Contact Us
West Ujimqin Banner, Xilingol League, Inner Mongolia, China
© 2025 Alchemist Worldwide Ltd, All Right Reserved
Back in the early 1900s, food scientists searched for ways to extend the shelf life of processed foods and improve their consistency. Their efforts led them to explore esters—compounds made by combining acids with alcohols. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol, often abbreviated as CAGE or E472c, emerged from this wave of innovation. Over the decades, this emulsifier found its place not only in food production but also in cosmetics, plastics, and pharmaceuticals. Early patents, mostly from Europe and the U.S., mapped crude synthesis methods. By the 1950s, global regulatory agencies started setting purity rules and safety guidelines, prodding manufacturers to refine their processes and documentation. The development of these esters echoes a time when the industrial boom and consumer demand pushed boundaries, for better or worse, in search of reliable, affordable, and versatile additives.
Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol are best known as food-grade emulsifiers. They help oils blend with water and stabilize foams, crucial for margarine, baked goods, and coffee creamers. Physically, these compounds come as waxy pastes or powders, sometimes translucent, sometimes pale yellow, never truly uniform in texture because raw materials and processing conditions vary from one manufacturer to another. Key manufacturers sell these not only as standalone emulsifiers but sometimes blended with mono- and diglycerides for even greater effect. On supermarket shelves, consumers ingest them without thinking—these esters lurk behind cryptic ingredient codes. I spent time in a food science lab during my studies and saw firsthand how swapping CAGE for other emulsifiers altered bread softness and cake volume. Such versatility explains the continued reliance on them even as “clean label” trends push for fewer synthetic additives.
On a molecular level, these esters look like tangled chains—glycerol molecules bound up with fatty acids and citric acid through ester bonds. Their melting point shifts based on the fatty acid chain length; shorter chains soften at lower temperatures. Water solubility rests in the middle ground, not quite eager to dissolve yet not entirely oil-loving, so manufacturers can use them in both fats and water-containing systems. Under heat, they remain stable through typical baking and frying ranges, though pushing temperatures above 200°C introduces risk of breakdown and off-flavors. That’s why precise batch control is crucial. Chemically, they show acid values between 50-100 mg KOH/g, saponification values up to 500, and only negligible odor or taste. These aren't always numbers people recognize, but for food processors and regulators, they signal whether the product will meet health and safety standards.
Food law around the world assigns numbers and names to citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol. In the EU, they carry the code E472c; in the U.S., labeling typically calls them “mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids, esterified with citric acid.” Before a batch hits store shelves, a checklist runs down fatty acid composition (no more than a set percent of saturated fat), acid value, saponification value, and presence of residual solvents. Analytical tests include infra-red spectroscopy, gas chromatography, and titration for acid number and purity. As a consumer, I often notice that labels in Europe look more straightforward—just E numbers—while American products stretch out long strings of chemical names. Transparency matters, and missing allergen data or unclear labeling fires up concerns across the board.
Industrial synthesis of these esters generally begins by mixing glycerol with fatty acids derived from natural oils—often palm, soybean, or sunflower—then reacting this mixture with citric acid using heat and catalysts. The reaction runs under vacuum to drive off water and prevent decomposition. After esterification, the resulting mass goes through neutralization and filtration to eliminate unwanted side-reactants and catalyst traces. Manufacturers tweak the fatty acid chain sources to achieve different melting behaviors, further fine-tuned with fractionation and deodorization. The best-run factories use closed, automated reactors, keeping process control tight and operator safety a top concern. All of this harnesses lessons learned over generations; early processes tended to waste materials or produce byproducts unsafe for consumption, but refinements in the last 40 years greatly stepped up both efficiency and purity.
In the core reaction, citric acid forms mono-, di-, or tri-ester links with both fatty acids and glycerol, creating a sprawling mixture of molecules with different properties. Heat and acidic conditions encourage branching and cross-linking, though excessive heat can scorch the mixture. Some research labs experiment with enzymes in place of traditional acid catalysts, hoping to improve selectivity and decrease waste, but wide-scale production hasn’t quite caught up due to cost constraints. Chemists looking to modify the esters at the bench scale try introducing new fatty acid types—like those with unsaturation or even omega-3 links—pushing product performance into new directions such as improved texture or lower melting points. Such tweaks carry trade-offs: some changes boost functionality but raise process complexity or safety risks, challenging both manufacturers and regulators to adapt.
