- Urinalysis: Experiment c urine volume: no changes comparedwith control groups or other dose groups.
- Organ weights: Experiment b and c: no changes comparedwith control group.
- Gross pathology: - Histopathology: - Other: STATISTICAL RESULTS: see above
Sodium Sulfate was obatined as anhydrous powder from Merck,
A.C.S.
(2) valid with restrictions
Old study non-GLP and not according to standard guideline.
(68)

Species:rat
Sex: male
Strain:no data
Route of administration: inhalation
Exposure period:
8, 12, 44, 90, 720 hrs
Frequency of treatment: continuous (?)
Post exposure period:
1 month (size of recovery group not given)
Doses:
3, 11.06, 18.03, 40.05, 60.45 mg respectively, withconcurrent exposure to 500 mg/l in drinking water
Control Group:
other: one control group for each exposure group, size
105

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
not specified

Year:
GLP:
Remark:Result:Reliability:

1989
no
ACTUAL DOSE RECEIVED BY DOSE LEVEL BY SEX:
cannot be calculated
Aerosol generation not described. Aerosol size, stability
not described. exposure duration / day not given
Concentrations measured by potentiometric method
Calculated daily dose from inhalation at 3 mg/m3 is 0.66 (8hr/day) to 2 mg/kg/day (24hr/day), compared to intake fromdrinking water 60 mg/kg/day.
LOAEC: 2 mg/m3
log(time-to-first appearance) plotted againstlog(concentration) shows 100% linear correlation for 2 ofthe 3 reported effect parameters. Such precision is unlikely
to occur in biological systems.
Number of animals: 200; 5 exposure groups and 5 control
groups, size not given. Report mentions complete recovery at
1 month post-exposure but size of recovery group not given.
method for monthly isnpections of inner organs not given.
Time of death: n/a
Nr. of of deaths at each dose: none
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Mortality and time to death: n/a
Clinical signs: not specifed
At concentrations of 60, 40, 16, 11 and 3 mg/m3:
small but statistically significant effects on serum livercholinesterase concentration (first appearing at 6, 12, 44,
90 and 720 hours respectively ), prolongation of blood
coagulation time (first appearing at 4, 8, 30, 64 and 510
hours respectivey) and brain irritablity as measured by"summated threshold potential (?)", (first appearing at 4,8, 24, 45 and 288 hours respectively),
effects stated to be worse at end-of exposure (no data
provided). Depression of spermatogenesis (presumably at
end-of-exposure), at al concentrations.
All effects stated to be completely reversible within one
month post-exposure (size of recovery groups not given).
Body weight gain:- Food/water consumption: drinking water contained 500 mg
sodium sulfate/liter. Consumptio data not given
Ophthalmoscopic examination:- Clinical chemistry: no abnormalities in blood histamine,brain cholinesterase, number of sulfhydryl groups,basic
phosphatase activity in blood serum and content of ascorbic
acid in the adrenals.
- Haematology:
No abnormalities were observed in number of erythrocytes andleucocytes, total haemoglobin, meth- and sulfhaemoglobin,presence of Heinz-Ehrlich bodies- Urinalysis:- Organ weights:- Gross pathology:- Histopathology: (? method not given) suppression of
spermatogenesis- Other:
STATISTICAL RESULTS: see above(3) invalid
results biologically implausible / insufficient
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

106

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
documentation for assessment

26-SEP-2005

(29)

Type:
Chronic
Species:rat
Sex: male
Strain:no data
Route of administration: inhalation
Exposure period:
3 months
Frequency of treatment: not given
Post exposure period:
1 month (size of recovery group not given)
Doses:
dust concentration 1 mg/m3, with concurrent exposure to
500 mg/l in drinking water
Control Group:
yes
Year:
GLP:

1990
no

Remark:Dust generation, particle size, aerosol stability etc notdescribed
exposure duration per day not given
Measured exposures in workplace atmosphere (shift average)
88 mg/m3, yet apparenty no clinical symptoms or complaints
from humans
Method for "monthly ispection of inner organs" not given
Sulfate concentration in drinking water 500 mg/l;
caluculated maximum uptake from air < 0.1 (8-hr exposure) to.6 mg/kg/day (24hr/day exposure) vs. 60 mg/kg/day fromdrinking water

Result:small but significant changes in "summarized threshold
potential" (measure of brain irritability), livercholinesterase, blood cholinesterase, number of lymphocytes
and neutrophils, body weight, relative liver weigt;
depression of spermotagenesis, histopathological changes inliver and testes, serious histopathological changes in thelungs and several cases of pneumonomia, all fully reversible
after 1 month recovery.
results similar to those found in concurrent studies withsodium sulfite at 01. and 1 mg/m3 and a mixture ofsulfite/sulfate at 1 mg/m3.
Na2SO4 dust, not specified(3) invalid
Results biologically implausible; insufficient documentation
for assessment(30)

Test substance:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

Species:rat
Sex:
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
6 weeks
Frequency of treatment: daily (feeding study)
Doses:
1 or 2 % in dietControl Group:
other: saline in equal concentrations
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not described1976
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: In two experiments the direct effect of
dietary intake of sodium sulfate was examined. One
experiment with weanling rats, and another with adults, over

107

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Result:

Test condition:

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
a 6 weeks exposure period.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): not determined
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Mortality and time to death: not described- Clinical signs: not described- Body weight gain: exp1 weanling rats upto 10 g S/kg dm andexp2 adult rats upto 20 g S/kg dm (exp1/exp2)
control exp1 : 4.54 g/dcontrol exp2 : -1.42 g/d
exp1 : 4.49 g/d
exp2 : -1.95 g/d- Food/water consumption:water:
control exp1 : 28.0 ml/d
control exp2 : 36.8 ml/d
exp1 : 36.2 ml/d
exp2 : 57.4 ml/d
food:
control exp1 : 13.4 g/dcontrol exp2 : 13.8 g/d
exp1 : 13.5 g/d
exp2 : 15.2 g/d
STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described, Overall dietary
supplementation with sodium sulfate did not significantly
affect food/water intake and live-weight gain of rats.
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: not described- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: eight weaning and eight adult animals
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 6 weeks- Type of exposure: oral
- Post exposure period: not described- Vehicle: commercial diet
- Concentration in vehicle: 10-20 gram S/kg dm- Total volume applied: not described- Doses: in daily diet
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY:- Clinical signs: no- Mortality: not described- Body weight: yes- Food consumption: yes- Water consumption: yes- Ophthalmoscopic examination: no- Haematology: no- Biochemistry: no- Urinalysis: no
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described(3) invalid
documentation was insufficient for assessment
(104)

Type:
Chronic
Species:henStrain:other: White Leghorn
Route of administration: drinking water
Exposure period:
3-4 weeks
Frequency of treatment: continuous
Doses:
250-23328 mg/l
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

Sex: female

108OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Control Group:
LC100 :

yesca. 23328 mg/l

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not a guideline study, see freetext
1974
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: Commercial strain hens were supplied withsodium sulfate containing drinking water for a period of 4
weeks. Egg production, body weight, water en feed
consumption and mortality were examined.
STATISTICAL METHODS: performance of treatement were comparedto performance during pretreatment.
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
ANALYTICAL METHODS: no
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): not described
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Mortality and time to death: at 16000 mg/l Na2SO4
cumulative death of 100% was observed at day 14, while death
was already apparent at day 5.
- Clinical signs: not described

Result:

Conc.
(mg/l
weight
250
370
1000
1480
4000
5920
16000
23328

egg
production
Na2SO4)
+6.5
-16.1
+26.7
-15.6
+0.5
-24.4
-43.7
-73.8

water
consumption
-2.3
-12.9
-2.0
-14.9
-12.0
+58.8
+146.7-47.1

foodconsumtion
+13.3
-3.7
+1.3
-1.7
+8.1
-14.2
-25.5
-77.8

body
+9.0
-0.6
+1.3
+2.0
+1.1
-0.3
-14.7
*

* all animals died

Test condition:

109- Ophthalmoscopic examination: - Clinical chemistry: - Haematology: - Urinalysis: - Organ weights: - Gross pathology: Necropsis of birds receiving 16000 mg/l
sulphate showed extreme emaciation and visceral gouit.
- Histopathology: Microscopic examination of kidney tissues
showed urate accumulation of individual glomeruli andtubules losing cellular detail.
- Other: none
STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: not described- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: 2 hens per cage, 6 per block in 2 or 3
cage rows in
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 4 weeks with 4 weeks
pretreatment- Type of exposure: continuous in drinking water- Post exposure period: no- Vehicle: water- Concentration in vehicle: 250, 1000, 4000 and 16000 mg/l
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:

07-AUG-2006

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Na2SO4- Total volume applied: n.a.
- Doses: not described
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY:- Clinical signs: no- Mortality: yes- Body weight: yes- Food consumption: yes- Water consumption: yes- Ophthalmoscopic examination: no- Haematology: no- Biochemistry: no- Urinalysis: no
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Macroscopic: gout
- Microscopic: kidneys
OTHER EXAMINATIONS: egg production
STATISTICAL METHODS: all data were converted to performance
percentages using the formula performance during
treatment/performance during pretreatement x 100. Data wereanalyzed by analysis of variance when warranted.
(2) valid with restrictions
No guideline study, but includes detailed information on
used method, endpoints and statistical evaluation
procedures.

