Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate found its way into the world’s chemical landscape during a period when synthetic esters became practical on a large scale. Before the 20th century, chemists experimenting with esterification focused mostly on basic compounds like ethyl acetate. As organic chemistry moved forward, researchers explored novel esters for their aromas and potential industrial roles. Through the 1950s and 60s, consumer appetite for new flavors and fragrances led to the laboratory development of complex esters including isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate. Scientists isolated this compound for its fruity scent and adaptable chemical profile, which later carved space in food technology and solvents. Over the past few decades, improved purification and greener synthesis methods have helped scale production with tighter tolerances and better safety margins, answering both industrial and regulatory calls for quality.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate brings a unique mix of volatility, solvency power, and a crisp, fresh aroma containing notes of apple and pear. Chemists value its balanced evaporation rate and low residue, so you’ll find it in products where a clean finish matters. Food technologists add it for nuanced flavors. Fragrance experts blend it into top notes. It lands itself in specialty coatings, adhesives, and industrial cleaners. The versatility builds from both molecular structure and purity, making quality control pivotal during batch production. Consistency across shipments underpins trust with end users in competitive sectors.
With a molecular formula of C8H16O2 and a molar mass around 144.21 g/mol, this ester appears as a clear, colorless liquid. As an oily compound, it floats noticeably above water since its density typically sits below 1 g/cm³. The boiling range hovers around 157–160°C, meaning it vaporizes smoothly under industrial heating but stays stable at room temperature. Its vapor pressure signals moderate volatility, so in open containers, it readily evaporates without aggressive fumes. The blend of hydrophobic and hydrophilic tendencies in the ester group gives it solubility in most organic solvents, but it avoids simple mixing with water—something that users need to consider in process design. Flash point data suggests careful storage and handling in areas free from sparks or flames, as with most lower esters.
Producers focus sharply on specification: purity often meets or exceeds 98%, and color is checked using standardized visual or spectrometric methods. Water content must remain low to prevent hydrolysis, typically under 0.1%. Key impurities, like isobutyric acid and related esters, demand tight controls since trace components can shift odor profiles or reactivity in end-use formulas. Drum and bulk containers call for clear GHS-compliant labeling. Common tags include the chemical name, warning symbols (flammable, mild irritant), lot number, UN code, and full supplier traceability for every shipment. Standard SDS sheets align with OSHA and REACH, giving clear guidelines on accident response.
Synthesis usually starts with isopropanol and 2-methylbutanoic acid. Acid catalysis carries out esterification, using sulfuric acid or, in modern processes, more environmentally gentle catalysts. Heat encourages the reaction, driving equilibrium toward the ester and water combination. Some operations include azeotropic distillation to remove water and boost yields. Technicians often prefer stainless-steel reactors to dodge contamination and corrosion. After separation, washing with brine and drying with magnesium sulfate polishes up the crude product. Fractional distillation purifies the ester, allowing clear separation from lower and higher boiling point impurities. Some newer approaches explore enzyme catalysts to cut down on energy use and toxic waste, hinting at a broader green chemistry movement within this industry.
The molecule often serves as a reactive building block in organic synthesis. Its ester bond can break under basic or acidic hydrolysis, reverting back into isopropanol and 2-methylbutanoic acid. This predictable cleavage gets used in both laboratory and industrial transformations. Chemists sometimes tweak the ester group, adding functional pendants for downstream specialty chemicals. Under oxidative environments, the compound can generate oxidized fragments, making storage stability a real concern in high-heat or oxygen-rich plants. Substitution along the branched chain allows for further analogues—each one tailored for precise flavor, solvent, or reactivity applications. The structural backbone offers enough flexibility to inspire ongoing research into derivatives with tuned properties.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate circulates in industry under a handful of aliases, most notably isopropyl isovalerate. Technical datasheets often refer to it simply by its IUPAC name. Sometimes suppliers flag it as a “fruity ester” or “flavoring base”, which can confuse newcomers sorting through order catalogues. International trade names reflect this diversity, working from local naming conventions and translation quirks. The CAS number—used as a regulatory anchor in procurement contracts—locks down the identity past any marketing flourish.