Depending on where you buy these compounds and which standard you consult, you’ll see different names in use. E472c is the preferred shorthand in Europe, while U.S. documents lean heavily on descriptive names like “glycerol esters of citric acid and fatty acids.” Manufacturers sell them under proprietary brands to emphasize application—sometimes for specific baked goods, confections, or coffee creams. Old industry papers call them CAGE, though you’ll rarely spot this outside technical literature. Product names may change, but the chemistry remains constant, creating headaches for anyone searching cross-border data. In my experience, even lab ordering systems trip up on these synonym floods, adding real cost to delay or substitution.
The safety profile of citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol comes shaped by strict government oversight. Major risk comes from impurities—unreacted fatty acids, solvent residues, or process acids—which can enter supplies if plant controls go awry. FAO/WHO’s Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives capped intake at 30 mg/kg body weight in their evaluations, based on animal studies and human case reports. GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) guidelines force plants to run regular purity tests, document traceability, and monitor for allergenic material migration from source oils. Ventilation and guarding on mixing tanks protect operators from vapors and contact burns during manufacture. In over a decade of reviewing ingredient safety data sheets, I saw that most incidents trace back to plant maintenance or shortcuts rather than the basic compound. Safety, not a magic bullet, still works best when paired with continual staff training and clear data on product origin.
Uses for citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol stretch far beyond food. Food companies rely on them in ice cream, margarine, cake mixes, and flavored creamers, where these additives help prevent separation, slow staling, and keep products palatable through temperature shifts. Non-food sectors deploy them in PVC and polystyrene plastics to improve flexibility and gas barrier properties—valuable lessons from postwar material science still hold weight. Cosmetic chemists add them to creams and lotions for a smooth, stable feel on skin. Pharmaceutical manufacturers test them as drug carrier matrixes, especially for sensitive formulations. From my own experience formulating model food systems, finding the balance of emulsifier levels radically altered product texture and stability—too little, things separate; too much, and the taste’s off-putting.
Modern labs push to innovate on a few critical fronts: low-acrylamide processing, sustainability in sourcing, and switch-over from petrochemical to bio-based catalysts. Teams work on tuning molecular structure through computer modeling; simulation now predicts which ester blend yields the best spreadability or moisture retention. The race also heats up to replace palm oil sources with less controversial alternatives, given pressure to minimize deforestation and preserve biodiversity. Academic researchers often publish on enzyme-catalyzed synthesis, saying it slashes unwanted byproducts and energy use, but cost and scalability challenges keep most factories sticking to legacy chemistry. Regulatory researchers keep busy tracking unintended side reactions, especially with new flavoring agents or "clean label" ingredients. Years of reading patent filings highlight that most true breakthroughs either cut processing waste or address consumer demand for transparent, natural-sounding ingredient lists.
Toxicological studies on citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol lean on both animal and human data collected over 50 years. In rats and dogs, high doses sometimes cause minor gastrointestinal upset but fail to produce major organ toxicities or carcinogenic effects. Absorption studies with radiolabeled molecules show almost complete breakdown in the gut, with components entering ordinary fat metabolism or being excreted. In humans, regular dietary exposure—far below regulatory thresholds—produces no acute or lasting harm. Some researchers flag minor risks because source fats can carry trace toxins or allergens, especially if derived from inadequately refined oils. In reviewing incident reports submitted to regulatory agencies, the overwhelming pattern is that flagged samples were contaminated by extraneous substances, not the core ester. Vigilance still matters; that means periodic re-testing, not just accepting previous generations’ assessments.
Looking ahead, the course for citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol will hinge on whether manufacturers and regulators can maintain consumer trust without sacrificing product reliability or affordability. A growing wave of plant-based products, climate consciousness, and consumer demand for “simple” ingredient lists pressures producers to polish up sourcing and manufacturing transparency. Expect growing investment in greener catalysts, better recycling of byproducts, and digital traceability—all drawing on ongoing R&D. Food brands continue to experiment, searching for emulsifiers that keep pace with shifting market standards yet avoid additive overload or unintended health impacts. My expectation, having seen both older and newer processes firsthand, is the esters will remain in circulation for years, but the pressure to balance safety, function, and sustainability will keep reshaping both bench chemistry and boardroom decisions.
