Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
Interest in potassium phosphates grew as chemists and physicians noticed their role in animal and plant metabolism. Long before labs refined formulas to precise standards, early attempts used whatever was on hand—potash, bone ash, and animal waste all found their way into crude preparations. Refinement came with the industrial revolution. By the late 19th century, companies were already producing potassium phosphates in dedicated factories. The trihydrate version joined textbooks as research revealed water's influence on crystal stability and solubility. It took decades for international regulators to set unified standards. BP, EP, and USP grades reflect this history, blending tradition with clean manufacturing and traceable supply chains. For the pharma world, this progression means trust. We don’t just rely on lab results—we lean into a century-long journey of understanding, regulation, and trial.
Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate does more than show up as a white crystalline powder. Used in buffer solutions, intravenous injections, and dialysis fluids, this salt keeps systems balanced. Its pharma grade ensures tight control over impurities. Error is rarely tolerated, as even minor contamination brings massive downstream risks for patients. I've seen researchers demand batch-to-batch consistency for injectable applications, as small fluctuations upset delicate metabolic processes. Hospitals, labs, and manufacturers all demand full certificates of analysis before shipments leave the dock. It’s this layer of transparency that keeps patients safe and researchers confident as they push for new therapies.
You’ll find dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate as colorless to white, tasteless crystals, with a slightly alkaline reaction in water. Chemical formula: K2HPO4·3H2O. It dissolves well in water—key for clinical and lab applications—leaving no lumps even at high concentrations. Unlike anhydrous forms, the trihydrate offers stability in humid air, refusing to cake like some other phosphates. Melting point hovers just above 130°C, but before you reach boiling, dehydration and chemical breakdown start to change its nature. These physical quirks led formulators to favor trihydrate for solutions where stability and full dissolution matter. You can feel the difference in handling—a free-flowing salt that pours easily and resists atmospheric clumping.
Every container ought to list grade, batch number, expiry, phosphorous content, potassium assay, moisture, and heavy metals. Standards from BP, EP, and USP don’t leave much wiggle room for variance. Pharmaceuticals expect an assay of at least 98% for dipotassium salt, moisture tests to confirm trihydrate content, and near-zero lead, arsenic, and other nasties. Manufacturers print traceability info right on the drum for hospital pharmacists and QA inspectors, including dates and manufacturer address. There’s no room for unlabelled, mystery-sourced batches—the risks for patient safety and legal compliance run too high. Healthcare and life sciences players know that mistakes in labeling rip through the system, halting production lines and prompting recalls. Quality assurance isn’t just paperwork; it’s a disciplined practice written into every kilogram shipped.
Factories start with high-purity phosphoric acid and potassium carbonate or potassium hydroxide, handling the exothermic neutralization in controlled tanks. The mixture allows slow crystal growth, forming trihydrate at the right pH and under carefully managed temperatures. Early errors gave gummy masses, but modern processes produce fine, consistent crystals. Filtration removes unreacted traces and residues, then the salt dries under mild conditions to avoid losing hydration water. Small changes in temperature or concentration yield different hydrate limits—years ago, poor understanding led to inconsistent preparations and serious risk in medical use. Now, producers lean heavily on in-line sensors, batch controls, and rigorous documentation to meet global pharma expectations.
Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate behaves as a mild base when dissolved, working as both a buffer and a potassium source. In clinical or research lab buffers, it interacts with acids or other salts, keeping pH stable. Industrial chemists can tweak this salt with acid or heating to form monopotassium or tripotassium salts. Reactivity with calcium or magnesium makes it less useful in hard water or certain parenteral formulations where precipitation becomes an issue. That property triggers design choices in everything from injectable drugs to biological cultures. As a phosphate donor, its chemistry underpins phosphorylation studies and certain kinases in biotechnology.
You’ll see this chemical listed under names like Potassium phosphate dibasic trihydrate, Dipotassium phosphate, and K2HPO4·3H2O on safety data sheets and catalogs. Some suppliers use codes or abbreviations like DKP trihydrate. In conversation, folks often drop “trihydrate” when it’s understood from context, but precision matters in formulation work. Regulatory documents avoid these shortcuts, spelling out the hydrate number to dodge error.
Lab personnel working with dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate don gloves, goggles, and dust masks when handling large volumes. While not highly toxic, the powder can irritate eyes and skin or cause throat discomfort if accidently inhaled. Modern facilities anchor safety protocols in GHS labeling, spill controls, and documented waste disposal methods. Potassium salts can cause metabolic upsets if accidently ingested at high doses—hospitals keep emergency reference charts for symptoms and antidotes. Risk assessment forms a backbone for both pharmaceutical and research-grade material handling, as even mundane errors in concentration or labeling cascade into clinical problems. Regular audits and safety training double as insurance policies against surprise incidents.