Labs and factories maintain clear boundaries between storage and process areas to manage the flammable nature of isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate. Spills can cause slicks on floors, so proper containment matters as much as personal protection. Typical PPE: nitrile gloves, splash goggles, flame-retardant coats. Facilities keep MSDS sheets on hand and train crews in both small spill response and fire emergencies. Vapor management systems, like fume hoods and spark-proof ventilation, keep workplace air clean and cut down ignition risk. Most countries require periodic workplace exposure reviews, and staff rotate closely in confined spaces to avoid prolonged inhalation even if exposures run below the published limits. For disposal, plants follow hazardous waste protocols, often involving incineration or specialist chemical waste processors to keep the material out of water tables.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate’s reach goes beyond just flavorings or scents. Its main economic role tracks through fine chemicals, custom resins, and specialty solvents—sometimes in formulations for automotive or electronics cleaning. The food industry values the ester’s crisp apple-pear aroma, using it in trace amounts for boosting appeal in candies and beverages. Perfume houses infuse it into complex bouquets, leaning on its volatility to freshen up sprayable products. Printing ink makers chase its fast-drying character, especially where smudge-resistance pairs with low toxicity targets. Recently, eco-friendly cleaning solutions also adopted this ester for dissolving oily residues without leaving strong chemical odors. Growing regulatory limits on harsher solvents turn attention to alternatives like isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate, pushing demand up among greener coatings and adhesives.
Academic and industrial teams dig deeper into new synthesis methods. Catalysts shift toward biobased and solid-supported acids, chipping away at the environmental footprint. Researchers monitor every new modification to the molecule—adding halogens, swapping the alcohol piece, or even creating polymer-bound esters for longer-lasting fragrances. Test runs in pilot facilities focus on recycling process water and recovering heat, proof that sustainability and cost control need not compete. Analytical chemists refine ways to confirm both the presence and absolute purity of the ester using GC-MS and HPLC, giving both producers and regulators better eyes on quality control. Collaborations across universities and private labs open up new routes to isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate analogues that match shifting consumer and regulatory appetites.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate ranks as a low-to-moderate toxicity ester by acute measurements. Animal studies flag some mild skin and eye irritation at high concentrations, though at safer handling levels the risks remain manageable with the usual protections. Chronic exposure data runs thinner—long-term inhalation studies help clarify safety margins for occupational settings. Regulators in food and fragrance circles require ongoing review of both metabolism and breakdown products, cutting off uses that show even a sniff of bioaccumulation or systemic toxicity. From hands-on experience, researchers know that robust safety data supports development of both regulations and new products, so toxicologists keep plugging away at exposure pathways and low-level effects to stay ahead of policy shifts.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate stands at an interesting crossroads for chemists and product designers. Shifts in flavor regulation, green chemistry priorities, and tighter emissions targets line up to shape how this ester lands in tomorrow’s markets. I often see renewable feedstocks edging into mainstream discussion, with fermentation-based production looking more practical as costs drop and yields climb. If downstream applications in flavors, fragrances, and specialty resins keep pushing for lower toxicity and cleaner profiles, commercial routes for isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate will need even sharper focus on process waste and resource cycling. By keeping research humming and regulatory data transparent, stakeholders can make sure this useful compound finds its place within more sustainable and responsible industries.
Most people may not get excited about the chemical names floating around in perfumes or food labs. But Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate plays a real part in daily life, especially where fragrances and flavors matter. This compound has a fruity scent, sometimes compared to apples or pineapples, which makes it a favorite in the world of synthetic flavors. Look at fruit-flavored candies, chewing gum, or pick up certain drinks that taste like summer – this compound might have helped create that refreshing flavor. I remember working with a confectionery company, and their lab techs raved about the control and consistency Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate offered over natural extracts. Natural aromas shift with the seasons, but a synthetic ester like this gives predictable results year after year.