If you skim ingredient lists on packaged foods, you’ll probably spot citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol under their E-number or as “CITREM.” To most shoppers, these names don’t ring a bell, but these esters play a big part in making processed food taste and look good.
My personal wake-up call about food emulsifiers came when I tried making homemade ice cream with just milk, cream, and sugar—it froze rock hard, and the texture never matched anything store-bought. Food makers rely on emulsifiers like CITREM to help fat mix smoothly with water. This blends everything from sauces to bakery creams without separating, improving mouthfeel and appeal. Over the years, I’ve paid close attention to what science says about these food additives, since as a parent and cook, I like to know what’s really in my food.
One of the main talents of these esters comes from their ability to keep oil and water together—even when you heat, cool, or whip a product. In sweet spreads like margarine or certain chocolate creams, this means you get a stable emulsion and a satisfying texture. In bakery products, CITREM helps dough stay softer longer, giving cakes or burger buns a better shelf-life and consistent crumb.
You’ll also find these esters in ice creams and non-dairy desserts. Here, they strengthen the network that traps air and fat droplets, keeping things creamy and smooth instead of icy or gritty. Frozen foods benefit too, because the esters help stop large ice crystals from forming. So, every spoonful stays soft straight from the freezer.
As someone who tracks nutrition controversies, I know discussions around food additives can get heated. Based on international reviews, the JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives) set acceptable daily intakes for CITREM, saying these esters don’t show toxic effects at levels allowed in food. The body digests these esters much like natural fats, breaking them down into substances already found in fruits or vegetable oils.
That being said, some people want fewer processed ingredients in their diets. In my own kitchen, I cook more from scratch, mostly using whole foods, but it’s nearly impossible to avoid processed products entirely. The key lies in balance—being aware of what you eat, not letting fear override facts, and knowing where your food comes from.
One concern is that clean-label trends push companies to reformulate products using fewer or “friendlier-sounding” ingredients. Sometimes, that means using natural emulsifiers or mechanical tweaks—say, changing how you mix or cool a product—to get the same result. Some startups use lecithin from sunflower or rapeseed, or even oat proteins, to sidestep chemical names. These alternatives can work, but they cost more, and supply chains for novel emulsifiers aren’t always stable.
At home, baking without industrial emulsifiers means fresher bread but a shorter shelf life. Fresh taste wins for me, but I recognize busy families value products that stay good longer. For brands, staying honest about what goes into food, sharing plain-language ingredient lists, and responding to what people want births better relationships with their customers.
Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol do a lot of heavy lifting behind the scenes in our modern diets. As science learns more about how processed foods fit into wellness, it pays to stay curious about what’s inside the foods we buy and eat. Transparency and informed choices—not fear—guide us to meals that taste good and help us feel good too.
Walk through a grocery store and pick up any packaged snack, and you’ll spot a long list of ingredients. Sometimes it feels impossible to pronounce half of them. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol often show up on these lists. They’re in things like baked goods, chocolate, ice cream, chewing gum and margarine. Food manufacturers use them to keep textures smooth and shelf lives longer. Ingredients like this can raise questions. People worry about what’s really going into their bodies. Those concerns deserve honest answers and reliable information.
Food safety depends on more than a hunch; it stands on careful research. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol go by the shorthand code E472c in the European Union. After decades of study, food safety agencies such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) weigh the evidence before giving a green light. They check what happens to these additives after eating, looking for any red flags with digestion and metabolism.
So far, scientists haven’t found clear dangers from eating these esters at the levels most people consume. The body breaks them down into substances it already deals with: citric acid, fatty acids, and glycerol. Each of these shows up in many ordinary foods, and the body knows what to do with them. EFSA in 2017 reviewed the data and found no need to set an upper daily intake limit, because even regular consumers fall well below any risky range.
Even with this reassurance, not everyone feels satisfied. I’ve encountered friends who are skeptical of anything synthetic in their food. Sometimes those worries trace back to larger doubts about food processing in general. Concerns about “chemical-sounding” names don’t just come from nowhere. Years of food controversies have left people with scars and plenty of mistrust. While the data looks clear for these particular esters, building trust calls for more than just repeating the same scientific statements over and over.
People need clearer labeling and plain-language communication about food ingredients. Reading the label shouldn’t feel like deciphering a cryptic code. It’s also important that food safety agencies stay tough, checking for long-term or subtle health effects as diets and products change. No one wants regulators nodding off at the wheel.
