Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
Chemical history often tracks with public health. Glutaraldehyde first turned up in laboratory work during the late 1950s, brought forward as a disinfectant after scientists pushed deeper into molecular biology and medical technology. The need to control infections in healthcare grew quickly—use of penicillin couldn’t solve everything. Sterilizing tools in hospitals demanded something stronger and more reliable than what the market offered. Glutaraldehyde found its niche: it performed well both as a cold sterilant and as a fixative in microscopy. The drive for tough, broad-action biocides put it into the hands of manufacturers, and soon it stood alongside better-known chemicals. Regulators in Europe and the United States recognized its usefulness, leading to industry standards like BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia). It’s hard to overstate how much research and protocol work got invested in tweaking production techniques, controlling purity, and meeting labeling requirements. This early work underpins every later application in healthcare and science.
Glutaraldehyde brings more to the table than a label suggests. It’s chiefly a strong, clear liquid, sometimes given a slight yellowish tint. It carries a pungent odor, a little like rotten apples. At its core lies a five-carbon chain dicarbaldehyde, making it chemically reactive and good at cross-linking. In pharmaceuticals, only high-purity batches are accepted. Pharma-grade versions hit tough specs: the composition runs near 50% aqueous solution. This isn’t the diluted product from janitor’s closets; pharma-grade glutaraldehyde runs with exacting standards set by international pharmacopoeias.
Glutaraldehyde’s physical presence and chemical punch go hand in hand. It dissolves smoothly in water, ethanol, and acetone, which makes it valuable for a range of formulation challenges. Its boiling point lands about 187°C, freezing at around -14°C. Chemists value its strong reducing qualities and rapid cross-linking as a bifunctional aldehyde. The two aldehyde groups on each end react readily with proteins—grabbing onto amino groups and forming sturdy links. This is why it has become essential for both disinfecting and fixing biological samples in labs, since it locks cells in their tracks, creating fidelity in microscopy. Its vapor, unfortunately, can irritate nasal passages and lungs. Even in closed facilities, the sharp smell signals a need for good ventilation and proper PPE. The measured density and pH depend on concentration, with most pharma applications staying between a pH of 3–4.
Modern pharmaceutical work demands tight specifications and thorough documentation. Glutaraldehyde’s supply chain gets scrutinized by global standards; for example, BP, EP, and USP demand no less than 99% purity after water removal. Every drum or bottle requires precise batch labeling, hazard warnings, lot numbers, and detailed certs showing compliance with pharmacopoeial monographs. Trace metal testing, microbial content, and identification by IR/UV absorbance keep out dangerous impurities. Labels also list shelf-life, storage temperature (usual recommendation sits between 2–8°C), and container compatibility, since the liquid attacks plenty of common plastics. Standard drums and IBC tanks use high-density polyethylene or lined steel. Even packaging has to pass leaching tests, since minor breakdown products can show up if left unchecked. With such strict requirements, oversight from regulatory authorities doesn’t lag: each import or use includes certifications, material safety data sheets, and traceability information for every processing step.
Manufacturing glutaraldehyde on an industrial scale ties together chemical know-how and process control. Main industrial routes involve oxidizing cyclopentene or pentane-1,5-diol, often using nitric acid or air oxidation with metallic catalysts. The process generates an aqueous solution nearly 50% in strength, with careful control needed to avoid by-product buildup—over-oxidation leads to carboxylic acids or tars. Frequent monitoring of temperature, pH, and oxygen exposure keeps the reaction on track. Downstream, purification follows: distillation removes lighter fractions while activated carbon or ion exchange scrubs trace contaminants. Only a few global manufacturers run these processes at sufficient scale and under validated cGMP (current Good Manufacturing Practices) for pharma customers. Even small variations in feedstock or process temperatures can tip the outcome, so a deep familiarity with the reaction kinetics means more than just copying a chemical recipe.
Glutaraldehyde’s reactivity comes straight from its two terminal aldehyde groups. It reacts with primary amines—lysine groups in proteins jump out as main targets—forming irreversible covalent cross-links. This property makes it almost unmatched as a fixative in electron microscopy, locking cells and tissues into a snapshot. Chemists also use glutaraldehyde to tune material properties, crafting stabilized hydrogels or modified surfaces. It plays a role in enzyme immobilization, a technique that attaches enzymes to inert matrices for use in diagnostics or continuous bioprocessing. You see it used in cross-linking in collagen, gelatin, or chitosan, giving biomedical products extra toughness and longer lifetimes. Some efforts explore further modification or “capping” of unreacted aldehydes by sodium bisulfite or similar agents, improving usability and lowering toxicity in some settings. Its versatility rests largely in how quickly and strongly it binds, which outpaces most other dialdehydes or fixatives.