This chemical sits at a busy intersection of medical and research worlds. Hospitals rely on it for preparing intravenous fluid supplements, especially for patients needing both potassium and phosphate boosts. Blood bank storage solutions use it to keep red cells viable during weeks of refrigeration. Biotechnologists choose it to buffer cell culture media and fermenters—without it, cells suffer pH swings and nutrient shortages. Food scientists once embraced potassium phosphates as emulsifiers and pH agents in processed foods, but pharma grade sees stricter controls. In agriculture, high purity means lower environmental phosphate runoff, guarding against waterway eutrophication. Every application draws on the same foundation: strong consistency, high solubility, and well-understood physiological effects.
Innovation in dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate isn’t about chasing new chemical tricks. Researchers push boundaries with purity, solubility, and compatibility improvements—sometimes targeting even tighter heavy metal limits, or finding ways to reduce byproduct waste. Pharmaceutical development teams have explored alternative buffer systems to cut down on sodium or chloride intake for sensitive populations, but return to dipotassium phosphate for its unmatched balance between cost, safety, and biological compatibility. I’ve watched researchers spend months testing substitutes, only to return to phosphate’s sweet spot for enzyme stability or drug solubility. Sustainability efforts look promising—biotech upcycling of food or plant waste points to future greener manufacturing routes.
Most data shows low acute toxicity for dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate, though large doses throw off electrolyte balance, spiking potassium levels and causing nervous or cardiac problems. Toxicologists require long-term exposure studies and detailed metabolic tracking before approving new pharmaceutical routes. In animal models, researchers focus on reproductive and developmental toxicity to cover worst-case scenarios. Hospitals use built-in lab monitoring and dosing safeguards to avoid cumulative risk, as patients with kidney failure or metabolic disorders prove more vulnerable to potassium uptake. The literature keeps an eye on minute contaminants—smaller impurities, like arsenic, can cause trouble at levels once thought safe.
Industry aims to tighten purity standards even further, incorporating real-time monitoring and digital batch tracking for every shipment. Experts talk about expansion into specialty nutrition and precision medicine, pairing potassium phosphates with custom therapies. Environmental regulators press for cleaner production processes, with waste minimization and energy efficiency a top demand. Academic breakthroughs in phosphate recycling may soon reshape sourcing, especially if new catalysts enable lower-temperature synthesis from plant matter or industrial byproducts. Pharmaceutical players continue to lean on this humble salt for reliability, but green chemistry promises a new chapter in how and where the world gets its dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate.
Pharmaceutical science rarely draws the spotlight, but look closer and you find chemicals like dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate quietly holding everything together. Lab scientists and manufacturing teams rely on it because it steps up as a reliable buffer. Medicines and injectable solutions need to be steady—one shift in pH can spoil the work of months. Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate keeps pH in the target range, letting active ingredients do their job safely and predictably. In my time talking with pharmacists, questions about formulation stability come up almost every week. Having a robust buffer cuts down on complaints from hospitals and pharmacies about crystallized vials or batches that break down too soon. This isn’t just convenient. It saves lives by keeping critical electrolytes balanced when someone’s health depends on fast, precise treatment.
Ask anyone who works in pharma manufacturing about quality, and they’ll mention the British Pharmacopoeia, European Pharmacopoeia, and United States Pharmacopeia standards. Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate carrying these designations isn’t just a matter of paperwork. These grades mean tight limits on impurities, purity levels above 98%, and strict microbial controls. This matters because injectable medicines go straight into the body’s bloodstream. High-grade material avoids strange side effects, allergic reactions, and legal nightmares. I’ve toured plants in Europe and the U.S. where entire teams work round the clock to monitor input ingredients. In this environment, cutting corners just isn’t an option. These standards are a sort of insurance policy—one that protects patients and shields companies from catastrophic recalls.
Doctors count on balanced electrolytes, especially in critical care. This chemical helps create solutions that adjust blood chemistry during kidney dialysis. Hospitals use it in intravenous infusions to correct potassium levels, buffer the solution, and support heart function. Potassium plays a big role in nerve signals and muscle contractions. In the wrong hands, even a small dose out of balance leads to heart issues or muscle cramps. Nurses and pharmacists handling dialysis centers know this well, and most keep a careful watch on suppliers to make sure stock doesn’t run out. Supply chain hiccups mean cancelled treatments and families scrambling for help.