I’ve noticed that public pressure — when shoppers demand answers — can move companies and agencies to be more open. Real conversations between producers, scientists, and eaters help untangle confusions and make food systems safer for everyone. Giving people honest, balanced facts about food additives, and changing the way information is shared, do more for safety than just another quietly published report.
Everyone deserves food they can trust. Authorities should run ongoing reviews and offer clear channels for the public to ask questions or raise doubts. Schools and communities teaching more about what’s in our food can arm everyone with tools to make better choices. Food makers could listen more to public worry and find ways to use fewer unnecessary additives. In the meantime, science points to citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol being safe. But keeping the conversation honest and alive is just as important as any government approval.
Food science never stops finding new ways to keep food fresh, stable, and appealing. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol, often called CITREM, bring more than just technical support to the table. They bridge the gap between food chemistry and what ends up on our plates. Using esters like these isn’t just about making food look better—it’s about practical solutions for real-world challenges. Every time I pick up a loaf of shelf-stable bread or pour cream into my coffee, I see the results of these ingredients in action.
In bakery production, keeping baked goods fresh and fluffy often seems like the chase for the holy grail. CITREM helps maintain the structure of starches, slowing staling and keeping bread soft for longer stretches. This extends shelf life without stuffing labels with extra sugar or artificial preservatives—a big deal for anyone focused on clean-label options.
Ice cream makers rely on similar science. Melted and refrozen ice cream tends to get icy and unpleasant. Esters prevent bigger ice crystals from forming, so the texture stays creamy. This approach cuts back on waste and customer complaints. The dairy industry, always on the lookout for better ways to stabilize fat in products, gladly turns to these esters. They stop fats from separating out of milk or cream, keeping products reliable from factory to fridge.
Not every food mixes together easily. Trying to combine water and oil in salad dressings, sauces, or spreads often leads to frustration. CITREM acts as an emulsifier, encouraging these ingredients to mix more readily. This results in products that keep their consistency throughout their shelf life. Fewer clumps, fewer watery layers—results that keep both manufacturers and home cooks satisfied.
If you’ve noticed that plant-based milks sometimes separate quickly, it’s likely because they lack strong natural emulsifiers. Adding citric and fatty acid esters fixes that problem, making these alternatives look and taste more like traditional dairy. The same logic applies to spreads and margarine, which need to spread smoothly without leaking oil.
Safety always sits high on the list of priorities. CITREM has passed safety evaluations from food authorities like the European Food Safety Authority and the US Food and Drug Administration. These agencies reviewed long-term studies to check for harmful effects. Experts found that human bodies break down these esters into familiar substances: glycerol, fatty acids, and citric acid. That process closely matches how we digest other ingredients in food.
In food processing, efficiency saves money, but consumer trust drives brand loyalty. CITREM helps companies meet both goals: fewer returns, longer shelf lives, and ingredients that won’t scare off mindful shoppers. As plant-based and reduced-sugar foods continue to expand on grocery shelves, the utility of citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol will likely grow. Relying on science and regulation, food producers can be confident they’re adding value—without sacrificing taste, texture, or safety.
People want food that tastes good, keeps fresh, and doesn’t surprise them with anything risky on the label. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol turn up on ingredient lists for many baked goods, dairy desserts, and some spreads. These are emulsifiers—blended from edible fats, citric acid from citrus fruit, and glycerol, a standard compound in our bodies and in many foods. They’re there to keep things smooth and make sure oil and water don’t separate. Most folks never think twice about them.
Food allergies scare people for good reason. When a label lists a chemical-sounding name, questions pop up. So far, research shows no established record of these esters causing classic food allergies—those over-the-top immune reactions to proteins from peanuts or shellfish, for instance. That makes sense, since these esters come from fats and not from proteins. Allergies usually target proteins, which the immune system can recognize and attack.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration both check food additives carefully. For decades, both groups have not seen reports of allergy problems linked to these esters. Most reactions seen with food additives—colorants, sulfites, and preservatives—don’t apply here. If someone has trouble, it usually involves a rare sensitivity, not a true allergy, and even then, published cases in medical literature almost never mention citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol by name.