You might spot glutaraldehyde under several different names, and this sometimes creates confusion in procurement. Among its common synonyms: 1,5-pentanedial, glutaral, and Glutacare. Trade names differ regionally or by manufacturer. In medical and industrial circles, brand names like Cidex and Metricide show up, though these usually refer to finished formulations with stabilizers, wetting agents, or corrosion inhibitors added. In basic chemical supply catalogues, it typically goes by its chemical name, matched with grade certifications such as “BP/EP/USP” or “Pharma Grade.” Recognizing these synonyms helps track regulatory status or compare material data sheets. Importers, hospitals, and labs use these distinctions to match purity to task, separating pharma-validated batches from technical grades that fit industrial disinfection or leather processing but miss required specs for injectables or diagnostic tools.
With glutaraldehyde, safety procedures can’t drift into routine. Its vapors sting the nose and eyes on momentary exposure; repeated contact can cause skin sensitization or asthma-like symptoms. Several hospital studies have linked chronic workplace exposure to eye, nose, and respiratory issues in staff handling sterilizing solutions. Proper personal protective gear includes gloves, eye shields, and secondary containment. Ventilation needs to meet workplace exposure limits—often set under 0.2 ppm averaged over an 8-hour shift in Europe and North America. Training programs for hospital and manufacturing workers reinforce spill response, good storage discipline, and record-keeping. Waste streams carrying glutaraldehyde go through neutralization with sodium bisulfite or similar reducers before sewer discharge. Regulators now push for exposure monitoring in any workplace using the chemical, with routine air sampling and health surveillance. For all its benefits in germ killing and sample stabilization, medical centers take staff safety and patient exposure seriously, shifting to less hazardous alternatives for basic cleaning where possible.
Glutaraldehyde spans a wide range of uses shaped by its cross-linking action and strong antimicrobial activity. Hospitals value its punch in cold sterilization of endoscopes and delicate medical tools. Surgeons and dentists prize its ability to penetrate and kill spores and complex biofilm layers, things that laugh at basic disinfectants. In the research lab, biologists use it to preserve tissue architecture for electron and light microscopy, as the rapid fixation prevents any post-mortem changes in cell structure. Water treatment engineers dose it into recirculating cooling towers, knocking back bacterial slime and fouling. In the drug industry, it serves as both an intermediate for other molecules and as a core element in vaccine manufacture, typically for toxoid production or viral inactivation. Biomedical device makers cross-link collagen, gelatin, or other polymers with glutaraldehyde to produce heart valve leaflets, patches, or drug-delivery scaffolds that resist breakdown. While its main targets tend to fall in healthcare and science, industrial users found value for tannery, paper, and even oilfield treatment. The diversity reflects confidence in its chemistry, but users must check lot documentation for residuals and by-products, especially for material aimed at human contact or injection.
Recent R&D work focuses on both improving safety and extending the performance of glutaraldehyde. A lot of energy goes into reducing worker exposure by developing closed-system sterilization units or switching to less volatile derivatives. Innovations in labeling now track actual fume production and shelf-life at individual user sites, reflecting changes in regulatory thinking—compliance must go hand in hand with worker health. Beyond physical containment, some research teams rework chemical structure, attaching stabilizers that slow down evaporation or bring down allergen potential. Medical developers push for tighter purity controls, realizing that trace impurities can provoke adverse reactions in sensitive patients. Synthetic biology groups also investigate how the cross-linking behavior could advance new biomaterials or drug encapsulation systems. A few startups eye green chemistry principles, using bio-based feedstocks or eco-friendlier solvents to drop environmental impact. Academic teams map out alternative fixatives and try to model reaction kinetics under more realistic, in-use conditions—this improves predictive value for risk assessments and clinical decisions.