Production quality tracks directly to patient outcomes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, demand spiked for fluids containing dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate. Factories worked overtime, but quality didn’t slip. This comes from a culture built around transparency, traceability, and accountability. Even now, import teams stay busy checking for proper documentation, making sure raw materials meet each country’s requirements. Patients often don’t hear about this work, but trust depends on it. Efforts to localize sourcing or keep strategic stockpiles may sound expensive, but past experience with shortages proves it’s worth the investment.
Greater collaboration between manufacturers, regulators, and end users can cut down on supply risk. Setting up digital tracking, auditing suppliers, and tightening distribution all help. Moving away from “just-in-time” inventory for crucial chemicals proved wise during recent disruptions. Building skill in pharmaceutical logistics, supporting worker training, and fighting counterfeit products need equal focus. Every investment in this chain strengthens patient care, boosts public trust, and helps life-saving medicine land in the right hands without delay.
Anyone who has worked with chemical products long enough knows one thing—asking about specifications and purity isn’t just routine paperwork. In a lab, at a manufacturing site, or in a research center, the difference between a product listed as “pure” and one with precisely measured purity values can mean hours of troubleshooting, blown budgets, or even stuck production lines. Regulators and end-users want clarity for a reason: history is full of recalls and failures where assumptions about purity set off costly chain reactions. Trust relies on solid, specific information.
To really understand what you’re getting, you can’t settle for vague data. Look at the percentage purity (like 99.5% for a reagent), the batch testing method (GC, HPLC, or ICP-MS, for example), typical physical properties like melting point or density, and trace contaminant levels. Reputable suppliers often provide certificates of analysis (COA) alongside lots. For instance, a pharma-grade active ingredient often reports impurities down to parts per million, with exact breakdowns for each detected variant. One year, I watched a project lose six months after a critical ingredient labeled “pure” ended up containing sodium contaminants well above process tolerance. The delay could have been avoided with a more thorough specification from the start.
People searching for transparency shouldn’t just ask about a number—they should turn their attention to traceability. Any trustworthy supplier documents lot numbers, keeps samples for future reference, and responds to purity concerns with actual lab data, not promises. Standards like ISO 9001, FDA cGMP, or REACH push companies toward rigorous documentation. I recall once chasing down an out-of-spec batch of raw material and hitting a brick wall, because the supplier couldn’t verify their source or testing method. Knowing where your product originates and how it has been handled may safeguard your company’s reputation and keep your supply chain running.
Sometimes the focus on purity alone misses important context. For example, absolute purity might not translate to better performance or safer outcomes. Solvents used in electronics need ultra-low water content, while other applications tolerate small impurities as long as they’re the right type. It’s wise to look at the entire product profile: particle size, stability, shelf life, and even how it reacts under your operating conditions. Failure to match all these aspects regularly leads to failed batches and finger-pointing between buyers and sellers.
Buyers play a big part in getting meaningful specs. Always insist on technical data sheets and a COA with real numbers—not just marketing claims. Ask for test methods used. When red flags show up, like missing details or untraceable lots, treat them as warnings, not tolerances. Suppliers doing business the right way expect these questions, and companies living up to high standards rarely have anything to hide. Testing incoming material in your own lab before release remains a simple step that saves trouble down the road—a lesson learned through painful trial more than once.
At the end of the day, specifications and purity reflect a company’s commitment to safety and performance. Honest reporting, verified numbers, and clear dialogue protect everyone involved. Skipping steps or settling for half-truths leads to loss, both in time and in hard-earned trust. In the world of science, the numbers matter—but the willingness to show your work matters even more.
Most of us take the quality of our medicines for granted. We trust they will work because we expect strict rules shape every step, starting with the raw ingredients. The big three pharmacopeias—British Pharmacopoeia (BP), European Pharmacopoeia (EP), and United States Pharmacopeia (USP)—set those rules. This isn’t just bureaucracy. These books protect people. And it’s personal: nobody wants to gamble with their health.
I’ve watched manufacturing teams debate if a certain ingredient truly matches all BP, EP, and USP criteria. They don’t look for trouble; they want peace of mind that their batch won’t get flagged by a regulator or, worse, cause an issue for a patient. Pharmacopeial standards give everyone—from chemists to pharmacists—clear benchmarks for things like purity, potency, and contaminants. They don’t just plug numbers into spreadsheets. They run tests, crosscheck documentation, and, if in doubt, keep asking until every answer is backed with evidence.