Type:
Sub-acuteSpecies:other: Cattle
Strain:other: Holstein
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
21 daysFrequency of treatment: ad lib
Post exposure period:
not applicable
Doses:
0.8% in dietControl Group:
yes
LOAEL:
ca. .8 %(1)

Sex: male

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: non-protocol
1991
noother TS

Remark:only three controls, sulfur content of diet not reported.
However, effects so serious that they can safely be assumed
to be absent in any control population.
In a study with 9 young Holstein steers (validity 3,
controls insufficiently desribed), a concentrate dietcontaining 0.8 % sodium sulfate (total sulfur content
appoximately 0.36%) was given during 21 days. 3 controls
were given the same diet without added sodium sulfate (total
sulfur or sulfate content not reported). Five out of nine
test animals vs. no controls developed clinically manifest
poli-encephalomalacia (PEM) as well as macroscopicallyvisible and histologically recognisable cerebral lesions(brain histology of not-affected animals not reported) . The
onset of the disease correlated well with increasing
concentrations of sulfide in the rumen. Thiamine
concentrations in serum (another alleged cause of PEM) were
not significantly affected. Similar disease due to highsulfur content of food was allegedly also reported earlier

Result:UNEP PUBLICATIONS

110

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Test substance:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
in sheep
Test substance: dosing based on total sulfur content offeed, brought up to required level by adding sodium sulfate(2) valid with restrictions
(45)

Type:
Sub-acuteSpecies:other: cattle
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
5 weeks
Frequency of treatment: ad lib
Post exposure period:
not applicable
Doses:
Control Group:
LOAEL:

Sex: male3860 ppm; 5540 ppm; 7010 ppm
noca. 3860 ppm

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: non-protocol
2002
noother TS

Result:three groups of 5 young heifers / group were fed diets with
3860 ppm, 5540 ppm and 7010 ppm of sulfur respectively
during 5 weeks. Sulfur concentrations were reached by adding
sodium sulfate to the desired level. Microscopic signs of
PEM were seen in all four low-dose animals, macroscopic
signs in 4/5 medium-dose and 4/5 high-dose animals. Clinicalsigns of PEM were seen in all animals. Onset of PEM
correlated highly with sulfide concentrations in rumen.
Other potential causes of PEM were excluded. (Niles, 2002.)
Test substance: dosing based on total sulfur content offeed, brought up to required level by adding sodium sulfate(2) valid with restrictions
No control group. Effects so serious that they can safely be
assumed to be absent in any control population.
(73)

Test substance:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

Type:
Chronic
Species:other: chicken
Strain:other: S.C.W.L.
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
11 daysFrequency of treatment: Daily (feeding study)
Doses:
1,2,3,4 or 5 % in dietControl Group:
yes

Sex:

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: no guideline study, see freetext
1976
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: The response of chicks of 14 days of age toincreasing levels of dietary sodium sulfate were
investigated. Weight gain and feed intake were observed.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): not determined- Number of deaths at each dose: No death recorded
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL: yes- Mortality and time to death: No mortality

Result:111

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Test condition:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Clinical signs: not described- Body weight gain: weight gain decreased with increasing
sulfate concentration.
- Food/water consumption: not reported
STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: 14 day-old male chicks- Weight at study initiation: weight was main test parameter- Number of animals: randomized block design with 60
treatments arranged as a 2x5x6 factorial, with two

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

replications.
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 11 days
- Type of exposure: oral
- Post exposure period: not described- Vehicle: commercial diet (basal diet wth 18% crude
protein)- Concentration in vehicle: 0 - 5 gram sulfate per 100 gramfood
- Total volume applied: water ad libitum- Doses: in daily diet 30 diets in total
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY:- Clinical signs: no- Mortality: yes- Body weight: yes- Food consumption: yes- Water consumption: not described- Ophthalmoscopic examination: no- Haematology: no- Biochemistry: no- Urinalysis: no
STATISTICAL METHODS: analysis of variance for determinationof weight gain and gain:feed ration according to Snedecor,
G.W. Statistical Methods, Coll. Press Ames, Iowa, USA(1956).
(3) invalid
documentation was insufficient for assessment(91)

Species:pig
Route of administration: drinking water
Exposure period:
28 daysFrequency of treatment: daily
Doses:
54-1800 mg/l
Control Group:
yes, concurrent vehicle

Sex: no data

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1992
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: The effect of sulfate in drinking water onnursery pig performance and health was examined over 28 days
with 415 weaned pigs.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): not determined
ACTUAL DOSE RECEIVED BY DOSE LEVEL BY SEX- Time of death: 1 pig died within the first week

Result:UNEP PUBLICATIONS

112

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Number of deaths at each dose: 1 pig at 600 mg/l
TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Clinical signs: Increased prevalence of diarrhea was atrend as sulfate concentration increased.
- Body weight gain: cumulative weight in kg of
body-weight/kg (sd)__________________________________________________________
Week

Control

600 mg/l

1800 mg/l__________________________________________________________
1
0.79 (0.61)
0.94 (0.78)
0.80 (0.63)
2
2.56 (1.14)
2.78 (1.90)
2.4 (1.05)
3
4.30 (1.70)
5.05 (2.67)
4.49 (1.94)
4
6.53 (2.31)
7.59 (3.37)
7.16 (2.75)__________________________________________________________
Observations in week 4 were for both 600 and 1800 mg/l
statistically significantly different
Increased- Food/water consumption: A non-significant trend inincrease water intake was observed with increasing sulfate
concentration.No differences in feed intake were observed
between various sulfate concentrations. Feed to gain ratios
for all treatments were not different.
- Clinical chemistry: isolates of E-coli were found in 14%of the pigs, from 1 pig rotavirus was isolated. No pigs were
exposed to transmissible gastroenteritis virus. None of thetreatments had an adverse effect on nursery pig performance.
Test condition:

113

STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described separately
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: 28 +/- 2 days
- Weight at study initiation: 6.8 kg mean weight- Number of animals: 415 (male/female, males were castrated)
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 4 weeks- Type of exposure: drinking water- Post exposure period: not described- Vehicle: farm well water- Concentration in vehicle: 54, 600 and 1800 mg/l
- Doses: continuous in drinking water- Feeding: pelleted 22% crude protein corn-soybean meal
containing 20% dried whey. At the start of the third week
the crude protein content was 18%.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY:- Clinical signs: Diarrhea, pathogenic E.coli and rota virus
detection, enteropathogenicity in ligated intestinal loops,
transmissable gastroentritus.
- Mortality: yes- Body weight: yes, feed to gain ratio- Food consumption: yes- Water consumption: yes- Ophthalmoscopic examination: no- Haematology: yes- Biochemistry: no- Urinalysis: no
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Macroscopic: no
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Microscopic: no
OTHER EXAMINATIONS:STATISTICAL METHODS: 7 replicates of 8 pigs/pen on water and6 replicates of 8 pigs/pen for treatment with sulfate.
Statistical evaluation compared mean water consumption, feed
consumption, cumulative gain and feed-gain ratios bytreatment group and week. Analysis of variance with repeatedmeasures was used to account for the differences intreatment group over time. Initial weight was used ascovariate in all analysis. Diarrhea scores were evaluated on
an individual basis, using a non-parametric repeatedmeasures design.
(2) valid with restrictions
Acceptable, well documented publication which meets basic
scientific principles.
(108)

5.5 Genetic Toxicity 'in Vitro'Type:
Ames test
System of testing:
S. Typhimurium TA1535, TA1537, TA100, TA98
Concentration:
312.5 to 5000 µg per plate with 4 dilutions
Cytotoxic Concentration: no cytotoxicity observed
Metabolic activation:with and without
Result:negative
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:
Method:Result:

Test condition:other: Salmonella/Microsome test, Ames et al, Mutation Res.
31, 347-364 (1975)
1988
yes
as prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4
METHOD FOLLOWED: Ames test as described by Ames et al(1975). Test was performed in duplicate with varying
concentration range.
DEVIATIONS FROM GUIDELINE: no guideline study
GLP: yes
STATISTICAL METHODS: not applicable
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not applicable
ANALYTICAL METHODS: not described
EFFECTS:- With metabolic activation: both tests, no effects- Without metabolic activation: both tests, no effects
FREQUENCY OF EFFECTS: n.a.
PRECIPITATION CONCENTRATION: not described
MITOTIC INDEX: not described
CYTOTOXIC CONCENTRATION: no toxicity observed up to 5000
mg/l
TEST-SPECIFIC CONFOUNDING FACTORS: not described
STATISTICAL RESULTS: n.a.
SYSTEM OF TESTING- Species/cell type: Salmonella typhimurium LT2 mutants: TA
1535, TA 100, TA 1537, TA 98- Deficiences/Proficiences: Histidine- Metabolic activation system: LT2 system- No. of metaphases analyzed: not described
ADMINISTRATION:- Dosing: 4 concentrations, 312.5-625-1250-2500-5000 mg/l
and 8-40-200-1000-5000 mg/l
- Number of replicates: 4 per test
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

114

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Application: plate- Positive and negative control groups and treatment: pos.
control: sodium azide, nitrofurantoin, 4-nitro-1,2-phenylene
diamine and 2-aminoanthracene; negative control- Pre-incubation time: not described
CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING RESULTS: Based on Maron and Ames
(1983).
(1) valid without restriction
Comparable to guideline study
(13)

Type:
Cytogenetic assay
System of testing:human blood lymphocytes
Concentration:
5*10e-5 to 5*10e-3 M
Cytotoxic Concentration: no data
Metabolic activation:
no dataResult:negative
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not specified
1992
nono data

Method:SYSTEM OF TESTING- Species/cell type: human lymphocytes- Deficiences/Proficiences: - Metabolic activation system: - No. of metaphases analyzed: ADMINISTRATION:- Dosing: - Number of replicates: - Application: - Positive and negative control groups and treatment: - Pre-incubation time: DESCRIPTION OF FOLLOW UP REPEAT STUDY: CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING RESULTS: GENOTOXIC EFFECTS: - With metabolic activation: - Without metabolic activation: FREQUENCY OF EFFECTS: PRECIPITATION CONCENTRATION: MITOTIC INDEX: CYTOTOXIC CONCENTRATION: - With metabolic activation: - Without metabolic activation: TEST-SPECIFIC CONFOUNDING FACTORS: STATISTICAL RESULTS:
The frequency of chromosomal abberations, sister chromatid
exchanges, and micronuclei was not increased in human blood
lymphocytes in this experiment. Also there were no changes
in mitotic index or lymphocyte cell cycle.
No data on the test substance sodium sulfate.
(4) not assignableNot assignable. Results are given but this is just astatement. No expsrimental data are given. The study is
non-GLP and non-guideline.
(66)

Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:

26-SEP-2005

115

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

5.6 Genetic Toxicity 'in Vivo'
5.7 Carcinogenicity
Species:rat
Strain:Sprague-Dawley
Route of administration: oral feed
Exposure period:
up to 27 or 44 weeks
Frequency of treatment: daily (feeding study)
Doses:
0.84 % in dietResult:negative
Control Group:
yes

Sex: male

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: no standardized method used1975
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: Male rats were fed diets containing Na2SO4.
The study was part of a toxicity study on Azo Dyes. The
sodium sulfate were included as control series.
METHOD OF CALCULATION:
not described
MORTALITY: no mortality was observed (10 surviving rats inboth series) in both test series after 27 and 44 weeks of
exposure as compared to control (10 surviving rats).
CLINICAL SIGNS: No tumors were detected. No evidence ofhyperplastic and/or dysplatic change after 16 weeks. No
cholangiofibrosis or mild cirrhosis in the liver after 16
weeks were observed as compared to control.

Result:

BODY WEIGHT CHANGES: No significant differences in overall
body weight gain or in liver weight were observed.
_____________________________________________________________group Eff.no. starting
no. ofTerminal
Terminalof rats weight grats
body wght
liver wght+/- SD
surviving g +/- SD
g +/- SD
mean
mean
mean
_____________________________________________________________
Controla5230.8-18.6
2
358.5
10.11
b
5
193.4 33.6
5
358.4-16.0 10.2-0.49
Na2SO4a5252.0-30.2
3414.7-39.5 14.3-1.42b
5
194.2-35.7
5332.0-53.7 10.03-0.99

Test condition:_____________________________________________________________
FOOD AND WATER CONSUMPTION CHANGES: no changes observed
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: not described- Weight at study initiation: mean weight of animals 211.6
gram- Number of animals: total 90 , 5 in a cage
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: Study was divided in twoseries. One series lasted 27 weeks, and the other 44 weeks- Type of exposure: feeding study, daily feeding
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

116

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:
26-SEP-2005
Species:
Strain:SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Post exposure period: no
FOR ORAL STUDIES:- Vehicle: maize oil- Concentration in vehicle: 8.4 gram/kg- Total volume applied: 30 ml- Doses: 0.84 % in diet
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY- Body weight: yes- Food consumption: Basal diet consited of pellets with
15-16% protein, 6-8% fat and 8-9 % fibre (Victoria Wheat
growers Corp. Ltd, Melbourne, Aus.). The consumption rate
was 10 g/rat per day at the start up to 17 g/rat per day atthe end of the study.
- Water consumption: free acces to tap water- Clinical signs: not described- Mortality: yes- Macroscopic examination: yes- Ophthalmoscopic examination: not described- Haematology: yes, haemoglobin estimations were performed.
- Clinical chemistry: not described- Urinalysis: not described
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Macroscopic: spleen, liver- Microscopic: not described
OTHER EXAMINATIONS: lung sections were examined afterstaining with haematoxylin, eosin and the PAS method.
STATISTICAL METHODS: The probability of observing liver
tumors of 1 cm or more in diameter, and evidence ofmetastatic spread or multiple tumors at death was calculatedby an actuarial method, as described by Pilgrim and Dowd,
Cancer Res. 23, 45 (1963). Differences between numbers rats
bearing tumours of at least 1 cm diameter, were comparedusing Fisher's exact test.
(3) invalid
No guideline study, 5 male animals only
(16)
mouse
Swiss

Sex: male/female

Route of administration: s.c.
Exposure period:
26 weeks
Frequency of treatment: weekly
Doses:
31 µg in 0.01 ml sodium chloride (0.9%) per g bodyweight / week
Result:negative
Control Group:
other: Na2SO4 served as control for 4-HMBD / historicalcontrols
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: see freetext
1987
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: Test was control test of investigation ofcarcinogenity of 4-(hydroxymethyl)benzenediazonium ion in
mice. Mice were treated for 26 weeks, and observed for 150
weeks, to test substance and control (Na2SO4)
METHOD OF CALCULATION:
not described
MORTALITY AND TIME TO DEATH: see attachement, table I

Result:117

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Test condition:

Attached doc.:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
CLINICAL SIGNS: see attachment, table II
BODY WEIGHT GAIN: not described
FOOD/WATER CONSUMPTION: not described
GROSS PATHOLOGY: see attachment, table II
HISTOPATHOLOGY: see attachementm, table II
OTHER: see attachment, table II
TIME TO TUMOURS: see attachment, table II
STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described
TEST ORGANISMS- Age: 6 weeks (50:50 male/female)- Weight at study initiation: not described- Number of animals: 50 male and 50 female
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Duration of test/exposure: 26 weeks- Type of exposure: subcutaneously injections weekly- Post exposure period: not described
FOR ORAL STUDIES:- Vehicle: 0.9 %v sodium chloride- Concentration in vehicle: 31 µg per 0.01 ml vehicle per g
body weight- Total volume applied: not described- Doses: weekly
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS AND FREQUENCY- Body weight: yes- Food consumption: no- Water consumption: no- Clinical signs: yes- Mortality: yes- Macroscopic examination: yes- Ophthalmoscopic examination: no- Haematology: no- Clinical chemistry: no- Urinalysis: no
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Macroscopic Histological study: skin, subcutis, liver,spleen, kidneys, bladder, thyroid, heart, pancreas, testes,
ovaries, uterus, nasal turbinals, lungs- Microscopic: Yes, after staining with hematoxylin andeosin
OTHER EXAMINATIONS: All other pathological changes
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
RS2-Toth.doc(3) invalid(97)