Modern perfumers chase new blends that stand out for both novelty and longevity. Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate adds brightness to the top notes of perfumes. Its volatility helps fragrances bloom right away without hanging around too long and muddling the scent profile. Brands want signature scents that trigger strong, positive reactions. A dose of this ester, with its crisp and fruity notes, brings just that touch. My work in product marketing showed that certain household brands lean on safe, reliable chemicals like this to differentiate new releases and keep quality steady, even across continents.
Aside from its sensory appeal, Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate offers solvency for certain industrial uses. In specialty coatings, adhesives, and some cleaning agents, this chemical helps blend ingredients that do not want to mix otherwise. Cleaning manufacturers like it because it leaves less residue and dries fast, which speeds up production. I’ve spoken with maintenance crews who point out how residues from some cleaners gum up machinery, but with esters like this, surfaces stay clearer and deliver fewer hassles down the line.
Lab settings continue to hunt for reliable reference materials to validate tests and instrument calibration. Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate functions as a useful reference for analytical methods such as gas chromatography. Labs value its known properties and consistent responses. Research teams also use it as a starting point to design new molecules or to experiment with synthetic flavors before investing in botanical sources. Some university research groups, for example, prefer this ester in pilot projects because it is safer and less expensive than many volatile solvents.
Everyday products people take for granted depend on chemical ingredients that function behind the scenes. Choosing the right compounds touches everything from taste and scent to manufacturing speed and regulatory approval. The safety record for Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate stands strong, with regulatory bodies in Europe and the United States allowing its use in food and cosmetic applications within defined limits. As companies chase more transparency, more often you see these names on ingredient lists. Sharing clear information helps consumers feel confident that food, fragrance, and cleaning products use well-studied compounds.
Synthetic esters like Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate show how chemistry can lower costs, protect flavor profiles, or align with global regulatory rules. Eco-friendly production ideas, such as bio-based synthesis, may soon appeal to manufacturers who want to lighten their environmental footprint. Producers who minimize waste and boost safety can build trust with consumers while staying agile as science moves ahead.
Everyone’s got a bathroom shelf lined with bottles full of ingredients no one can pronounce. Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate is one of those names that sounds more like a chemistry quiz question than something you’d find in a face cream. This chemical is an ester, which means it comes from an acid and an alcohol. It has a fruity odor, and it brings texture and a little scent to skin and hair products.
Before anything lands in a face wash or lotion, scientists want to know if the ingredient is safe for folks to use day after day. Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate has passed through a handful of tests. There’s not a mountain of studies, but the available toxicology profiles don’t show big red flags when used in tiny amounts, which matches most cosmetic usage.
A 2019 review appearing in the International Journal of Toxicology reported that isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate doesn’t build up in the body or cause mutations in DNA. The European Chemicals Agency’s public records do not list this ester as a known allergen or sensitizer at usual product concentrations, and it breaks down into harmless byproducts once inside or outside the body.
In practical terms, the ingredient plays a role like lots of other emollients: it gives products a smooth, silky feel and helps scents linger on the skin. Anyone who’s mixed their own balms or creams at home can recognize the difference it makes—smooth instead of sticky, better shelf life, and a short-lived pleasant fragrance.
Skincare often comes down to trust. I remember helping my mother pick out lotions for her eczema years ago, flipping ingredient lists, searching for anything that caused problems. Most people don’t have the time to look up every compound. They lean on regulatory agencies and ingredient databases for peace of mind.
Cosmetics regulations in Europe and the US stick to a high standard because a slip-up affects millions. Ingredients like isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate end up allowed if there’s no strong evidence of harm at the amounts used. The process involves animal testing data, lab simulations, and sometimes human repeat-insult patch testing. Then each batch goes through quality controls to catch contamination.