A compliant product ticks off strict IDs, purity levels, and safety requirements. Let’s say an excipient claims to meet USP standards. Someone checks: does it meet not just identification but also heavy metals limits, microbiological specs, and particle size where that matters? A supplier promising “pharmacopeial grade” is only part of the equation. Pharmaceutical companies still go through supplier audits, demand up-to-date certificates of analysis (COAs), and verify every batch with in-house labs.
Suppose a product passes for EP but falls a bit short on a USP impurity spec. That’s a red flag for U.S. drug makers. No exceptions, even if a product “almost” passes. This isn’t just about keeping operations squeaky-clean for inspectors. Manufacturers stake their reputation on giving patients a safe, effective medicine. Facing recalls or having patients hurt from impurities would spell disaster—both for people and for the business.
Mistakes and oversights happen. Heavy workloads and complex documentation can cause minor details to slip through. A product might get shipped with the claim “conforms to BP/EP/USP,” but batch-specific test results tell another story. This has real-world consequences. One small impurity above a threshold in a blood-pressure drug can cause recalls or health scares. Supply chain complexity only increases risk, especially as companies source ingredients globally. And even trusted suppliers get caught off guard if their raw materials change.
Continuous training, rigorous supplier qualification, and keeping an eye out for new updates in the BP, EP, or USP books can prevent most compliance issues. Drugmakers follow systems, not just paperwork. They keep up-to-date specifications, require full traceability, and never accept “close enough” as good enough. Regular, thorough audits weed out the unexpected. When someone finds a discrepancy, a good team stops everything until they resolve the issue.
No one should just trust a label or a verbal assurance. Data tells the story: chromatograms, spectra, physical property measurements—these build the full picture. Patients rely on that trust, whether they know it or not. Meeting BP, EP, and USP standards is more than ticking boxes. It is the promise behind every safe dose of medicine.
Dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate, or K2HPO4·3H2O, turns out to be pretty common in labs and processing plants. Every chemist working with this compound pays sharp attention to moisture. The trihydrate form signals there’s extra water bound up in those crystals, so humidity is the enemy here. If a container stays open in a humid lab or even in a storeroom during the summer, you’ll wind up with lumpy, caked powder or—worse—partial dissolution. Things get messy fast. Silica gel desiccants packed inside cabinets and always resealing every lid stops the powder from absorbing more water from the air.
Most supply bottles carry clear warnings: keep dipotassium hydrogen phosphate away from strong acids and bases. The reason isn’t just about accidents—this salt plays a balancing act in solution, easily shifting pH. If it sits near open HCl or ammonia, it may end up altered. Separate storage cabinets matter: acids go one way, bases another, and neutrals like K2HPO4 far from both. This habit means peace of mind if there’s ever a spill or leak, because nobody wants unplanned chemistry in the warehouse.
Extreme cold or heat doesn't help stability. I learned early as a junior lab tech—one summer, our storeroom's AC died and some batches sat for days over 35°C. We started getting reports of unexpected results in buffer recipes. That sort of slip-up teaches an unforgettable lesson. Every bottle now lives in dry, cool spots, usually no higher than 25°C. No need for a refrigerator unless your protocol says so, but shelves away from sunlight or any hot water lines do the trick.
Old habits die hard in science. I once saw a well-meaning coworker pour leftover phosphate back into a bottle, not realizing any dust or contaminant could spoil future reactions. Always stick with clean scoops or spatulas and never return unused material. Most manufacturers use high-density polyethylene or glass. Both hold up against minor knocks and exposure. Opaque or amber bottles stop light from breaking down the salt. I recommend clear labeling and checking the “date opened” since even with good storage, it pays to rotate stock.
No one wants to risk ruined products over bad ingredients. Before using, look at the powder—if it clumps, changes color, or smells strange, get a replacement. Manufacturers print expiration dates for a reason. Even if it looks fine, chemical changes creep in over time, especially if someone got sloppy with closures in the past.
Clear procedures around chemical storage keep everyone safe. Training new staff to pay attention to moisture, temperature, and incompatible compounds saves money and time. Tidy labels, airtight containers, and respectful handling make a difference—both for the people who work with dipotassium hydrogen phosphate trihydrate and those counting on reliable results.
Drug safety rules don’t take shortcuts. A product heading for use in pills, syrups, or topicals faces tight scrutiny. Doctors hand out these drugs expecting patients to trust what’s inside. That puts big weight on every ingredient producer, including those who supply the less-glamorous parts like fillers or binders.