5.8.1 Toxicity to FertilityType:other: two parities using the same mice
Species:mouse
Sex:
femaleStrain:ICR
Route of administration:
drinking water
Exposure Period:
1 week prior to breeding until study termination
Frequency of treatment:
drinking water was avaialble ad libitum
Premating Exposure Period
male:
no exposure
female:1 weekDuration of test:
1 week prior to breeding until study termination
No. of generation studies: 1
Doses:
0, 0.924, 1.848, 3.696, 7.392 g/liter
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

118

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

Control Group:

other: One control group received deionized distilledwater and one received deionized distilled water with
2,392 ppm Na
NOAEL Parental:>= 7392 mg/l
NOAEL F1 Offspring:>= 7392 mg/lother: NOAEL F1 Offspring 2 :>= 7392 mg/l
Result:No effects on litter size and weaning weight wereseen. Reproductive performance is not affected inthis study.
Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: not specified
1988
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:TEST ORGANISMS: ICR mouse
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Type of exposure: drinking water- Duration of test/exposure: 1 week before study until study
termination.
- Treatment: drinking water was available ad libitum- Control group and treatment: One control group received
deionized distilled water and one received deionizeddistilled water with 2,392 ppm Na- Vehicle: deionized water- Concentration in vehicle: 0, 0.924, 1.848, 3.696, 7.392
g/liter- Total volume applied: - Doses: drinking water with 0, 0.924, 1.848, 3.696, 7.392
g/liter sodium sulfate ad libitum.
- Concentrations: - Particle size: - Type or preparation of particles:MATING PROCEDURES:
After one week a male mouse that had received tap water only
was randomely bred withe ach female mouse. The female waschecked every day for a vaginal plug. When a vaginal plug
was observed the male was removed.
STANDARDIZATION OF LITTERS:The litter were standardized to 8 pups per litter. The dams
with fewer tahn 8 pups received pups from other dams in thesame dose group. If these were not available they wereassigned pups from a lower dose group.
PARAMETERS ASSESSED DURING STUDY P AND F1(1) AND F1(2):- Clinical observations:water consumption was measured daily during the 2nd and 3rd
week of gestationa and 1st and 2nd week of lacation. (themeasureemnts during week 1 of gestation were discarted due
to leakage from drinking bottles, the measurements performed
during week 3 of lacation were also discarted because thepups started drinking water).
Bodyweights of the dams were recorded at parturition andlitter sizes were determined.
At 21 days pp the dams and litters were weighed.
- Estrous cycle: - Sperm examination: - Others: OFFSPRING: ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):- Organ weights P and F1: -119

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Histopathology P and F1: - Histopathology F1 not selected for mating, F2: OTHER EXAMINATIONS: STATISTICAL METHODS:
The description of the statistical analysis remains unclear:
The least square mean analysis of variance technique wasused to analyze the data. One contrast was used to compare
the different groups. Sulfate treatment effects werepartitioned into linear, quadratic and cubic components
using orthogonal contrasts. Student's t-test were used todetermine the difference in water consumption between weeks
in both gestation and lactation.
NOAEL (NOEL): 7392 mg/l = 5000 ppm
ACTUAL DOSE RECEIVED BY DOSE LEVEL BY SEX:TOXIC RESPONSE/EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Parental data and F1:- Body weight: gestational and lactational body weight gian
was not influenced by level of sulfate consumed.
- Food/water consumption: a decrease in water consumption
was seen. It is suggested that the amials became acclimatedto the high sulfate levels because the water consumtion
levels ere higher during the 2nd week of lactation comaredto the 1st week during the 2nd parity.
- Description, severity, time of onset and duration ofclinical signs: - Fertility index: - Precoital interval: - Duration of gestation: - Gestation index: - Changes in lactation: - Changes in estrus cycles: - Effects on sperm: - Hematological findings incidence and severity:- Clinical biochemistry findings incidence and severity: - Mortality: 0- Gross pathology incidence and severity: - Number of implantations: - Number of corpora lutea: - Ovarian primordial follicle counts: - Organ weight changes: - Histopathology incidence and severity: - Offspring toxicity F1 and F2: - Litter size and weights: litter size was not affected bytreatment.
- Sex and sex ratios: - Viability index: none of the pups died.
- Post natal survival until weaning: none of the pups died.
- Effects on offspring: - Postnatal growth, growth rate: - Vaginal opening (F) or preputial separation (M): - Other observations; STATISTICAL RESULTS: Sodium sulfate, reagent grade.
(4) not assignableNon-GLP and non-guideline study. Not sufficiently detailed.
The set up of the study differs from the standard. Mice were
exposed from 1 week before the study until study
termination. The same female mice gave birth to the first
and the second litter. The litter was weaned at 21 days pp
and the mice were mated again.The males were not exposed.
Possibly only the mice with two subsequent litters were
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

120

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
involved in the analysis.

27-SEP-2005(7)

5.8.2 Developmental Toxicity/Teratogenicity
Species:
Strain:Route of administration:
Exposure period:
Frequency of treatment:
Duration of test:
Doses:
Control Group:

mouse
Sex: female
other: ICR/SIM
other: oral (gavage)
4 days (gestation day 8-12)
once daily
up to day 22 of pregnancy
2800 mg/kg/day
other: yes (N=28, vehicle alone H2O)

Method:Year:
GLP:

other: no guideline study
1986
noResult:As part of a validation of a developmental screen, pregnant
mice were exposed to 55 compounds, composed of known
teratogens, known non-teratogens or equivocal substances.
Exposure: single daily dose by gavage; dose level at or nearinduction of maternal toxicity.
Vehicle alone (H20): 15 control groups of 28-30 mice.
Vehicle alone (Corn oil): 13 control groups of 28-30 mice.

Test substance:
Reliability:
26-SEP-2005

Endpoints: maternal weight gain, delivery rate, litter size,% live birhts, pup weight day 1 and day 3, neonatal survivalrate, macrospoci visceral and skeletal abnormalities
Statistical analysis:maternal weight :two-tailed analysis of variancelive and dead litter size: one-tailed analysis of varianceneonatal survival rate: Fisher one-tailed exact probability.
neonatal weight: two-tailed analysis of variance with litter
size as co-variant
Overal results: reported "Seidenberg JM , Becker RA: A
summary of the results of 55 chemiclas screened fordevelopmental toxicity im mice. Teratogenesis,
Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis 7:17-28 (1987)
Results for sodium sulfate:Compared to controls, slight increase in neonatal body weighat day 1 pp.(1.80+0.14 vs 1.72 + 0.13 grams).
Normal maternal weight gain, normal delivery rate, normal
litter size, normal nr. of live births, normal weight ofpups on day 3, no macroscopic visceral or sceletal
abnormalities
Na2SO4, not specified(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard screening test.
(90)

Species:
Strain:Route of administration:
Exposure period:
Frequency of treatment:
Duration of test:
Doses:
Control Group:
Method:121

mouse
Sex: female
other: ICS/SIM
other: oral (gavage)
4 days (gestation day 8-12)
once daily
up to day 22 of pregnancy
Na2SO4: 2800 mg/kg
other: yes (N=28, vehicle alone H2O)

other: no guideline study
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY
Year:
GLP:
Remark:Result:

Test substance:
Reliability:
27-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
1987
noReviewer disagrees, slight increase in body weight ofneonates on day 1 p.p. only is not an adverse effect and isbiologically totally irrelevant.
Summary of results of a screening study fully described in:
Seidenberg JM, Anderson DG, ecker RA: validation of an invivo developmental screen in the mouse. Teratogenesis,
Carcinogenesis and Mutagenesis, 6:361-374 (1986) See RS
Overal results:
24 of 26 substances previously reported as positive interatogenicity / embryotoxicity tests scored positive inthis screen.
93% of substances previously reported as negative scorednegative in this screen.
equivocal substances 4of 5 positive in this screen
no data: 3 out of 9 considered positive, among them sodium
sulfate.
Results for sodium sulfate:Compared to controls, slight increase in neonatal body weighat day 1 pp.(1.80+ -0.14 vs 1.72 + -0.13 grams).
Normal maternal weight gain, normal delivery rate, normal
litter size, normal nr. of live births, normal weight ofpups on day 3, no macroscopic visceral or sceletal
abnormalities; Considered by authors as a positive outcomeof screening
test.
Na2SO4, not specified(2) valid with restrictions
non-standard screening test.; scoring criteria too strict.
(89)

