Talk:Chlorpropham
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chlorpropham article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Untitled
[edit]Regarding the mutagenicity and toxicity of 3-chloroaniline. The mechanism by which aromatic amines exhibit carcinogenicity is by the stabilisation of aromatic nitrenium ions formed by metabolism (hydroxylation) on nitrogen and subsequent elimination of the alcohol sometimes after glucuronidation or sulfation. It is the nitrenium ion which can form adducts with DNA leading to single stranded DNA breaks and point mutations. The stabilisation of the nitrenium ion by substituents on the ring is important in determining the lifetime of the nitrenium ion in water. A 4-chlorosubstituent on the ring is able to stabilise the charge on the nitrenium ion and would be expected to increase the lifetime of the nitrenium ion and its mutagenicity/carcinogenicity. A 3-chlorosubstituent will inductively destabilise the charge on the nitrenium ion (if formed by metabolism) and is likely to make the metabolite of chlorpropham less mutagenic/carcinogenic than aniline which is not generally considered to be carcinogenic although this classification may change. The material safety data sheet for 3-chloroaniline states that IARC: No component of this product present at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as probable, possible or confirmed human carcinogen by IARC. Making the statement regarding similarity of structure in this case for the carcinogenicity of the metabolite is therefore not warranted and there are reasons to believe it would be non-carcinogenic due to the mechanism of activation and this sentence should be removed.
Very different German page
[edit]On the German page this substance has more and serious side effects. Is the EU really paranoid or more thorough? 2001:8003:A928:800:8D35:4EDE:661E:C3FF (talk) 05:32, 17 July 2018 (UTC)
Countries where it is used
[edit]The article previously said "Chlorpropham is approved for use as a plant regulator and herbicide only on potatoes in the United States.[1]"
About the sauce does not support the claim that it's the only country. So I removed the word "only".
If this is correct and up-to-date, it's also used in Australia: https://www.apvma.gov.au/chemicals-and-products/chemical-review/listing/chlorpropham --Chriswaterguy talk 04:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Chriswaterguy: My understanding of the previous phrasing was that is only approved for use on potatoes in the US, not that the US is the only country to approve it. i.e. it can't be used on other crops. SmartSE (talk) 12:44, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Smartse: You're correct – I don't know how I misread that.
- I've rewritten it to try to make it clearer, but not sure if I succeeded: "Chlorpropham is approved for use in the United States as a plant regulator and herbicide only on potatoes." Feel free to revert if that reads poorly. --Chriswaterguy talk 00:03, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
To add to article
[edit]If chlorpropham is somewhat mutagenic, why not add the word "mutagenic" to this article (in order to help make it more properly encyclopedic)? ~2026-20625-89 (talk) 22:36, 11 May 2026 (UTC)