Fluorogestone acetate first appeared in scientific literature back in the 1960s, connecting chemistry labs to the needs of animal agriculture. Researchers needed ways to control reproductive cycles for better herd management and food production, so they leaned on hormone manipulation. Fluorogestone acetate—a synthetic progestogen—offered hope, especially in veterinary medicine. Its progress resulted not from a single breakthrough, but steady improvements in organic synthesis, combination techniques, and a growing understanding of steroid hormones. As governments formalized drug approval rules, the compound moved through tight reviews and continued refinement, shaping regulatory and commercial pathways that would follow for decades.
Fluorogestone acetate acts as a hormone replacement product, commonly used in livestock management, especially with sheep and cattle. Ranchers insert it, usually in the form of an intravaginal sponge or implant, to manage estrus synchronization. The product takes over the animal’s hormonal pathways to regulate ovulation and reproductive schedules. Packaged in sterile doses, it maximizes reproductive efficiency, giving farmers tighter control and wider predictability without repetitive manual labor. Its adoption became standard practice in large-scale animal breeding, with companies tailoring delivery systems for maximum reliability and easy administration.
Fluorogestone acetate comes as a white to off-white crystalline powder, with low solubility in water, but it mixes well with organic solvents like ethanol or chloroform. The molecule’s core is made up of a steroid backbone, decorated with an acetate group and a fluorine atom, giving it unique reactivity and biological action. With a molecular formula of C23H29FO4 and a molecular weight hovering around 388.5 g/mol, this compound holds up to standard lab scrutiny, showing melting points near 240°C. Its chemical stability speaks to its design—built to survive the critical windows between manufacturing, storage, and administration.
Commercial suppliers list potency and purity as top selling points, usually providing detailed certificates under pharmaceutical quality control standards. Each package shows clear batch numbers, expiry dates, recommended storage conditions (cool, dry, away from direct sunlight), and specific concentrations per delivery unit. Regulatory agencies demand unambiguous composition data, down to trace contaminant levels, along with instructions that reflect approved animal species and permitted administration protocols. Labels warn users about potential residue times, withdrawal intervals before slaughter or milk collection, and include emergency directions for accidental exposure.
Chemists synthesize fluorogestone acetate starting from a suitable pregnane derivative. Stepwise reactions introduce fluorine at precise positions, followed by selective acetylation to build the final acetate ester. This process demands both skill and precision, since introducing a fluorine atom isn’t trivial—it takes specific reagents and exact temperature controls to avoid side reactions. Purification includes crystallization or chromatography techniques, separating the finished product from byproducts and impurities. Experienced manufacturers maintain detailed logs at every stage, covering from raw materials to final compound, tracking yields and safeguarding quality.
The acetate ester group serves as a handle for further transformation, with chemists able to tweak functional groups for other analogues or for research needs. Under acidic or basic conditions, the ester can be hydrolyzed to access the parent alcohol. The fluorine atom can drive specific biological effects, but it complicates certain chemical reactions, requiring harsh conditions to modify. The backbone of the molecule resists most oxidation and reduction reactions, pointing to stability that helps in both storage and metabolic longevity. In practice, real-world modifications often target formulation changes by blending with carriers or investigating ways to extend release in animal systems, improving field utility rather than just chasing novelty.
Different sources refer to fluorogestone acetate using names such as FGA, Fluorogestone, or by trade names assigned in various markets. Catalogs from veterinary pharmaceutical companies include variants like Synchro-Mate-B or Chronogest, depending on the application and jurisdiction. Chemistry texts and regulatory documents stick to the full chemical name or a recognized international nonproprietary name, to keep things clear in cross-border trade and research. Knowing the synonyms isn’t just academic—veterinarians, researchers, and regulatory inspectors cross-check names to track residues and stay compliant, as versions across territories don’t always match.
Strict protocols define how workers handle, store, and administer fluorogestone acetate. Personal protective equipment cuts down on accidental contact or inhalation. Safety data sheets spell out steps for spills, exposure, or fire, reflecting the compound’s moderate risks but serious potential for endocrine disruption if mishandled. Waste product disposal follows hazardous pharmaceutical guidelines, keeping these compounds out of water systems or non-target organisms. In the field, users stick to precise dosages and adhere to withdrawal periods, protecting both food safety and animal welfare. The oversight by veterinary agencies and food safety authorities functions as both a legal backstop and a public assurance mechanism.