Species:
Strain:Route of administration:
Frequency of treatment:
Duration of test:
Doses:
Control Group:
Result:mouse
Sex: female
other: CF-1s.c.
single injection at day 8 or 9 of gestation
not described
60 mg/kg bw
yesincreased maternal weight gain, no soft tissue
abnormalities, increase of skeletal abnormalities(delayed ossification)

Method:Year:
GLP:
Test substance:other: no standardized method used1973
noas prescribed by 1.1 - 1.4

Method:METHOD FOLLOWED: The teratogenic effects of sodium sulfate
injected s.c. in albino mice was investigated. The study
examined mice after administration at day 8 and 9 ofgestation.
STATISTICAL METHODS: not described
METHOD OF CALCULATION: not described
NOAEL (NOEL), LOAEL (LOEL): not determined
MATERNAL TOXIC EFFECTS BY DOSE LEVEL:- Mortality and day of death: not described- Number aborting: not described- Number of resorptions: See attachement- Duration of Pregnancy: not described

Result:UNEP PUBLICATIONS

122OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006- Body weight: see attachement- Food/water consumption: not described- Description, severity, time of onset and duration ofclinical signs: Soft tissue abnormalities were notsignificantly different from the control group. Skeletal
abnormalities , described as delayed ossification,
especially in phalanges, sternebrae and skull, were
statistically different form control
group .
- Hematological findings incidence and severity: notdescribed- Clinical biochemistry findings incidence and severity: notdescribed- Gross pathology incidence and severity:- Organ weight changes:- Histopathology incidence and severity:
FETAL DATA:- Litter size and weights: 6, no weight determined- Number viable: 51 fetuses-·Sex ratio: not determined- Postnatal growth: not described- Postnatal survival: not described- Grossly visible abnormalities: no abnormalities- External abnormalities: see attachement, no abnormalities- Soft tissue abnormalities: see attachement, noabnormalities- Skeletal abnormalities: see attachement, no abnormalities

Test condition:

Attached doc.:
Reliability:

123

STATISTICAL RESULTS: not described
TEST ORGANISMS:
Albino mice (CF-1) (25-30 gram), obtained from Carworth
Farms, Inc. New York, USA.
ADMINISTRATION / EXPOSURE- Type of exposure: injection subcutaneous- Duration of test/exposure: as described by Iuliucci, J.D.,
Gautieri, R.F., J. Pharm. Sci, 60:420 (1971).
- Treatment: at day 8 or 9 of gestation- Control group and treatment: yes, untreated (saline)- Vehicle: distilled water- Concentration in vehicle: 10 mg/ml- Total volume applied: not described- Doses: one injection- Concentrations: 60 mg/kg body weight
PARAMETERS ASSESSED DURING STUDY:- Body weight gain: yes, ratio between start and end ofstudy- Food consumption: no- Clinical observations: yes, soft tissue abnormalities,
skeletal abnormalities and resorption uterine horns- Examination of uterine content: no- Examination of fetuses: yes- Litter : yes
ORGANS EXAMINED AT NECROPSY (MACROSCOPIC AND MICROSCOPIC):
OTHER EXAMINATIONS: Exencephaly, Axial skeletal fusions andcryptorchid testes.
STATISTICAL METHODS: as described by Iuliucci, J.D.,
Gautieri, R.F., J. Pharm. Sci, 60:420 (1971).
RS1-Arcuri&Gautieri.doc(2) valid with restrictions
Not a guideline study. Experiment described in detail. Not
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
all parameters determined. Endpoints are not all clearly
described.

27-SEP-2005(9)

5.8.3 Toxicity to Reproduction, Other Studies
5.9 Specific Investigations
5.10 Exposure Experience
Type of experience:

Human - Epidemiology

Method:Method: Cross-sectional study, internal sub-cohort study
Subjects: 119 male workers from natural sodium sulfate
mines.
Age range: 17 to 58
exposure duration: 0.6-31 years(no control group, study outcomes compared with "normal
values", source not given).
Exposure: Na2SO4 dust ,range 5 mg/m3 to 150 mg/m3(sampling method, strategy, number, frequency and timespanof sampling not given).
General medical screening, lung function tests, bloodpressure, skin condition, gastro-intestinal functioning,serum sodium, calcium, potassium chloride and sulfate
content were all within normal ranges ( i.e presumably asfound in the general population).

Result:Mean urinary excretion of inorganic sulfate exceeded 2.2
gr/liter in all workers and thirty percent of the workers
excreted more than 3 gr of inorganic sulfate per day,indicating massive uptake from recent exposure. The only
subjective symptom indicated by the workers was nasal
irritation and runny noses on exposure to dust.

01-DEC-2004

Internal sub-cohort study:
Short exposure duration subcohort:
subjects: More than 10 years of exposure (n=77)
age 28.0 +-10,
exposure duration 3.1 + 2.8 years
Long exposure duration subcohort:
Subjects: more than 10 years exposure (n=42)
age 454.5 + 8.8,
exposure duration 19.9 + 3.6 years
Results:
No differences other than explained by age difference.
(2) valid with restrictions
Absence of control group, incomplete description of
exposure
and possibility for healthy worker effect severely restrict
extrapolation(59)

Type of experience:Livestock - Exposure through Feeding

Remark:Method:31 sows and 27 gilts were each allotted to three treatments
to study the effect of water quality during gestation andlactation. Sulfate was added to the water at concentrations

Reliability:

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

124

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Reliability:
07-NOV-2001

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
in three treatments (1) 320 - 620 mg/l (2) 1820 - 2840 mg/l(3) 3320 - 5080 mg/l. Water was offered ad libitum. from 30
days post-breeding through 28 days lactation.
Results:
There was no significant difference in gestation or
lactation, number or weight of pigs at birth or at weaning.
Water consumption did not differ during gestation, but
increased as salt levels increased. Water consumption was
13.6, 14.2 and 16.8 liter/day for lactating females intreatment 1, 2 and 3.
These results suggests that sulfates up to and including
3320 mg/l, in water have no significant effect on
reproduction in the gilt or sow.
(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

Type of experience:other: Human - controlled study

Remark:METHOD:The objective of the study was to provide additional
information regarding whether sensitive populations(infants
and transients) may be adversely affected by sudden
exposure
to drinking water containing high levels of sulfate.

(79)

One hundred and five study participants were divided among
the dose groups as follows: 24
received 0 mg/L sulfate; 10 received 250 mg/L sulfate; 10
received 500 mg/L sulfate; 33 received 800
mg/L sulfate; and 28 received 1200 mg/L sulfate. The numberof bowel movements recorded each day by study participants
were analyzed. There were no statistically significant
differences in the bowel movements among the groups on days
3, 4, 5, or 6. There were also no statistically significant
differences in the bowel movements reported when comparing
days 1 and 2 (the days when there was no sulfate in thewater) with days 3, 4, and 5 within each dose group. To
examine the data for a trend toward increased frequency ofreports of diarrhea with increased dose of sulfate, alogistic regression model were the dose as an ordinalvariable was included for osmotic diarrhea was included.
There was no statistically significant increase in reportsof diarrhea with increasing dose (one-sided p = 0.099).
RESULTS:
One hundred five study participants were divided among thedose groups as follows: 24 received 0 mg/L sulfate; 10
received 250 mg/L sulfate; 10 received 500 mg/L sulfate; 33
received 800 mg/L sulfate; and 28 received 1200 mg/L
sulfate. The demographic information for the study
population was as follows: the mean age of participants was
42 years; the majority (62%) was female;the races included in the study population were white(80%), black (13%), and Asian/Pacific Islander (7%).
Ninety-five percent of the participants were non-Hispanic.

125

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
In the experimental trials with adult volunteers, nosignificant dose-response association between acuteexposure to sodium sulfate in water (up to 1200 mg/L) andreports of diarrhea were found.
However, a weak (not statistically significant)increase in reports of diarrhea at the highest dose level
when it was compared to the combined lower
doses was observed.

27-SEP-2005

Remark: concentration in drinking water known, but not
actual dose.
(4) not assignable
Documentation insufficient for assessment: Abstract only.
(76)

Type of experience:

Human

Remark:27-SEP-2005

Inhalation of sodium sulfate dust causes irritation of the
mucuous membranes, and prolonged skin contact has a drying
effect.
(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment.
(101)

Type of experience:Livestock - Exposure through Feeding

Remark:26-SEP-2005

Association between sulfate in drinking water and diarrhea
in swine was investigated. Sulfate concentrations ranged
from 5.99 to 1629 mg/l recorded at 54 farms in Ohio USA.
Associations between sulfate concentrations and prevalenceof diarrhea could not be established.
(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment(107)

Type of experience:

Human - Epidemiology

Remark:Evaluation of infant diarrhea associated with elevatedlevels of sulfate in drinking water.