There’s another layer beyond true allergy. Some people say certain additives upset their digestion or give them headaches, even if there’s no immune problem in sight. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol haven’t shown up as culprits. The ingredients used to make them, like palm oil or soybean oil, rarely cause trouble for those who are allergic to soy or nuts because the proteins are stripped away during manufacture.
Still, it pays for manufacturers to be honest about sources. Cross-contact can happen if equipment also handles allergenic ingredients. Food safety groups push for detailed labeling for a reason—to help those with severe allergies make informed choices. One batch of emulsifiers might be made differently than another, though tests show the risk is extremely low for these esters to trigger anything close to allergy.
Trust in food comes from reading labels and asking hard questions. Companies using these emulsifiers need to keep cleaning and separation up to standard in their plants. Sourcing matters too; suppliers who cut corners could risk contamination. Regulation helps set a baseline, but real safety depends on what happens every day on the production floor. If in doubt, asking manufacturers or customer service about sourcing and cross-contact risk isn’t just smart—it’s part of keeping yourself healthy.
Doctors and allergists keep these facts in mind when guiding patients with complex or rare allergies. The lack of reports shows that, for nearly everyone, citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol don’t belong at the top of the allergen watch list. People with confirmed, severe citrus allergies or problems with metabolic disorders may want extra caution, though such cases show up rarely in published summaries.
On allergenic risk, these esters get a clean bill based on decades of consumer experience and safety testing. The science supports that for most buyers, the real risk sits elsewhere on the label. Staying informed, using quality suppliers, and asking questions keeps everyone just a little bit safer—and a lot more confident in what they eat.
Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol have worked their way into many food, pharmaceutical, and cosmetic products. They show up as emulsifiers and stabilizers, and most people rarely notice them. But safe handling and proper storage don’t just protect regulatory compliance—they keep workers and consumers safe. In my experience, folks on the ground depend on straightforward standards for handling additives, not just a checklist of dos and don’ts. When I first encountered these esters in a manufacturing setting, the words the quality team stressed weren’t “documentation” or “audit,” but “clean” and “dry.”
Opening a new drum or bag of this ingredient, a clear odor sometimes escapes, reminding you it’s made from organic sources. That smell signals a vulnerability: moisture and heat won’t be your friends. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol tend to clump and degrade if exposed to humidity or high temperatures. That translates to product waste, batch failures, and even equipment blockages. Long before digital sensors and smart warehousing, old hands kept these additives in cool, ventilated rooms—never on a sunlit loading dock, never under leaking pipes. Temperature control, usually below 25°C, and dry shelving create the baseline for keeping this material in top shape. Direct sunlight and stacked storage against warm devices often spell trouble. Specialized containers—airtight, food-approved plastics or steel drums with tamper-proof lids—help cut down on spoilage or contamination risks.
Once a container is open, the next issue that creeps in is cross-contamination. Gloves come out—nitrile or vinyl prevent skin contact and keep the powder or liquid free from unwanted residues. Labels matter: no unlabeled buckets, no sharing scoops between ingredients. In several cases, I’ve watched entire lots written off due to a moment’s lapse in these basics. ASTM and FDA documentation back these practices with clear science—mixing even small impurities can trigger off-flavors, unexpected chemical reactions, or regulatory warnings.
Ventilation in the work area deserves respect. In poorly ventilated spaces, vapors or fine particles could irritate the eyes or airways. Good airflow, powered exhaust, and a basic face mask offer a strong line of defense. Slips and spills present a hazard too. In warehouses and production floors, oily residues turn walkways into slip zones. Proper spill kits—absorbent mats, chemical-safe cleaning solvents—cut down injury reports. Every supervisor I’ve known keeps a close eye on warehouse cleanliness for exactly this reason.
These practical points shape routines that last. Training new staff covers more than a list of chemical properties; it means walking them through the ways this ingredient interacts with their work environment. Signage at every storage point, scheduled bulk rotation, and daily cleaning walk-throughs reinforce reliable habits. Traceability gets overlooked—labeled batches, temperature logbooks, and prompt reporting of changes in appearance or odor have flagged issues early, again and again.