Still, allergic reactions can pop up, even to safe ingredients. That’s true for almost everything from peanuts to perfumes. Patch testing with a dermatologist can help sort out rare sensitivities for folks with reactive skin.
One thing the beauty industry still gets flak for: hidden or vague labeling. As a writer, I believe detailed ingredient lists and easy-to-access safety data are essential. Too many consumers feel in the dark. Digital tools, scannable codes, and plain-language ingredients would help more people make informed choices.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate shows up in more and more products. Cosmetics labs can support public trust by updating websites with ingredient safety data and links to independent studies. Dermatologists can keep an eye on patient experiences and report issues to regulators.
The bottom line: this ingredient has a good safety record for personal care. Transparency combined with ongoing science helps everyone stay confident in the products they use every morning.
Chemicals play a big role in labs, manufacturing, and research, and the smallest change in quality can set a project back. Ask anyone who’s been around a busy research bench or worked in a pilot plant: shelf life is not just a number companies slap on a label. For isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate, a few key factors shape its shelf life. From my own runs in the lab, chemicals with ester bonds tend to break down if handled the wrong way. Direct sunlight makes things worse, and damp storage speeds up decay.
A typical bottle of isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate, kept sealed and in the right spot, should keep its properties for about two years. This number often assumes a best-case—the container unopened, stuck in a dark cabinet at 20–25°C. As soon as the bottle gets opened, air and stray moisture bump up the chances of hydrolysis, which can form acids that hurt purity. Over time, that sweet, fruity aroma turns odd, and reliable test results slip out of reach.
No fancy climate control is needed to store isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate, but good habits save headaches. Heat speeds up chemical reactions, so even keeping the bottle next to warm equipment reduces life. Humidity brings its own trouble—water vapor in the air reacts with esters like this one, trimming shelf life by months or more. At one workplace, I saw how a storeroom’s broken AC meant batches didn’t last through a single warm season. Fluctuating temperatures, stuffy rooms, and frequent opening all add up.
Physical container choice plays a role. Amber glass blocks sunlight, while a decent cap keeps out water. Polyethylene bottles do not always seal tight—chemicals with strong odors can slip out, and oxygen sneaks in. Glass wins on both fronts, especially if the chemical will be stored for long stretches.
There’s no substitute for a smart, measured approach in the lab. Simple tests tell you everything: a GC-MS scan reveals new contaminants, a pH check uncovers hydrolysis, and a whiff can show if volatile notes have faded. The sweet scent of isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate stands out, but if it shifts toward sour or sharp, the chemistry inside has changed.
Spoilage slips in through small mistakes. Leaving bottles open, using wet scoops, or storing next to acids pushes reactions along. Routine label checks add another layer of safety—if you spot sediment or cloudiness in what should be a clear liquid, that’s another red flag.
I’ve learned that good habits beat expensive fixes. Store isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate in a cool, dry space, in a tightly sealed amber glass bottle. Log every date the container gets opened or topped up; it’s easy to lose track over a year or two. Only pour out what’s needed for the day to avoid excess exposure, and never return unused portions to the master container.
Training helps too. Staff who know what to watch for—odd smells, cloudy appearance, subtle label changes—catch problems early. Chemistry is unforgiving; prevention matters more than clean-up or last-minute replacements.
It’s easy to ignore storage guidelines until a run of bad batches or contamination ruins a project. Having watched this happen firsthand, I’m convinced that attention to temperature, humidity, light, and airtight seals isn’t just box-checking. It’s about cutting waste, saving money, and producing repeatable results.
No system is perfect, but sticking to proven methods for shelf life and smart storage keeps isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate dependable. In chemistry, peace of mind comes from small, careful steps.
Take a stroll down the ingredient list of some processed scents or flavor enhancers and you might spot the name Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate. Some folks know this ester for its fruity, pleasant note that pops up in food, fragrances, and personal care goods. Anyone with sensitive skin or allergies often wonders about new ingredients—how safe something like this really is.