Assessing glutaraldehyde’s toxicity remains a live issue for health and environmental scientists. Research shows strong ability to irritate skin, eyes, and airways—sensitization and persistent eczema now rank among the top occupational complaints. The molecule’s reactivity drives these effects, as it binds to proteins in the skin or mucous membranes, sometimes generating allergenic complexes. Animal testing demonstrates dose-dependent effects: acute inhalation exposures cause airway inflammation and, at higher doses, can damage lung tissues. Chronic low-level exposure, particularly in poorly ventilated spaces, builds risk for asthma or allergic rhinitis. Environmental fate studies found rapid breakdown in well-managed sewage plants, but in rivers and groundwater, residuals can persist long enough to disrupt aquatic organisms; it takes sunlight and microbial activity to handle leftover aldehydes. Workers and researchers saw the need for better ventilation and direct exposure minimization. Regulatory reviews landed glutaraldehyde on restricted-use lists for schools and homes, with strong labeling for personal and commercial uses. Shifting to personal stories, I’ve seen several clinical staff develop allergies, forcing job changes, and that highlights the seriousness of not just technical compliance, but everyday vigilance and workplace health monitoring.
Looking forward, the market and technology paths for glutaraldehyde look mixed. On one side, the spread of antibiotic resistance and growth in minimally invasive medical devices keep up steady demand for effective, high-purity sterilants. Advanced diagnostics, cell and tissue engineering, and next-gen implant materials need cross-linking chemistries that offer reliability and predictable biological outcomes. Still, the push for safer workplaces and lower chemical exposure nudges industry toward new, lower-toxicity formulas or alternative molecules that offer similar performance. Regulatory bodies eye rising toxicity evidence and look for better monitoring, stronger warning labels, and more robust air handling requirements. Environmentally responsible manufacturing, using green chemistry and energy-efficient systems, attracts more investment, and patent filings track steady improvement in feedstock sourcing, process control, and impurity management. Teams innovate new derivatives, stabilized solutions, and closed-application tools that keep glutaraldehyde relevant without risking staff health. The molecule probably won’t fade fast, but real-world safety and rising expectations from regulators and workers keep the field moving toward cleaner, smarter, and safer uses.
Walk into any hospital and you’ll find strict routines for cleaning and disinfection. As someone who’s worked in healthcare settings, I’ve seen how a single oversight in sterilizing equipment leads to real consequences—patients rely on safe environments. Glutaraldehyde BP EP USP Pharma Grade stands as a go-to solution. Its popularity comes from its effectiveness against a wide range of microbes, including some that laugh in the face of weaker disinfectants.
Pharma grade means something more than just a label slapped on a drum. This level of quality gets established in standards like BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia). Each of these standards makes sure the chemical is consistent, pure, and free from nasty surprises like contaminants. In real terms, this matters because lower purity brings risk. Dangerous byproducts or impurities don’t have a place in patient care, or in the production of injectables, surgical equipment, or dialysis machines.
Glutaraldehyde has a reputation for its ability to kill bacteria, viruses, fungi, and even bacterial spores that survive in harsh conditions. As someone who’s known technicians stressed over outbreaks, using a reliable sterilant like this one means peace of mind. Companies supply it as a liquid, making it easier to handle in clinics, dental offices, and labs.
Nurses and cleaning teams depend on glutaraldehyde for disinfecting tools that can’t take the heat of an autoclave: endoscopes, respiratory therapy equipment, surgical instruments with delicate lenses, and plastic tubing. Some kidney dialysis units use it for cleaning machine parts that directly touch patient blood. In all these cases, the margin for error is slim.
Quality glutaraldehyde appears in certain pharmaceutical manufacturing processes too. Companies use it for vaccine production, since it can help stabilize proteins while killing any live viruses or bacteria left behind. Only pharma grade material gets the green light for this kind of job because contamination poses a direct risk to patient health.
Working with glutaraldehyde isn’t as simple as splashing it around. Hospitals spend time training staff on safe handling because the fumes can irritate eyes, skin, and lungs. Even temporary headaches or rashes mean someone needs to rethink their approach. Good ventilation, gloves, and proper disposal keep the risks in check. I’ve watched teams upgrade fume hoods or switch to less hazardous formulas, but glutaraldehyde stays in use where the alternatives don’t do the job.
Newer disinfectants hit the market every year. Some offer less harsh odors or easier disposal, but few have the track record established by glutaraldehyde in critical settings. Hospitals look for products that balance strength with safety. There’s always a push to improve: better training, safer substitutes, smarter engineering for handling and ventilation. That said, some tools and procedures still call for glutaraldehyde because no other disinfectant covers as much ground.
The job isn’t done just by choosing the right chemical. Real safety depends on buying from trusted vendors who meet pharma standards, tracking lot numbers, and staying within expiration dates. Hospitals that ignore these steps open the door to contaminated instruments or allergic staff. The rules around pharma grade glutaraldehyde come from years of hard lessons and evidence—not just red tape.