Reliability:

Reliability:

Reliability:

Method:274 households were investigated in South-Dakota USA.
Sulfate concentrations in drinking water was determined.
Data on infant diarrhea were collected using
questionnaires.
Logistic regression was used to estimate the risk fordiarrhea.

Reliability:

Results:
69% of the households drank municipal water and 54% used itin the infants diet. 39 infants developed diarrhea. Of the
170 households that submitted water samples, 141 were using
the water in the infants diet. The median sulfate
concentration of the water was 264 mg/l. 25 infants
developed diarrhea.
Average infant daily sulfate intake was not significantly
associated with an increase diarrhea rate. There was no
significant association between sulfate intake and theincidence of diarrhea for the range of sulfate studies.
There was no effect of a dose-response or threshold effect.
(4) not assignable
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

126

OECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Only secondary literature available

09-NOV-2001(39)

Type of experience:Livestock - Exposure through Feeding

Remark:Artificially reared neonatal piglets were used to study theeffect of inorganic sodium sulfate on bowel function inhuman infants.
Method:Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the effect ofhigh levels of inorganic sulfate intake on the growth, feedintake and feaces consistency.
40 pigs with an average age of 5d were individually caged
abd reared with an automatic feeding device. Ten pigs per
dietary treatment were fed one of four diets containing thefollowing levels of inorganic sodium sulfate (mg/l diet):0, 1200, 1600, 2000 for exp 1 (18 days study), and 0, 800,
2000, 22000 for exp. 2 (16 days study).

22-JUN-2005

Results:
The levels of sulfate did not affect (P>0.05) the growth ofpiglets, or their food intake. 1200 mg/l sulfate had noeffect on feaces consistency, while 1800 mg/l sulfate did(non-pathogenic diarrhea). Added sulfate did not affect (P>0.05) relative kidney weight. The results suggest that thelevel of added dietary inorganic sulfate at which 50% of
piglets develop nonpathogenic diarrhea is between 1600 and1800 mg/l.
(2) valid with restrictions
Acceptable, well documented study.
(43)

Type of experience:

Direct observation, poisoning incidents

Remark:Two outbreaks of poisoning (eosinophilicmeningoencephalitis) in pigs due to treatment with sodium
sulfate. Experimental reproduction indicated a similar
syndrome.

Reliability:

Reliability:

Method:8 12 weeks old pigs were each given by drneching gun 50
gram of sodium sulfate, dissolved in a minimum amount ofwater daily for 3 consecutive days. Controls were treatedwith water.
Results:
2 of the treated pigs were found dead on day 4, and 3 werein prostrate and in extremis. The latter 3 animals were
killed for examination. The three were all inco-ordination,
blind and had epileptiform convulsions. Histopathologicalexamination revelaed lesions of the central nervous system,
vacuolation, nueronal degeneration, cortical laminarmalacia. Large numbers of eosinophils and some macrophages
were present in the meninges and in the perivascular spacesin the cortical white matter.
(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

22-JUN-2005
Type of experience:
127

(32)
Human - Exposure through Food
UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
5. TOXICITY

Remark:Reliability:
27-SEP-2005

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Three illustrative cases of diarrhea in infants in Canada
following ingestion of well waters with a sulfate content
above 600 mg/l. Other causes such as infections or otherpresence of chemicals were excluded. The estimated daily
dose would have been around 70- 100 mg/kg/day.
It is recommended that water with more than 400 mg/l
sulphate be regarded as unsuitable for infant feeding.
Remark: clinically, cause and effect relationship clearly
established. Extrapolation to general population notpossible in the absence of data on the population at risk
and incidence(4) not assignable(25)

5.11 Additional Remarks
Type:

Toxicokinetics

Remark:Review:
Sulfate is a normal constituent of the blood and is a normal
metabolite of sulfur-containing amino acids, and excess
sulfate is excreted in the urine. Daily sulfate excretion isreported to be 0.20 to 0.25 mmol/kg bw/day and higher inchildren.

Reliability:

In male adult Wistar rats, approximately 73% of dietarycalcium or magnesium sulfate salts was absorbed, althoughabsorption was partly dependent on other dietary elements.
(4) not assignable

29-SEP-2005

(50)

Type:

other: Oral toxicity to pigs

Remark:Sodium sulfate (Glauber's salt) toxicity was observed inpigs after drenching eight-week old pigs with 50 g sodium
sulfate for three days, and restricting their water supply.
The animals showed nervous signs, twitching, tremors andconvulsions. The most noticeable lesion at post mortem waswidespread vacuolation and necrosis of the cerebral cortex.
The sodium concentration of the cerebrospinal fluid wassignificantly higher than normal.

Reliability:(3) invalid
Documentation insufficient for assessment

26-SEP-2005(26)

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

128

OECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(1) Adams, A.W., Cunningham, F.E., Munger, L.L. (1975). Some
effects on layers of sodium sulfate and magnesium sulfate intheir drinking water. Poultry Sci. 54(3):707-714.
(2) Allgemeine Verwaltungsvorschrift (1990). Uber die
nahere bestimmung wassergefahrdender stoffe und ihre
einstufung entsprechend ihrer gefahrlichkeit-VwV
wassergefahrende stoffe (VwVwS) 9.3.1990.
(3) Ambient water Quality Guidelines for sulphate (2000).
Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks Province of British
Columbia, Water Quality Section Water Management Branch
Victoria, BC, Canada.
(4) Amdur M.O., Bayles, J., Ugro, V., Underhill, D.W. (1978).
Comparative irritant potency of sulphate salts. Environ.
Res. 16(1-3):1-8.
(5) Anderson, B.G. (1944). The toxicity thresholds of various
substances found in industrial wastes as determined by theuse of daphnia magna. Sewage Works J. 16(6):1156-1165.
(6) Anderson, B.G. (1946). Industrial wastes - The toxicity
thresholds of various sodium salts determined by the use ofdaphnia magna. Sewage Works J. 18(1):82-87.
(7) Andres, C.J. Cline, T.R. (1989). Influence of Sulfate in
Drinking Water on Mouse Reproduction during two Parities.
Journal of Animal. Sciences. 67:1313-1317.
(8) Arambasic, M.B., Bjelic, S., Subakov, G. (1995). Acutetoxicity of heavy metals (copper, lead, zinc), phenol andsodium on Allium cepa l., Lepidium sativum l. and Daphnia
magnaSt.: comparitive investigations and the practicalapplications. Water Res. 29(2):497-503.
(9) Arcuri, P. and Gautieri, F. J. (1973). Morphine-induced
fetal malformations. 3. Possible mechanisms of action.
Pharmaceut. Sci. 62(10): 1626-1634.
(10) Awasthi, S.P.(1989). Effect of different salts on the
nodulation of Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczeck. J. Phytol. Res.
2(1): 109-112.
(11) Banet, G., Wininger, S., Badani, H., Ben-Dor, B., Friedman
andY., Kapulnik, Y. (1996). Toxic and osmitic effects ofsalinity on growth and nodulation of Medicago sativa.
Symbiosis. 21:209-222.
(12) Bauer, J.H. (1976) Oral administration of radioactive
sulfate to measure extracellular fluid space in man. J.
Appl. Physiol. 40(4):648-650.
(13) Bayer A.G. (1988). Salmonella/Microsome test to evaluate forpoint mutagenic effects. Unpublished report. Study no.
T9027163, Report no. 16839, Wuppertal, Germany.

