Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
Chemistry built its backbone on basic inorganic salts, and Sodium Dihydrogen Phosphate Monohydrate (NaH2PO4·H2O) is no exception. Its roots stretch back to early 19th-century laboratories, where newly defined concepts of acidity and basicity called for reliable phosphate salts to balance pH in both food and medicine. Researchers and pharmaceutical developers alike counted on this compound’s predictability. Over time, demands for higher purity and stricter control led European and American pharmacopeias to define clear BP, EP, and USP standards, cementing its status in critical drug manufacturing. Fast industrialization and global trade transformed it from a simple experimental salt into a pharmaceutical mainstay whose manufacturing processes kept evolving. Factories that spent decades optimizing crystallization and hydration soon could offer traders and scientists a reproducible, trusted product.
It’s tempting to underestimate Sodium Dihydrogen Phosphate Monohydrate given its simple name, but this salt delivers serious versatility. Odorless and white, it presents as a crystalline or granular powder, tasting distinctly salty and acidic. Pharmacies, labs, and processing zones worldwide rely on this substance as a buffering agent, acidifying agent, and even a pH stabilizer for injectable solutions. BP, EP, and USP grades rarely differ in fundamentals, but their minute impurity limits and trace metal specifications can mean all the difference in critical treatments. Manufacturers apply these standards by batch coding, offering rigorous certificates and full traceability so anyone responsible for patient or food safety knows they’re covered.
Spotting Sodium Dihydrogen Phosphate Monohydrate isn’t tough if you know what to look for. It melts at about 60°C, though before reaching that point, the monohydrate crystal form releases its single water molecule in a gentle endotherm. Easily soluble in water, but practically insoluble in ethanol, its pH solutions stay mildly acidic—often in the 4–4.5 region when dissolved at common pharmaceutical concentrations. Chemically, you get a sodium cation bound to a monohydrogen phosphate anion, making it a straightforward acidic phosphate salt easily differentiable from its sodium or disodium siblings by titration or straightforward conductivity. Impurity analysis for heavy metals, arsenic, sulfates, and chlorides follows international benchmarks.
Regulatory boards set meticulous technical standards. Pharmaceutical sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate typically meets minimum purities exceeding 98 percent. Moisture content can hover around 11–13 percent, as expected for a monohydrate, and loss on drying testing ensures batch-to-batch consistency. Trace contaminants rarely slip past allowed limits: iron might cap at 20 mg/kg and arsenic at less than 2 mg/kg for pharmaceutical assurance. Labels follow regulatory frameworks down to the lot number, expiry date, country of manufacture, and any storage recommendations—often “keep tightly closed” and “store below 30°C.” Each container includes batch-specific CoA (certificate of analysis) so users confirm compliance before use. The strictness reflects a long history of both regulatory rigor and disaster avoidance, since any deviation spills into downstream safety risks.
Most commercial manufacturers begin with phosphoric acid and sodium carbonate or sodium hydroxide. They neutralize phosphoric acid with the alkali under controlled temperature, coaxing out the monosodium salt at the desired pH and molarity. Following this, gentle evaporation or crystallization brings the monohydrate out of solution. The resulting crystals get filtered, washed of soluble impurities, and then dried at modest temperatures to maintain hydration level. Experienced producers keep their process enclosed to prevent airborne contamination or mishaps with accidental anhydrous formation. Waste streams undergoing proper neutralization and water treatment reduce any environmental load, but the real challenge remains managing batch consistency. Over decades, tighter reactor controls, inline pH meters, and real-time moisture analysis have made this far less manual.
Despite its simplicity, sodium dihydrogen phosphate can surprise lab workers. Upon heating, its monohydrate sheds water and readily forms the anhydrous salt, and at higher temperatures will condense to pyrophosphate. Exposure to alkali quickly yields disodium or even trisodium phosphate, opening the door for routine titrating checks or broader buffer design. Since it acts as a weak acid salt, it responds well in buffer pairings with sodium phosphate dibasic, supplying critical acidity for pharmaceutical preparations without dramatic swings in solution pH. In technical fields—water treatment, detergent design, or spectroscopy—chemists sometimes modify it with other cations or organics for specific reactivity or solubility changes, but the base monohydrate sees the widest use.
Language and labeling often confuse seasoned buyers. Synonyms pop up regularly: monosodium phosphate, sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate, and sometimes E339 (for food additive registration). Certain catalogues reference its EC number (231-449-2) or CAS number (10049-21-5), obliging anyone seeking precise sourcing to double-check paperwork for hydrates and purity. Packaging often flags compliance with BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), or USP (United States Pharmacopeia) to guide hospital or compounding staff amid a sea of confusingly similar salts.