So far, authoritative resources like the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) don’t call out Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate as a known allergen. Years of patch tests and dermatology studies focus on common offenders—fragrance mixes, preservatives, and dyes. Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate usually avoids those red-flag lists. Most global safety databases describe it as having low toxicity and limited risk of irritation under typical use conditions in cosmetics and food. My own dive through safety datasheets matches what’s out there: no reports of widespread allergic reactions or systemic harm.
This isn’t a green light for everyone. I’ve talked with people who break out in rashes from ingredients others hardly notice. Sensitivities can sneak up on you, sometimes after repeated contact with a product—think of how dermatitis develops for some who handle lots of cleaning agents. Even if studies and regulators mark Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate as “safe,” unique immune systems don’t always follow the crowd.
A few scattered case studies mention related compounds causing mild skin discomfort in some cosmetics wearers, but nothing that sticks with this specific ester. Because new uses crop up often—especially in indie beauty spots and flavor houses—I keep an open mind. If someone reacts with redness or itch, patch testing under the care of an allergist gives the clearest answer.
Labels need more than just legal compliance. Clarity matters for everyone, not just chemistry buffs or folks with allergies. If Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate goes in a body lotion, shampoo, or food, companies serve customers best by listing it up front—easy to scan, pronounce, and understand. I always appreciate brands that spell out fragrance components, even ones classed as “low risk.” Informed choices start with honest communication.
If you have a history with contact allergies, that ingredient list becomes a map. Patch testing by a board-certified dermatologist brings peace of mind for chronic cases—especially for kids or the immunocompromised. Some support groups even maintain running lists of troublemaker ingredients, and while Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate rarely shows up, people with a cluster of sensitivities should keep it on the radar.
One step that helps everyone: push for mandatory disclosure rules on all cosmetic and food labels. Initiative from the personal care industry—sharing research on emerging ingredients—reduces trial-and-error for the most sensitive groups. Dermatologists and allergists should keep a pulse on new additives making their way into creative scents and flavors.
For individuals, understanding your own skin and gut health, reading new ingredient labels, and sharing feedback with manufacturers all drive safety forward. An extra minute reading can save weeks of discomfort. I’ve found the most effective consumer advocacy happens when shoppers ask questions, document reactions, and collaborate with health professionals.
While mainstream science doesn’t flag Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate as a worry, no single compound is universally perfect. For some, the ingredient will fly under the radar without a hitch. For a rare few, any unfamiliar compound can spark a reaction. Playing it safe never gets old: look at your own experience, trust your body’s response, and demand clear labeling every time. That approach supports a healthier, more transparent marketplace for all.
Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate pops up with a catchy, chemical-sounding name that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. Chemically, it looks like an ester—and esters often bring sweet, fruity smells. Plenty of flavors in candies and drinks rely on molecules in this category. The real question: does this specific ester land in the “food-safe” camp?
Consumers trust that what goes into their food won’t cause harm. Food ingredients face strict vetting, especially when they’re artificial or uncommon. Regulators like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) set the bar high. If you go to their listings for flavor additives, you won’t spot isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate. Unlike more familiar esters—ethyl butyrate, isoamyl acetate—there’s little sign of approval or even ongoing evaluation.
The reason for caution sits with the safety data. For any potential additive, you need real-world toxicology studies, reliable metabolism data, and clear understanding of how the body handles the compound. With isopropyl alcohol as a base, questions do turn up about potential toxicity. At high levels, isopropyl alcohol finds use as a disinfectant. In trace food-grade concentrations, though, some alcohol-based esters safely add flavor, assuming final safety studies back them. In this case, public records or scientific databases such as PubChem or the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) don’t show enough published research on isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate’s effects in humans.
Companies considering this flavor molecule for gum, candy, or beverages have a responsibility. Taking a shortcut by assuming “all esters are safe” runs against both common sense and food law. Skipping safety studies, or simply relying on chemical similarity, won’t wash with regulators or with the public. Decades of food safety alarms—like diacetyl in microwave popcorn and certain artificial dyes—remind us why companies and governments need this level of rigor.