129

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(14) Bayer AG data
(15) BC Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks, and Environment
Canada, (1996)ac. State of water Quality of Liard river at
Fort Liard, 1984-1995, Canada-British Columbia water Quality
Monitoring agreement.
(16) Blunck, J.M. and Crowther, C.E. (1975). Enhancement of azo
dye carcinogenesis by dietary sodium sulphate. Europ. J.
Cancer. 11(1): 23-31.
(17) British Chrome & Chemicals, Cleveland, producers data.
(18) Bundesminister des Innern (1990): Gemeinsames
Ministerialblatt Nr.41 Jahrgang 8 (1990).
(19) Bundesminister des Innern (1996). Gemeinsames
Ministerialblatt Nr.16, 47, Jahrgang 345, Kenn-nr. 286(29-04-1996).
(20) Bycov, L.A. et al. (1977). Neftepererab. Neftekhim. (Moscow)
ISS 4:40-41.
(21) Cairns, J.C.J., and Scheier, A. (1959). The relationship ofBluegill sunfish body size to tolerance for some common
chemicals. Proc. 13th Ind. Waste. Conf., Purdue Univ. Eng.
Bull 96:243-252.
(22) CFTA (1976). Allergic contact sensitization test (Test No.
<intentionally blanked-out>.003-76) on Bubble Bath 60082-C
containing 80.8% Sodium Sulfate. Unpublished report. Studyno. <intentionally blanked-out>.003-76, Report no. Not
stated.
(23) Chapmann and Hall (1992). Dictionary of Inorganic Compounds.
Vol.3.
(24) Chemiekaarten (2000). pp. 921, C-0979, The Netherlands.
(25) Chien, L., Robertson, H., Gerrard, J. (1968). Infantile
gastroenteritis due to water with high sulfate content. Can.
Med. Assoc. J. 99:102-104.
(26) Clarke, M., Harvey, D.G., Humphreys, D.J. (1981). Sodium
sulphate. Veterinary Toxicology. 2nd ed. London:Bailliere
Tindall, p.42.
(27) Cocchetto, D.M. and Levy, G. (1981). Absorption of orally
administered sodium sulfate in humans. J. Pharm. Sci.
70(3):331-333.
(28) Croser, C., Renault, S., Franklin, J and Zwiazek, J. (2001).
The effect of salinity on the emergence and seedling growthof Picea mariana, Picea glauca and Pinus bankciana.
Environmentla pollution. 115:9-16.
(29) Denisov, Y.N. and Tkachev, P.G. (1989). Hygienic
characteristics of small doses of sodium sulfate after its
inhalation. Gigiena i sanitaria. 4:69-71.
(30) Denisov, Y.N. and Tkachev, P.G. (1990). Health aspects of
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

130

OECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

sodium salts of sulfurous and sulfuric acids asenvironmental pollutants. Gigiena i sanitariia. 9:11-13.
(31) Diem, K. (ed.) (1972). Documenta Geigy scientific tables.
6th edition. J.R. Geigy S.A., Basle, Switzerland. 533 pp.
(32) Dow, C., Lawson, G.H.K., Todd, J.R. (1963). Sodium sulphatetoxicity in pigs. Vet. Rec. 75:1052-1055.
(33) Dowden, B.F. (1961). Cumulative toxicities of some inorganic
salts to Daphnia
maena as determined by median tolerance limits. Proc. La.
Acad. Sci. 23:77-85.
(34) Dowden, B.F. and Bennett H.J. (1965). Toxicity of selectedchemicals to certain
animals. J. Water Pollut. Control Fed. 37(9):1308-1316.
(35) Egan, T.P. and Ungar, I.A. (1998). Effect of different saltsof sodium and potassium on the growth of Atriplex prostrata(Chenopodiaceae). Journal of plant nutrition.
21(10):2193-2205.
(36) Environment Canada (1985). Tech Info for Problem Spills:
Sodium sulfate.
(37) Environment Canada. (1984). Detailed surface water quality
data, Northwest Territories 1980-1981, Alberta 1980-1981,
Saskatchewan 1980-1981. Manitoba 1980-1981. Unpublishedresults provided by Inland Waters Directorate, Ottawa. Cited
from Health Canada, 1996.
(38) EPI Suite (2000). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
(39) Esteban, E., Rubin, C., McGeehin, M., Flanders, D., Baker,
M.J., Sinks, T.H. (1997). Evaluation of human health effects
associated with elevated levels of sulfate in drinking
water: a cohort investigation in South Dakota. manuscript
submitted. Int. J. Occup. Med. Environ. Health. 3:171-176.
(40) Gilli, G. and Comune, P.M. (1980). Effetti della salinità su
sistemi biologici. Inquinamento 22(100):31-35.
(41) Gilman, A.G., Goodman, L.S., Gilman, A. (eds). (1980).
Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmalogical Basis ofTherapeutics. 6th ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
Inc. p.1005.
(42) Goetsch, P.A. and Palmer, C.G. (1997). Salinity tolerance of
selected macroinvertebrates of the Sabie river, Kruger
national park, South Africa. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol.
32:32-41.
(43) Gomez, G.G., Sandler, R.S., Seal, E., Jr. (1995). Highlevels of inorganic sulfate cause diarrhea in neonatal
piglets. J. Nutr. 125:2325-2322.
(44) Gosh, T.K., Konar, S.K. (1980). Toxicity of chemicals andwastewaters of paper and pulp mills to worms plankton and
131

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

molluscs. Indian J. Environ. Hlth. 22(4):278-285.
(45) Gould, D.H., McAllister, M.M., Savage, J.C., Hamar, D.W.
(1991). High sulfide, concentrations in rumen fluid
associated with nutritionally induced polioencephalomalacia
in calves. Am. J. Vet. Res.51(7):1164-1169.
(46) Greben, H.A., Maree, J.P., Mnqanqeni, S., (2000). Comparison
between sucrose, ethanol and methanol as carbon and energy
source for biological sulphate reduction. Water Science andTechnol. 41(12):247-253.
(47) Handbook of chemistry and Physics (1997-1998). 78th ed. CRC
press, pp. 4-87.
(48) Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (2003-2004). 84th ed. CRC
press.
(49) Hawley, G.G. (1981). The Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 10thed. New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. USA.
(50) Health Canada, November 1987 (updated September 1994),
Sulphate. Avialable: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/. [Accessed
09-22-2005](51) Heizer, W.D., Sandler, R.S., Seal, E., Jr., Murray, S.C.,
Busby, M.G., Schliebe, B.G., Pusek, S.N. (1997). Intestinal
effects of sulfate on drinking water on normal humansubjects. Dig. Dis. Sci. 42(5):1055-1061.
(52) Henkel, KGgA, unpublished data, Archive-No. TBD 710056.
(53) Henry, J.G. and Prasad, D., (2000). Anaerobic treatment oflandfill leachate by sulphate reduction. Water Science andTecnol. 41(3):239-246.
(54) Hitchcock, D.R., (1975). Biogenic contribution toatmospheric sulfate levels. Water's interface with energy,
air and solids: proceedings of the second national
conference on complete water-reuse, Chicago, Illinois, May
4-8, 1975. pp 291-310.
(55) Hoechst, A.G. (1989). Unveroffentl. Unters. (V-88-0938).
(56) Hughes, J.S. (1973) Acute Toxicity of Thirty Chemicals to
Striped Bass (Morone saxatilis).
La.Dep.Wildl.Fish.318-343-2417:15p.
(57) ICRP (1984). International Commission on RadiologicalProtection: Report No. 23: Report of the Task Group on
Reference Man. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK.
(58) Katz, M. (1977). The Canadian Sulphur Problem. In: Sulphur
and its inorganic derivatives in the Canadian Environment.
NRCC No. 15015, Associate Committee on Scientific Criteria
for Environmental Quality, National Research Council of
Canada. Ottawa. 21pp.
(59) Kelada, F. and Euinton, L.E. (1978). Health effects of longterm exposure to sodium sulfate dust. J. Occup. Med.
20(12):812-814.
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