No pharmaceutical salt enters the market without a clear-eyed view of its safety. Handling doesn’t demand the same gear as caustic soda or pure phosphoric acid, but contact can irritate skin, eyes, or mucosa, and dust inhalation rarely ends well. Workers use gloves, goggles, and, where needed, dust masks to minimize exposure. Storage in cool, dry, sealed conditions helps prevent any clumping or accidental hydration shifts. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) detail spill containment, proper first aid, and firefighting procedures. Environmental authorities also restrict API (active pharmaceutical ingredient) release in effluent streams, so manufacturers often reclaim or treat process water thoroughly. Newcomers quickly learn these safety routines or find themselves reminded by more experienced hands who’ve lived through forgotten masks or poorly handled sacks.
The real reach comes in its applications. Hospitals need its stable acidity for intravenous injectables, eye wash solutions, and kidney dialysis fluids. Food manufacturers rely on it as a leavening acid in baking powders and a buffer in processed cheeses or emulsified spreads. Water treatment plants dose it to prevent lead or copper leaching by stabilizing water chemistry. Biological research leans on its buffering for enzyme reactions and sample storage. Even photography labs and toothpaste formulators found a use. The trick is finding the right grade—because something safe for food may not match injection purity, and labs expect only the sharpest tolerances. Buyers who skip this step can end up with contaminated solutions, regulatory fines, or worse.
Every new pharmaceutical grade faces ongoing research. Labs track trace contaminants, microplastic inclusions, or even potential N-nitrosamine formation as contamination risk increases under high-throughput production. Chemists try new crystallization techniques, flow reactors, or greener solvents to minimize waste and push purity higher. Researchers dig into how even low-level impurities—metals, silica, or chloride—affect sensitive therapies or biological analyses. Institutions working on parenteral drug delivery often collaborate with producers to map out new criteria for next-generation grades. Regulatory agencies examine not just efficacy but the full lifecycle, looking to close gaps that have led to recalls or dangerous substitutions in the past.
Toxicologists have long established sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate’s low toxicity at prescribed doses, especially compared to other acids or buffering agents. In humans, ingestion in prescribed pharmaceutical concentrations passes through the kidneys and GI tract without accumulation or severe systemic toxicity. High doses, or administration without proper dilution, can disrupt blood electrolyte balance—risking metabolic acidosis, especially in compromised or pediatric patients. Regular reviews document no genotoxic, carcinogenic, or significant reproductive toxicity, but that doesn’t lower guardrails: every batch undergoes rigorous testing for trace toxins, especially if the manufacturing changes. Continuous studies respond to new concerns about cumulative phosphate intake, environmental discharge, or interactions with novel drugs.
Raw materials for sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate aren’t running out, but the world keeps pushing for greener processes and tighter impurity controls. Pharmaceutical companies demand even lower metal content and more reliable batch analytics. As digital tracking, automation, and real-time QC roll into more plants, consistency and traceability improve. Food formulation keeps shifting toward “clean label” trends that focus on familiar, safe, transparent ingredients—driving the use of simplified labels and more stringent safety reviews. Researchers also study interactions with new packaging materials, expanded applications in novel therapies, and the salt’s behavior in biopharmaceutical manufacturing. Regulation tightens alongside innovation, with new international harmonization projects aiming to prevent contamination tragedies and ensure safe, accessible products for the next generation.
Doctors and pharmacists rely on more than just the active ingredient when crafting a treatment; supporting agents play a huge part behind the scenes. Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate in BP, EP, or USP grades—names stamped for quality by European and U.S. pharmacopoeias—proves itself every day in pharmacy labs. Folks might see a bag of pure, white powder and wonder, “What’s the big deal?” It’s about stability. It’s about making sure the medications people trust actually work right up until the expiry date on the bottle.
Acids and bases carry weight in medicine. Every tablet, injectable, or solution depends on a careful balance. Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate steps up as a buffer. Not many folks pause to consider that a small shift in pH can make a drug too harsh or leave it ineffective. Manufacturers trust this compound to keep things steady. This colorless, almost bland substance takes on a huge job—steadying the chemical environment for antibiotics, painkillers, and vaccines alike.
Anyone who’s gotten a flu shot, IV antibiotic, or even a vitamin boost has brushed shoulders with this phosphate. High standards sit at the core of making anything that's injected. Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate BP/EP/USP grade arrives clean—free from heavy metals, microbial gunk, and impurities. Lapses in this quality control leave people at risk; cases in the past have shown this. Reliable sources matter. The tight guidelines on pharma grade phosphates aren’t bureaucratic red tape—they serve as insurance for the sick and the healthy.