I’ve watched smaller flavors and fragrance companies pitch the next hot molecule, hoping to create something bold and different for ice cream or drinks. There’s excitement all around until someone asks about the FDA’s Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) status or EU approvals. That’s where innovators hit a wall. It’s not impossible to run the rigorous toxicology and flavor evaluation studies, but running those tests costs millions and takes years.
If anyone wants to use isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate for food or beverages, the next steps look predictable—full safety evaluation, animal studies, perhaps even clinical trials in humans. Breaking ground with a new food ingredient means partnering with regulatory scientists, open data sharing, and full transparency with health authorities. Until that happens, responsible players should stick with proven, approved flavor agents. Cutting corners only invites risk, and in food, one mistake can undo years of trust.
For now, until isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate clears major regulatory hurdles and shows a strong safety profile, it belongs in the lab—not in the kitchen. The world of flavor chemistry is big enough; the real wins come with patience, proven science, and putting health at the center of innovation.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Isopropyl 3-methylbutanoate |
| Other names |
Isopropyl 2-methylbutyrate
2-Methylbutanoic acid isopropyl ester Isopropyl isovalerate Isopropyl 2-methylbutanoate 2-Methylbutyric acid isopropyl ester |
| Pronunciation | /ˌaɪ.səˈprəʊ.pɪl tuː ˌmɛθ.əl.bjuːˈteɪ.oʊ.eɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 597-66-6 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | `Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate` JSmol 3D model string: ``` CC(C)COC(=O)C(C)CC ``` |
| Beilstein Reference | 3938753 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:89055 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL4571879 |
| ChemSpider | 12071995 |
| DrugBank | DB19255 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03deecf9-a885-4ccc-b861-ca7d1df0e5fa |
| EC Number | 7493-51-0 |
| Gmelin Reference | 8595 |
| KEGG | C18707 |
| MeSH | D018420 |
| PubChem CID | 87639 |
| RTECS number | EK3442500 |
| UNII | 9S4X37KOUO |
| UN number | UN3272 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID7023422 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C8H16O2 |
| Molar mass | 132.20 g/mol |
| Appearance | Colorless to pale yellow liquid |
| Odor | Fruity, sweet, rum-like |
| Density | 0.865 g/mL at 25 °C (lit.) |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble |
| log P | 2.3 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.7 mmHg (20 °C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | pKa ≈ 24 (alpha hydrogen, ester group) |
| Basicity (pKb) | Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate has a very low basicity with a pKb estimated to be much greater than 14 (essentially non-basic ester). |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -8.42 × 10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.4060 |
| Viscosity | 1.787 mPa·s (25 °C) |
| Dipole moment | 1.62 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 272.7 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -486.7 kJ·mol⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -3164.1 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | There is no ATC code assigned to "Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate (Isopropyl 2-MB)". |
| Hazards | |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS07 |
| Pictograms | GHS02,GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H226, H315, H319, H335 |
| Precautionary statements | P210, P233, P240, P241, P242, P243, P261, P264, P271, P272, P280, P301+P310, P303+P361+P353, P304+P340, P305+P351+P338, P312, P321, P331, P332+P313, P333+P313, P337+P313, P362+P364, P370+P378, P403+P235, P405, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-2-0 |
| Flash point | 51 °C (124 °F) |
| Autoignition temperature | 410 °C |
| Explosive limits | 1.0% - 7.0% |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD₅₀ oral (rat): >5000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (oral, rat): 4260 mg/kg |
| NIOSH | SN4290000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for Isopropyl 2-Methylbutanoate (Isopropyl 2-MB) is not specifically established. |
| REL (Recommended) | 5 ppm |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Isopropyl butyrate
Isopropyl isobutyrate Isopropyl valerate Isobutyl 2-methylbutanoate Ethyl 2-methylbutanoate Methyl 2-methylbutanoate Propyl 2-methylbutanoate |