Quality and safety aren’t just lines in a brochure. Decades spent working with countless raw materials show that even tiny lapses end up as big problems later—think product recalls, regulatory crackdowns, or worst of all, patients who get hurt. That's why it makes sense for pharmaceutical makers to demand certificates showing a product meets standards like USP, Ph. Eur., or JP. These go beyond purity—they require traceability and documentation proving no harmful residues, microbial contamination, or inconsistent composition.
For any product to join a pharma production line, its maker must run a clean, validated process. If a supplier doesn’t use GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice), they're missing the mark. GMP isn’t just factory floor rules; it’s a culture of record-keeping, systematic checks, and regular outside audits. Years in regulated environments have taught me that an on-paper GMP claim without a real audit just breeds risk. Third-party audits and transparent batch records aren’t “nice to have”—they make or break trust.
Batch consistency can’t be an afterthought. If one batch absorbs moisture or harbors an unknown trace contaminant, it spells trouble. Pharmaceutical recipes work within fine tolerances. Fluctuating properties—like particle size, residual solvents, or heavy metals—don’t stay hidden for long. Reliable suppliers maintain strict controls and keep the analytical data handy at all times. If your supplier ducks questions or can’t explain key specs, seek out another source.
In the pharmacy world, “inert” doesn’t mean invisible. Even so-called inactive components can affect how medicine dissolves and enters the body, especially for people with sensitivities or specific diets. Take lactose: a workhorse excipient, but problematic for lactose-intolerant patients. Another case is microcrystalline cellulose. Its safety profile is strong, but changes in source wood or processing methods have triggered batch recalls and regulatory alerts.
Thinking green or organic doesn’t guarantee pharmaceutical grade either. Lyophilized herbal products or naturally derived binders, for instance, might sound appealing, but unless they match strict pharmacopeial limits for microbes, pesticides, and allergens, they don’t pass muster. Experienced buyers look past labels and dig into actual certificates, not just supplier promises.
Real improvement grows from supplier partnership. Regular site visits, collaborative audits, and open communication lower the odds of nasty surprises. Scrutinizing a new product means reviewing its full dossier—origin of raw materials, supply chain controls, history of recalls, and third-party test results. Many successful drug makers set up internal “ingredient qualification teams” who specialize in grilling suppliers and adopting new raw materials only after testing for six months or longer.
What keeps patients safe, in the end, is relentless attention to detail. Every pill, cream, or suspension starts with the right foundation, built on products that surpass every expectation—not just tick the boxes.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Dipotassium hydrogen orthophosphate trihydrate |
| Other names |
Potassium phosphate dibasic trihydrate Dibasic potassium phosphate trihydrate Dipotassium phosphate trihydrate DKP trihydrate K2HPO4·3H2O |
| Pronunciation | /ˌdaɪ.pəˈtæs.i.əm ˈhaɪ.drə.dʒən fəˈs.feɪt traɪˈhaɪ.drət/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 16788-57-1 |
| Beilstein Reference | 3561876 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:63033 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201619 |
| ChemSpider | 21559613 |
| DrugBank | DB14518 |
| ECHA InfoCard | ECHA InfoCard: 03-2119949272-39-0000 |
| EC Number | 231-834-5 |
| Gmelin Reference | 18689 |
| KEGG | C06323 |
| MeSH | Dipotassium Phosphates |
| PubChem CID | 24508 |
| RTECS number | TC6615500 |
| UNII | 99G62GIB0L |
| UN number | UN 9139 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | K₂HPO₄·3H₂O |
| Molar mass | 228.22 g/mol |
| Appearance | White crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 2.44 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Freely soluble in water |
| log P | -4.1 |
| Acidity (pKa) | 7.2 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 11.8 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -45.4×10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.333 |
| Dipole moment | 0 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 235.3 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -1577.7 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | B05XA10 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Main hazards: Not regarded as a health hazard under current legislation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS labelling: "Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) |
| Pictograms | GHS07, GHS09 |
| Signal word | Not a hazardous substance or mixture |
| Hazard statements | Non-hazardous according to GHS classification |
| Precautionary statements | Precautionary statements: P264, P280, P305+P351+P338, P337+P313, P301+P312 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | Health: 1, Flammability: 0, Instability: 0, Special: - |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat): >2000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): Oral rat LD50 > 2,000 mg/kg |
| NIOSH | TC6300000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | 15 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | Oral: Up to 70 mg/kg of body weight per day (as phosphorus) |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not established |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Monopotassium phosphate Tripotassium phosphate Dipotassium phosphate anhydrous Potassium dihydrogen phosphate Sodium phosphate Potassium chloride Potassium sulfate Disodium hydrogen phosphate |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