Those on dialysis or with kidney issues know all too well the value of proper salts. Blood becomes a balancing act, and medicines use sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate to keep things just right. Oral medicines, too—laxatives and bowel preparations—often blend it in for gentle, predictable effects. My local pharmacist shared how switching brands has caused confusion for folks, when the wrong salt throws off absorption or taste.
Not all phosphates are equal. In pharma grade, traceability walks hand in hand with safety. Batches must log their chain of custody, and each shipment meets strict tests for purity and water content. Years ago, a contamination scare involving a low-grade ingredient taught regulators a tough lesson. The best way up from there? Insist on documentation and reliable supply partners. If a label doesn’t guarantee BP, EP, or USP grade, it’s not worth the gamble.
Logistics often trip up rural clinics and small hospitals. Keep the supply chain short, and insist on proper handling. Some companies push hard for cost cuts but forget that cheap substitutes in life-or-death scenarios backfire. Buyers and hospital administrators can demand better with their budgets, choosing reputable suppliers and respected certifications. In my experience, a team that reads the Certificate of Analysis line by line catches issues ahead of time.
At the end of it all, sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate sets the stage for medicine that works—predictably, safely, and dependably.
Walking into a lab or factory, it's plain to see that minor differences in raw materials can shift results in a big way. Specs and purity standards form the backbone of trust for buyers and end-users. Most companies put numbers on the table for good reason—without benchmarks for contaminants, particle size, or moisture, talk of "quality" means nothing. I've learned the hard way that those digits translate directly into safety, usefulness, and even shelf life.
Dig into any technical sheet and you’ll run into terms like “purity ≥99.5%,” “heavy metals <5 ppm,” and “loss on drying <0.5%.” Each of those informs decisions across industries, from food processing to creating high-precision electronics. High purity isn't just a sales gimmick. That extra fraction above 99% can be the thin line between passing a pharmaceutical audit and recalling an entire batch. Regulators like the FDA don’t cut anyone slack for cutting corners. GMP guidance keeps things on track, with global organizations such as ISO and USP setting rules most manufacturers follow.
I've watched projects fall apart over missed specs. Take a food-grade additive as an example—impurities above safe limits can mean allergic reactions in consumers, blocked shipments, or ruined partnerships. In electronics, a trace amount of the wrong substance could kill the conductivity of a batch, costing thousands to investigate and fix. Even if an impurity doesn’t pose an instant danger, chronic exposure over years leads to serious health and environmental issues. Academics and journalists have traced several health scares right back to overlooked contaminant levels.
Serious suppliers back every batch with a certificate of analysis (CoA). These aren’t just boxes to check. A good CoA details exact results from analytical techniques like ICP-MS, HPLC, or UV-Vis. Labs keep samples on file for years, and third parties sometimes double-check claims. While it’s tempting to take things at face value, on-site audits and random sample testing add a crucial layer of protection. Personally, I trust suppliers far more when they open up about which labs they use and how often they validate their processes.
Problems pop up when specs are written too loosely or get lost in translation. Buyers have a duty to spell out technical requirements early and insist on documentation. Manufacturers benefit from investing in clean processes and digital traceability. Regulators enforce a minimum bar, but ongoing monitoring holds more weight than one-off approvals. Left unaddressed, small lapses snowball into legal and reputational disasters.
Education goes a long way. Teams working with chemicals or trace compounds need regular updates on evolving standards. Open communication—fast, honest, and transparent—keeps the industry healthy. Tech tools like blockchain and AI-driven analysis now handle records and flag issues faster than ever.
Specs and purity standards aren’t roadblocks. They build trust, limit risk, and protect both people and businesses. By demanding clear numbers, double-checking claims, and learning from near-misses, every link in the supply chain ends up stronger. In my experience, the best results come from those who treat their specs as a living commitment instead of just paperwork to file away.
A lot of talk circulates in labs and boardrooms about BP, EP, and USP. These aren’t just sets of guidelines someone tosses onto a shelf. They come from decades of arguments, mistakes, and discoveries. Each pharmacopeia sets out its own requirements because different regions expect medicines to meet their own safety and quality benchmarks. Someone working with a pharmaceutical product can't skip ahead or cherry-pick only the easiest pieces to follow. Once a product claims it is compliant, it steps into a world of strict rules, technical checks, and routine scrutiny from real regulators.