Good disinfection protects patients from harm and improves trust in healthcare. By understanding the chemicals we use and why quality standards exist, hospitals and labs put safety first. Pharma grade glutaraldehyde earns its place in the lineup because it delivers results with consistency—and in healthcare, that consistency isn’t just nice to have, it can save lives.
Glutaraldehyde earns its keep in the pharmaceutical world through its punch as a disinfectant, sterilizer, and chemical intermediate. The “BP,” “EP,” and “USP” tags mean that one batch meets British, European, and US Pharmacopeial rules for safety and quality—a big deal when lives hang in the balance.
Glutaraldehyde used for pharma work usually arrives as a clear, colorless solution. In the grade that meets BP, EP, and USP standards, concentration clocks in between 49% and 51% by weight. Standards push for tight tolerances because even slight deviations might trigger problems during sterile processing.
pH makes a significant difference. Pharma grade glutaraldehyde typically stays between pH 3.0 and 4.0, keeping the molecule stable and lowering chances for unwanted chemical reactions. I remember a time on a hospital consulting job when a batch with pH out of range destroyed weeks of sterile prep. No pharmaceutical team wants a repeat of that mess.
Other marker numbers come up too. Specific gravity (at 25°C) ranges from 1.12 to 1.13. This metric, while simple, gives a quick window into concentration and purity. If it strays far, that’s a sign of either too much dilution or an impure batch.
True pharma quality glutaraldehyde steers clear of significant by-products. BP, EP, and USP specs limit common impurities—acid content, formaldehyde, and metallic residue stay well below 1%. Water-insoluble matter should be almost non-existent.
In reality, a top batch runs with total impurities far below these thresholds. Why? High-purity glutaraldehyde reacts smoothly, leaving fewer residues in finished products. It also reduces risk for patients and lab workers. Stories from techs in vaccine plants suggest that anything less than pure causes headaches, delays, and extra validation steps.
Spectroscopy, chromatography, and classic titration—labs use these techniques to monitor every shipment. In one of my years working alongside QC teams, we set up surprise “spike” tests—adding known quantities of impurities to see if the lab would catch them. The best suppliers pass every time, and companies hang onto those partners. Failed tests mean product recalls, regulatory trouble, and a damaged reputation.
Packaging plays a role too. Pharma grade glutaraldehyde often comes in polyethylene or high-grade stainless drums, limiting chances of leaching impurities. The shelf life, usually up to two years under cool, dark storage, delivers peace of mind but demands strict inventory tracking.
Reduced purity can invite more than regulatory citations. Impure glutaraldehyde risks toxic by-products forming during drug synthesis. In extreme cases, these substances spiral into contamination of injectable drugs or solutions used for cleaning medical equipment. Hospitals trust suppliers who refuse to cut corners in production or transport.
In my experience, pharma leaders focus less on price and more on trust. They choose suppliers who offer traceability, batch-to-batch consistency, and real-time access to testing data. Auditing supplier labs helps keep everyone honest and responsive.
Better regulations, stricter testing, and cooperation are fueling higher quality, but there’s always room to push the envelope. Industry groups and regulators can increase random sampling, implement tighter electronic tracking, and nudge suppliers toward greener, less hazardous production routes.
Quality matters most where small details add up to giant consequences. Nobody wants to explain why a batch failed the last checkpoint—especially when a little extra vigilance could have kept the whole supply chain out of trouble.
Handling Glutaraldehyde, especially in pharma-grade forms like BP, EP, and USP, deserves attention. This isn't one of those chemicals to shove in any old cabinet or treat casually. Anyone who's worked in a lab knows strong disinfectants bring real risks. Back in my university days, our lab manager always made a point to double-check every label and run us through weekly safety drills—for good reason. Glutaraldehyde stings eyes, irritates skin, and its vapors bring headaches or worse. So, let's talk real storage and handling.
A dry, cool, and well-ventilated storeroom guards against chemical breakdown and accidental exposure. Heat speeds up reactions, and you don't want that. Direct sunlight? That breaks down glutaraldehyde's chemistry faster than you think. Big facilities rely on purpose-built safety cabinets, fitted with ventilation, shelving, and spill-containment measures. I’ve seen smaller operations try their luck with old office closets and that's always a disaster waiting to happen. Leaks become dangerous fumes without proper airflow.
Containers must stay tightly sealed—metal, glass, or high-quality plastic. Do not reuse soda bottles or makeshift jars. Real chemical storage containers now come with tamper-proof caps and clear hazard labeling. This protects both workers and the company because mix-ups lead to mistakes and medical emergencies. According to the CDC, glutaraldehyde needs segregating from acids, oxidizers, and reducing agents. Accidental mixing could cause toxic releases or even fires.