132

OECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(60) Krijgsheld, K.R., Frankena, H., Scholtens, E., Zweens, J.
and Mulder, G.J. (1979). Absorption, serum levels andurinary excretion of inorganic sulfate after oral
administration of sodium sulfate in the conscious rat.
Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 586(3):492-500.
(61) Lal, S.S. and Mithal, R.P. (1979) On the control of somenematode parasites of fishes. Bioresearch 3(1):15-17.
(62) Last, J.A. Purnendu, K.D., Ethinson, J.R. (1980). Inhalation
Toxicology of Sodium Sulfite Aerosol in Rats. Toxicol. Appl.
Pharmacol. 55:229-234.
(63) Laury, N.A. (1927). Hydrochloric acid and sodium sulfate.
American Chemical Society. Monograph series 36. Chemical
catalog Co, USA.
(64) Lettl, A. (1981). Effects of some sulpher compounds on soil
microflora of Spruce rizosphere. Folia Microbio.
26(3):243-252.
(65) Mckee, J.E. and Wolf, H.W. (1963). Water Quality criteria,
The Resources Agency of California, State Water Quality
Control Board, Publ. No.3-A, USA.
(66) Meng, Z.Q. and Zhang, L.Z. (1992). Cytogenetic damage
induced in human lymphocytes by sodium bisulfite. Mutation
Research. 298:63-69.
(67) Merck 12ed (1996). pp. 1483, Merck&Co, NJ, USA.
(68) Moinuddin, J.F., Wing-Tsit Lee, H., (1960) Alimentary, bloodand the other changes due to feeding MnSO4, MgSO4 andNa2SO4. American Journal of Physiology. 199(1): 77-83.
(69) Moore, F.W. (1952). Physiological effects of the consumptionof saline drinking water. A progress report to the 16th
meeting of the subcommittee on Sanitary Engineering andEnvironment. Appendix B. January 1952. Washington D.C.,
National Acadamy of Sciences.
(70) Morris, M.E. and Levy, G. (1983). Absorption of sulfate fromorally adminsitered magnesium sulfate in man. J.
Toxicol-clinical toxicol 20(2)107-114.
(71) Mount, D.R., Gulley, D.D., Hockett, J.R., Garrison, T.D.,
Evans, J.M. (1997) Statistical models to predict the
toxicity of major ions to Ceriodaphnia dubia, Daphnia magna
and Pimephales promelas (Fathead minnows). Environ. Toxicol.
Chem. 16(10):2009-2019.
(72) Navarro, J.M., Garrido, C., Carvajal, M and Martinez, V.
(2002). Yield and fruit quality of pepper plants undersulphate and chloride salinity. Journal of Horticulture andbiotechnology. 77(1):52-57.
(73) Niles G.A. , Morgan S., Edwards W.C. , Lalman D. (2002).
Effects of Dietary Sulfur Concentrations on Incidence andPathology of Polioencephalomalicia in Beef Calves. Vet.
Human Toxicol. 44(2):70-72.
133

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006(74) Notification of the Ministry of Industry, No. 232, B.E. 2521
(1978), issued under the Industrial products Standards Act.
B.E. 2511 (1968), published in the Royal Gazette, Vol. 95,
Part 68, (1978).
(75) Occupational exposure limits (1993). Health & Safety
executive publ. ISBN 0-11-882080-X Par39&40 pg.6. EH40/93.
(76) Office of Drinking Water and Ground Water (1999). US-EPA,
National centre for Environmental Health, Centres for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "Health effects fromexposure to high levels of sulfate in drinking water study",
CDC protocol 1779, EPA 815-R-99-001.
(77) Oganesyan, D.A., Mikaelyan K.A., Barseghyan M.N. (1977)
Soobscenija Akademija Nauk Armjankoj
SSR, Institut Agrochimiceskich Problem [Effect of highquantities of magnesium, potassium and sodium on the growthand biochemical indices of chlorella.] Gidroponiki
Hagordoimner 16:26-31.
(78) Okahara. (1963). Food Hygiene Journal (Shokuhin Eiseigaku
Zassi) 4:15.
(79) Paterson, D.W., Whalstrom, R.C., Libal, G.W., Olson, O.E.
(1979). Effects of sulfate in water on reproduction in swine
and young pig performance. J.Anim. Sci. 49(S1):105.
(80) Patrick, R.J., Cairns, J., Scheier, A. (1968). The relative
sensitivity of diatoms, snails, and fish to twenty common
constituents of industrial wastes. Prog. Fish-Cult.
30(3):137-140.
(81) Prased, D.Y. (1980). Toxicity of kraft pulp mill waste
constituents on fresh water gambusia affinis. Indian Pulp &Paper 35(2):9-12.
(82) Robinson, D.J.S. and E.J. Perkins. (1977). The Toxicity ofSome Wood Pulp Effluent Constituents. Cumbria Sea Fish.
Comm., Sci. Rep. No. 74/1, The Courts, Carlisle, England:22 p.
(83) Roth, Wassergefährende stoffe: 20. Erg. Lfg. 6/93
(84) Sackner, M.A., Ford, D. Kim, C. (1979). Effect of brief
exposure to high concentrations of sodium chloride andsodium sulfate aerosols with mass median aerodynamic
diameter of 0.5 µm on pulmonary function of normal andasthmatic adults. American Review of Respiratory Disease.
119(4):.233.
(85) Saliba, L.J. and Ahsanullah, M. (1973). Acclimation andTolerance of Artemia salina and Ophryotrocha labronica to
Copper Sulphate. M. Mar.Biol. 23(4):297-302.
(86) Scheuring, L. and Stetter, H. (1950/1951). Versuche über die
Wirkung van Natriumsulfat auf Wasserorganismen. Vom Wasser
18:78-100.
(87) Schlessinger, R.B. (1984). Comparative irritant potency of
inhalated sulfate aerosols-Effects on bronchial mucociliary
UNEP PUBLICATIONS

134

OECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES
clearance.

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006
Environ. Res. 34(2):268-279.

(88) Schwartz, D.L. (1984). Water quality, VSE 81c. Penn. state
Univ., Waggoner, R., Good R.. Water Quality and Poultry
Pedormance, In Proceedings AVMA Annual/Conference.
(89) Seidenberg, J.M. and Becker, R.A. (1987). A summary of theresults of 55 chemicals screened for developmental toxicity
in mice. Teratogenesis, Carcinogenesis, mutagenesis.
7:17-28.
(90) Seidenberg, J.M., Anderson, D.G., Becker, R.A. (1986).
Validation of an in vivo developmental toxicity screen in
the mouse. Teratogenesis, Carcinogenesis and Mutagenesis.
6:361-374.
(91) Sibblad, I.R. and Cave, N.A. (1976). The responses of chicks
to ammonium, calcium, magnseium, potassium and sodium
sulphates and to ammonium and potassium carbonates. Poult.
Sci. 55:2209-2213.
(92) Stanley, R.A. (1974) Toxicity of heavy metals and salts toEurasian watermilfoil (Miriophyllum spicatum l.). Arch.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2(4):331-341.
(93) Temple, P.J. and Richards, R.A. (1978) Effects ofatmospheric deposition of sodium sulfate on bean and tomato
plants. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 19(3):257-263.
(94) The Economics of Sodium Sulphate (1992). 7th Ed, Roskill
Information Services Ltd., London, UK.
(95) Tokuz, R.Y. (1986). The effect of high salinity on activatedsludge effluent quality. Curr. Pract. Environ. Sci. Eng.
2:143-154.
(96) Tokuz, R.Y. and Eckenfelder, W.W. (1979). The effect ofinorganic salts on the activated sludge process performance.
Water Res. 13(1):99-104.
(97) Toth, B. (1987). Cancer Induction by the sulfate form of
4-(Hydroxymethyl)-benzenediazonium ion of Agaricus bisporus.
In Vivo 1:39-42.
(98) Trama, F.B. (1954). The acute toxicity of some common saltsof sodium potassium and calcium to the common Bluegill.
(Lepomis Macrochirus Rafinesque). Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Philadelphia 106:185-205.
(99) Tuoboyski, L. (1960). Rocz. Nauk. Roln. 75B(3):401-445.
(100) U.S. Geological Survey (2000). Mineral Commodity Summaries.
February 2000.
(101) Ullmann (1979). Vol. 17, 211-229.
(102) Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry (2004). 7th
ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
(103) United States Environment Program. Global Environmental
Monitoring System. Freshwater Quality Program (GEMS)."Salts
135

UNEP PUBLICATIONSOECD SIDS
6. REFERENCES

SODIUM SULFATE
ID: 7757-82-6
DATE: 06.07.2006

and Salinization of Surface Waters". Available:
http://www.gemswater.org/atlas-gwq/salts-e.html. [Accessed
09-22-2005](104) Upton, P.K. and L'Estrange, J.L. (1976). Effects of highintakes of dietary sodium sulphate and sodium chloride on
voluntary food intake of rats. Proc. Nutr. Soc. 20A-21A.
(105) Van Horn, W.M. (1943). Possible stream pollutional aspectsof mill antiseptics. Paper Trade Journal 117(24):33-35.
(106) Van Horn, W.M. (1949). The effect of kraft pulp mill wastes
on some aquatic organisms. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 79:55-63.
(107) Veenhuizen, M.F. (1993). Association between water sulfate
and diarrhea in swine on Ohio farms. JAVMA. 8:1255-1260.
(108) Veenhuizen, M.F., Shurson, G.C., Kohler, E.M. (1992). Effectof concentration and source of sulfate on nursery pig
performance and health. JAVMA. 201(8):1203-1208.
(109) Wallen, I.E., Greer, W.C., Lasater, R. (1957). Toxicity to
Gambusia affinis of certain pure chemicals in turbid waters.
Sewage Ind. Wastes 29(6):695-711.

UNEP PUBLICATIONS

136