In practice, I remember sitting in on audits where an inspector would ask for proof—not just a label or a certificate. They’d want a fresh sample, a logbook, sometimes a call with a supplier. I once worked in a start-up lab that focused on small-batch manufacturing. The team learned fast that “compliant” meant every raw material could trace its story all the way to its origin. In one case, we lost weeks chasing documentation for a stabilizer that slipped through unchecked. Even a single missing document could halt an entire batch.
People want to take a medicine without second-guessing its safety. There's trust each time a pill lands in someone’s hand. Imagine a child with a fever—no one counts on a risky shortcut behind her medicine. The role of these standards is more than paperwork. They decide everything from how clean water should be to how much metal can stay in a tablet. According to published studies, deviations from these rules have resulted in real-world product recalls—sometimes costing millions, sometimes lives. No one forgets the valsartan recall in 2018; contamination went undetected until independent labs found issues. Regulators moved in and exposed how easy it is for a supply chain to break down.
Labs that meet all three standards rarely follow a single recipe. BP (British), EP (European), and USP (United States) sometimes ask different things of the same product. For instance, heavy metals testing might require one technology in Europe, another in the US. Even experienced chemists need to revalidate methods and run split tests. There’s no universal shortcut here—either a product clears the bar, or it doesn’t. I met a QC manager once who kept three binders for every test, color-coded by region. She never trusted memory alone, and she was right to be cautious.
Staying compliant isn’t easy, especially for smaller outfits. Labs and manufacturers benefit from good habits: tracking changes, using digital record-keeping, investing in staff training, and choosing suppliers certified to more than one standard. Automation helps, but so does communication—regular meetings between QA, sourcing, and production often catch problems early. Reliable compliance partners, regular audits, and open discussions with regulators build a culture where meeting BP, EP, and USP feels less like a burden and more like a badge of trust.
Sometimes the difference between success and disaster comes down to a single deviation in an audit. Transparency, careful record-keeping, and a strong sense of purpose drive long-term success in pharmaceuticals. BP, EP, and USP keep the industry honest—and protect people who count on every dose.
Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate often shows up in laboratories, food processing facilities, and water treatment plants. At first glance, it looks like a standard white powder, but behind that plain appearance lies the reason for caution. Chemicals like this one, familiar as they may be, demand practical respect.
Storing chemicals is not just about putting containers on shelves. Anyone who’s emptied a bulk sack in a storeroom knows dust drifts everywhere. For sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate, dry air and closed containers matter most. Humid basements or rooms with leaky pipes quickly turn manageable powders into sticky messes that cake together. Stack too many bags on top of one another? Bags burst, powder scatters, and cleanup creates new problems.
Many overlook ventilation. Without it, the air grows heavy with fine particles. Inhaling these repeatedly does more harm than most expect, irritating throats and lungs. Chemical-resistant shelving protects not just the chemical, but spares you from replacing rusted racks year after year. Storing away from strong bases, oxidizers, and acids reduces the risk of unpredictable reactions. Past experience taught me that labeling goes a long way as well. Unlabeled bags lead to avoidable mistakes and wasted product.
Practical handling starts before you even open the container. Gloves and goggles keep skin and eyes safer. After getting dust in my eye once, I never skip the eye protection. Poured too quickly, this powder forms clouds that hang in the air and settle everywhere. Pouring steadily cuts down on that mess. Some workers turn to dust masks or respirators to limit what they breathe in.
Spills happen even if you take care, and they rarely occur at a good moment. Sweeping with a dry broom scatters dust more than it removes it. Damp rags or a HEPA-filtered vacuum trap more and spread less. Routine training prepares a team for these events. The best sites create spaces for safe chemical use, set clear boundaries, and have eyewash stations nearby.
Even common chemicals leave an impact if handled carelessly. In my own work, I have seen forgotten spills wash into sink drains, causing local water treatment headaches. Waste containers labeled for such chemicals prevent confusion when it comes time for removal. It’s not just about following the law—neighbors downstream notice changes in water quality too.
Safety data sheets look like legal paperwork, but they serve as practical guides. Seasoned workers use them to refresh the memory about symptoms and first aid steps, especially after a long break. After years at different plants, I learned that regular reminders, not just training on day one, keep everyone alert.
Getting storage and handling right means fewer accidents, healthier staff, and a workplace that avoids extra costs. Prevention works better than reaction. Upgrading shelving, providing the right gear, and running drills cost less than fines or hospital bills. As regulations evolve, workplaces have a duty to match those standards—and doing so benefits everyone, from the worker closest to the powder to the broader community connected by air and water.