Nothing replaces decent personal protective equipment. Gloves (nitrile or butyl rubber—not latex), safety goggles, and lab coats stand between you and chemical burns. Workplaces must supply eye wash stations and emergency showers in the same room. Employees should know exactly how to flush eyes or skin if splashed. I’ve seen too many situations where protective gear sat unused or expired, collecting dust behind some steel door. Audits and regular training cut down on such lapses.
Glutaraldehyde's vapors build up fast indoors. Even a small spill carries respiratory risks. Exhaust hoods handle fumes effectively, so those should always hum along where people open containers or pour solutions. Companies sometimes balk at maintaining these, but the alternative often turns up as sick days or liability claims. Industry guidance from OSHA states exposure must stay under 0.2 ppm over any 8-hour period. Air monitors and clear signage keep everyone aware.
Accidents happen. Trained personnel know to use spill kits—absorbent pads and neutralizers—for quick cleanup. No one should tackle a spill unprepared or improvise with paper towels. Contaminated gear and waste enter sealed hazardous disposal bins. Dumping glutaraldehyde down the drain creates trouble for wastewater treatment and the environment, plus fines that hurt a business’s bottom line.
Employees deserve tools and updated protocols so they feel confident instead of confused. In my experience, a feedback loop—staff suggesting improvements, management listening—leads to safer, smarter chemical handling.
Complacency around dangerous chemicals like glutaraldehyde bays costly mistakes. Respecting storage rules, personal protection, and clear disposal policies protects health, finances, and reputation. Years of lab work have taught me it's smarter to err on the side of caution every single day.
Pharma-grade glutaraldehyde pops up in the discussion for one big reason: sterilization. This chemical takes out bacteria and fungi with real efficiency. Its official listing in pharmacopeias like BP, EP, and USP means it matches certain purity and safety criteria. So, on paper, it passes the first big test.
Not all glutaraldehyde is the same. Lab and industrial grades often come with impurities you wouldn’t want near a medicine. Pharma-grade batches go through tighter controls. Regulations cover everything from starting materials to handling practices and storage. There’s a layer of trust here, built on international standards and regular audits. These companies invest serious money to keep their licenses, and mistakes cost them dearly.
Glutaraldehyde makes life hard for germs, but it can also be tough on people. Workers facing daily exposure report headaches, breathing issues, and skin irritation. Studies have shown links to occupational asthma. Strong procedures should be in place, from proper ventilation to personal protective equipment. I saw hospital staff hesitate to use older formulations, preferring less toxic options if available. That says a lot about day-to-day practicality.
Pharma application goes beyond chemical analysis. Safe handling, right dilution, and proper neutralization play a huge role. Standard operating procedures make or break safety in real production lines. I learned to respect protocols after watching a rushed batch lead to near-miss spills in a compounding pharmacy. Safety isn’t automatic — it’s built every day through disciplined habits.
The FDA and EMA have both approved glutaraldehyde, but only under strict rules. Safety profiles must show low residuals in final drug products, and every batch must get tested before release. Environmental agencies focus on waste management because glutaraldehyde can be toxic to aquatic life. Medical device sterilization uses even tighter exposure limits, especially with endoscopes and surgical tools.
Pharmaceutical companies keep investigating alternatives like hydrogen peroxide, ozone, and paracetic acid. These can sometimes match glutaraldehyde’s bacteria-killing power with less downside for workers and the environment. Regulatory pressure hints that the field could lean harder on greener chemistry in the next decade.
Glutaraldehyde BP EP USP pharma grade passes today’s safety checkpoints, thanks to strict quality control and oversight. But behind closed doors, frontline workers and managers acknowledge the constant tradeoffs. On one hand, it’s a well-tested weapon against contamination. On the other, it reminds us that short-term fixes shouldn’t stand in the way of better long-term answers. The pharmaceutical industry can push forward by investing in less hazardous sanitization methods and engineering controls that put worker health front and center.
The story of glutaraldehyde shows why context matters just as much as compliance. On paper, pharma-grade glutaraldehyde is safe enough for pharmaceutical use, as long as companies back up their labels with good practices and accountability. Trust in these safeguards should be earned, not assumed. Every decision can help shape a safer landscape for patients, workers, and the wider community.