Up-to-date safety data sheets should always be available. Team members easily accessing this information leads to quicker, safer decisions in a pinch. Culture comes into play: when safe storage and careful handling move from “rules” to “expectations,” mistakes drop. In my own work, that shift has set the best operators apart, boosting both safety and output. Citric and fatty acid esters of glycerol aren’t hard to manage, but they don’t forgive shortcuts. Care here pays off at every step.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | glyceryl esters of citric acid and fatty acids |
| Other names |
E 472c Glycerol citric and fatty acid esters Glycerol esters of citric and fatty acids Glycerides, citric acid esters Glyceryl citrates |
| Pronunciation | /ˈsɪtrɪk ənd ˈfæti ˈæsɪd ˈɛstərz əv ˈɡlɪsərəʊl/ |
| Preferred IUPAC name | glyceryl citrates |
| Other names |
Glycerol Esters of Citric and Fatty Acids E472c Citric Acid Esters of Mono- and Diglycerides of Fatty Acids Citroglycerides Glycerides, Citric Acid Esters |
| Pronunciation | /ˈsɪtrɪk ənd ˈfæti ˈæsɪd ˈɛstərz ʌv ˈɡlɪsəˌrɒl/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 67701-44-0 |
| Beilstein Reference | 2337396 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:5446 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201808 |
| ChemSpider | 21568316 |
| DrugBank | DB11053 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03c8e3c2-61ac-4956-8988-bf4b69e593ba |
| EC Number | 31566-31-1 |
| Gmelin Reference | 84244 |
| KEGG | C02237 |
| MeSH | D005311 |
| PubChem CID | 24722 |
| RTECS number | TY2490000 |
| UNII | YG60L087SL |
| UN number | UN3085 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID6011499 |
| CAS Number | 977019-37-8 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | c1ccc(cc1)C(=O)OCC(COC(=O)CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC)OC(=O)CC(=O)O |
| Beilstein Reference | 969591 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:86651 |
| ChEMBL | CHEBI:53427 |
| ChemSpider | 3848604 |
| DrugBank | DB11044 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 100.272.301 |
| EC Number | E472c |
| Gmelin Reference | 1435135 |
| KEGG | C02451 |
| MeSH | D003579 |
| PubChem CID | 24203 |
| RTECS number | GU4375000 |
| UNII | 3X5850GA6T |
| UN number | UN3085 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C21H38O8 |
| Molar mass | 956.4 g/mol |
| Appearance | White to yellowish pasty mass or oily liquid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.05 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble |
| log P | 3.6 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Acidity (pKa) | ~3.1-5.0 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 11.0 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.450–1.470 |
| Viscosity | Viscous liquid |
| Dipole moment | 1.83 D |
| Chemical formula | C₃₉H₇₄O₈ |
| Molar mass | 822.1 g/mol |
| Appearance | Light yellow to brownish oily liquid or semi-solid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 950 kg/m3 |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble in water |
| log P | 1.8 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Basicity (pKb) | 8.1 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | Diamagnetic |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.4430 |
| Viscosity | Viscous liquid |
| Dipole moment | 0.00 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 1094.6 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -9978.5 kJ/mol |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 1123.5 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | 14600 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | A16AX |
| ATC code | A16AX |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause mild skin and eye irritation. |
| GHS labelling | Not classified as hazardous under GHS |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Signal word | No signal word |
| Hazard statements | No hazard statements. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | NFPA 704: 1-1-0 |
| Flash point | > 250 °C |
| Autoignition temperature | > 400 °C (752 °F; 673 K) |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat) > 5,000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | Greater than 5000 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | RN8754 |
| PEL (Permissible) | 10 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | 20 mg/m³ |
| Main hazards | May cause mild skin and eye irritation. |
| GHS labelling | Not classified as hazardous according to GHS |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Signal word | Not classified |
| Hazard statements | Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | NFPA 704: 1-1-0 |
| Flash point | > 220 °C |
| Autoignition temperature | > 385°C (725°F) |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): >20,000 mg/kg (oral, rat) |
| NIOSH | TLV9435000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | 100 mg/kg |
| REL (Recommended) | 12.5 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Glycerol Monostearate Sucrose Esters of Fatty Acids Polyglycerol Esters of Fatty Acids Propylene Glycol Esters of Fatty Acids Sorbitan Esters Mono- and Diglycerides of Fatty Acids Lecithin |
| Related compounds |
Glycerol ester of wood rosin Glycerol monostearate Sucrose esters of fatty acids Sorbitan monostearate Polyglycerol polyricinoleate Mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids |
West Ujimqin Banner, Xilingol League, Inner Mongolia, China