Pharmaceutical and lab work are high-stakes fields. Unlike making something for consumer shelves, a product destined for these fields carries a different level of responsibility. If you’ve ever worked in a lab, you probably remember the checklist: purity levels, documentation, and consistency across every batch. But it’s not just about ticking boxes. Patients and researchers put a lot of trust in what comes out of a package. That trust calls for much more than a glossy datasheet.
I once spent months on a clinical project, and the raw material source shifted halfway through testing. Even though the chemical composition matched on paper, something as small as a difference in particle size or a missing trace impurity derailed the experiments. This kind of setback slows down research, wastes resources, and in the world of drug development, lost time can mean lost lives. Lab teams rarely forgive brands that cause delays, and those few trusted suppliers reach that point after years of proven reliability.
A supplier’s certificate of analysis only tells part of the story. Products used in labs and the pharmaceutical sector call for traceability right back to the raw material’s source. If a problem emerges, the team looks upstream fast. Manufacturers open their books, walk through audit checklists, and provide process validation. They have to show how each batch came together, including environmental controls, cleaning logs, and clear chains of custody.
If a product works fine one month and then trips up the next, word spreads fast in scientific circles. Anyone who’s managed QC testing knows that running the same protocol a dozen times isn’t a formality—fluctuations hint at instability or contamination. Reputation in the industry travels through conference chatter, published work, and day-to-day lab networks.
Pharmaceuticals are sensitive to invisible threats. Dust, bacteria, or trace chemicals can ruin not just a single experiment, but a whole shipment. Walk into any facility working with drug substances, and you’ll see gowning procedures that rivals airport security, plus daily equipment swabbing. These measures matter because even one bad lot can risk patient safety or government intervention. A supplier unwilling to match these standards ends up sidelined quickly.
Rules do change, especially with the pace of technology and new regulations. Reputable providers adapt fast, update documentation, and engage in honest discussions with clients about process changes. Some of the biggest breakthroughs in drug discovery started with a supplier going the extra mile, perhaps tailoring product characteristics on special request or flagging minor changes before they disrupt research.
Anyone considering a new product for pharmaceutical or research use should ask hard questions. Not just about purity, but consistency, audit history, transparency on sourcing, and how often the supplier communicates mid-batch issues. Industry experience has shown that collaboration between scientists and trusted suppliers opens the door to safer, more effective treatments that actually make it to people who need them.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Sodium dihydrogen phosphate monohydrate |
| Other names |
Monosodium phosphate monohydrate Sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate MSP monohydrate NaH2PO4·H2O Sodium phosphate monohydrate |
| Pronunciation | /ˈsəʊdiəm daɪˈhaɪdrə.dʒən fəˈsfeɪt ˌmɒnəˈhaɪdreɪt ˌbiːˈpiː iːˈpiː ˈjuːˈɛsˈpiː ˈfɑːrmə ɡreɪd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 10049-21-5 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1713883 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:91246 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201190 |
| ChemSpider | 26246 |
| DrugBank | DB09465 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03a1b8a1-c2c2-4e7b-9b85-2c86a1c6ed1c |
| EC Number | 231-449-2 |
| Gmelin Reference | 65253 |
| KEGG | C01079 |
| MeSH | Dihydrogen Phosphates |
| PubChem CID | 23671876 |
| RTECS number | WA1900000 |
| UNII | 62T278S1AQ |
| UN number | UN not regulated |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | NaH2PO4·H2O |
| Molar mass | 138.01 g/mol |
| Appearance | White crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 2.04 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Easily soluble in water |
| log P | -4.1 |
| Acidity (pKa) | pKa1 = 2.15, pKa2 = 7.20 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 12.3 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -46.0·10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.422 |
| Dipole moment | 6.12 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 134 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -1285.2 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | A06AA02 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause eye, skin, and respiratory irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS labelling: Not classified as hazardous according to GHS. |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008. |
| Precautionary statements | Keep container tightly closed. Store in a cool, dry place. Avoid contact with eyes, skin and clothing. Wash thoroughly after handling. Use with adequate ventilation. Do not ingest or inhale. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-0-0 |
| Explosive limits | Non-explosive |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (Oral, Rat): 8290 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | > 17,000 mg/kg (Rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | WH7400000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for Sodium Dihydrogen Phosphate Monohydrate is not specifically established by OSHA; treat as nuisance dust: 15 mg/m³ (total dust), 5 mg/m³ (respirable fraction) |
| REL (Recommended) | 10 mg/m3 (as NaH2PO4) |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not Listed |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Disodium phosphate Trisodium phosphate Monopotassium phosphate Dipotassium phosphate Phosphoric acid Sodium phosphate dibasic Sodium phosphate tribasic |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