Pharmacies, hospitals, and manufacturers bump into these abbreviations all the time, especially when sourcing chemicals such as glutaraldehyde. Each one—BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia)—signals a different book of rules for what counts as “pure.” It’s easy to dismiss the significance—after all, glutaraldehyde is glutaraldehyde, right? A small difference in a document’s heading can have a big impact far beyond the laboratory.
Every country, or sometimes a collection of countries, claims its own standards. BP, EP, and USP grades are built on different sets of laboratory tests, tolerance ranges, impurity thresholds, and intended uses. Take glutaraldehyde: used to sterilize medical devices and in pharmaceuticals, its quality isn’t just a checkbox—patient safety depends on it. BP grades adhere to standards set for the UK and popular in the Commonwealth. EP rules over most of Europe, coordinating efforts to unify medicine safety across the EU. USP governs supplies entering the US.
I’ve had pharmacists shrug when ordering “pharma grade” and never consider what they get. Say the British standard admits just a trace of chloride or iron, but the American allows a slightly different margin. That sounds minor, but an unexpected impurity, even at a fraction of a percent, can trigger allergic reactions or equipment failure. Glutaraldehyde will still be an effective disinfectant by the bottle, but the peace of mind for a surgeon hinges on those extra layers of scrutiny. Labs and hospitals chasing the cheapest source might end up with a product that ticks every technical box on one side of the Atlantic, but never would have cleared customs on the other.
Some will argue this is just bureaucratic bickering. In reality, the stakes go up where borders blur—think about global outbreaks when medical shipments crisscross the world. Pharmaceuticals need a consistent guarantee, especially since regulatory agencies test batches using their own rulebook. If you’re running a hospital in France but source US-certified glutaraldehyde, you may stumble into compliance nightmares if inspectors arrive. The market then gets choppy, and patients, often the last to hear about these issues, feel the ripple effects.
The world’s labs have started paying more attention to the small font on the label. Audits, recalls, and changing duties to document every step make it necessary. Some countries have worked towards harmonized standards, but plenty of gaps remain. As someone who has watched hospital shelves empty because a supplier picked the “wrong” standard, it’s clear that simply trusting “pharma grade” can trip up even seasoned teams.
Labs need to demand full analysis certificates and question suppliers about which pharmacopoeia they match—and not just take claims at face value. Regulatory agencies could team up, whittling down minor differences where safety allows, instead of letting arbitrary thresholds breed confusion. For those buying in bulk, the reassurance comes not only from a familiar logo, but from solid paperwork and a bit of research. Sometimes what seems like nitpicking is actually protecting lives in the long run.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | pentane-1,5-dial |
| Other names |
Glutaral Glutaric dialdehyde 1,5-Pentanedial Pentane-1,5-dial |
| Pronunciation | /ˌɡluː.təˈræl.dɪ.haɪd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 111-30-8 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1711764 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:34750 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL504 |
| ChemSpider | 8825 |
| DrugBank | DB00431 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03-2119457554-41-0000 |
| EC Number | 203-856-5 |
| Gmelin Reference | 82152 |
| KEGG | C00234 |
| MeSH | D005947 |
| PubChem CID | 3485 |
| RTECS number | MA8050000 |
| UNII | W1359NXT6O |
| UN number | UN2810 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C5H8O2 |
| Molar mass | 100.12 g/mol |
| Appearance | Clear, colorless to pale yellow liquid |
| Odor | Pungent |
| Density | 1.06 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Miscible |
| log P | -0.36 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.6 mmHg (20°C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | 6.7 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 8.2 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | Diamagnetic |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.420 |
| Viscosity | 3 cP |
| Dipole moment | 2.83 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 311.6 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -703.7 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -2464 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | J01XX01 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Toxic if inhaled, causes severe skin burns and eye damage, may cause allergic skin reaction, toxic to aquatic life. |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS05, GHS06, GHS08 |
| Pictograms | GHS05,GHS08 |
| Signal word | Danger |
| Hazard statements | H301,H311,H314,H317,H330,H400 |
| Precautionary statements | P261, P280, P301+P330+P331, P303+P361+P353, P304+P340, P305+P351+P338, P308+P311 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 2-2-0 |
| Flash point | > 85 °C |
| Autoignition temperature | 150°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat): 134 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): 134 mg/kg (oral, rat) |
| NIOSH | FM2000000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL: 0.2 ppm |
| REL (Recommended) | 2-8°C |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | 40 ppm |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Acetaldehyde Formaldehyde Glutaric acid 1,5-Pentanediol Succinic anhydride |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