Veterinary reproductive management is where fluorogestone acetate delivers the biggest impact. Sheep, goats, and cattle operations turn to it for estrus synchronization, maximizing breeding efficiency and aligning production cycles with market and resource needs. By setting up breeding windows, farms reduce the chaos of random cycles and enable timing that fits infrastructure or weather patterns. Researchers and veterinarians also dip into its utility in hormone research and occasional applications in experimental animal control protocols. The food production industry sees direct benefits, as controlled breeding supports meat, dairy, and wool yields in ways that ripple across supply chains. Some limited human research originated decades ago, but human health approvals never materialized, so its use stays firmly within animal health circles.
Over the decades, research has zeroed in on better delivery methods, improved hormonal combinations, and a deeper understanding of how progestogens work inside animal bodies. Early versions with less predictable release and uneven results fueled rounds of studies, leading to advances such as slow-release sponges and biodegradable implants. Collaborations among universities, government labs, and the pharmaceutical industry drove progress not just in product design but in monitoring long-term effects and optimizing herd outcomes. Teams test analogues for better selectivity, lower residue risk, and improved withdrawal times, always with an eye on regulatory changes and economic realities facing modern livestock operations.
Animal safety and human food consumption both depend on rigorous toxicity studies. Researchers measure acute and chronic effects on multiple species, looking for hormone disruption, organ impact, and potential reproductive side effects. They assess metabolic breakdown, tracking both the parent compound and its residues in tissues, milk, and waste. The data banked from these studies sets safe levels and withdrawal guidelines, letting regulatory agencies mark the line between benefit and risk. Bans or limits in some markets spring from concerns about carrying over hormones into the food supply and the risks of accidental exposure for workers and consumers. Feedback loops between laboratory data and on-farm surveillance catch rare or delayed complications, though monitoring always remains an uphill battle.
Trends point to a mix of opportunity and challenge for fluorogestone acetate. On one side, demand for controlled breeding and reproductive management in livestock continues to rise, reflecting the global push for food security and efficient animal production. On the other, regulatory scrutiny and consumer sentiment about hormone use in agriculture fuel increasing research into both alternatives and ways this product can retain acceptance. Researchers are digging into formulations that lower residue levels, technologies that improve precision delivery, and strategies to measure or offset environmental impact. One thing feels clear: as food systems evolve and science pushes the boundaries, compounds like fluorogestone acetate must keep adapting—not just in formulation, but in policy, monitoring, and communication, to stay relevant and safe for the future.
Fluorogestone acetate isn’t something you often hear about at a neighborhood barbecue, but if you know anyone raising sheep or goats, it’s probably come up. This synthetic hormone shows up in livestock management, and although it flies under the radar in city life, it makes a big difference for rural producers. Over the years, I’ve seen firsthand how using it can shape a breeding season—or even an entire farm’s yearly plan. While there’s plenty of technical information out there, most folks just want to know what this stuff actually does and why anyone would trust it near their animals.
Talk to sheep ranchers, and you’ll hear the same challenge: not every ewe comes into heat at the right time. That throws off the schedule, and scattered lambing means more work, less sleep, and a harder time getting young animals to market when prices are best. Fluorogestone acetate, a progestogen, steps in here. Farmers use it in the form of sponges or implants, which get placed inside the animal for a handful of days. The hormone calms their cycles and lines up when the whole group comes into heat. So, you don’t end up chasing scattered births—everything gets tighter and more predictable. That makes transportation, selling, and caring for newborns a less stressful affair.
Synchronizing cycles isn’t just about convenience; it fills a practical need. With a group of ewes giving birth within a week or two of each other, farmers can supervise births better, catch complications early, and avoid losing lambs. I’ve helped out on properties where lambing drags on for four or five weeks, and by the end of it, everyone looks worn out—including the animals. By tightening that window, fluorogestone acetate supports stronger, healthier flocks and higher survival rates among newborns. Studies have shown that farms relying on hormone-based synchronization programs often see a 10-20% bump in lamb crop weight and survival—a result that translates directly into real money at market.
Anytime hormones get mentioned, there’s a knot of concerns: food safety, animal welfare, and what happens down the food chain. Fluorogestone acetate has a withdrawal period after use—meat from animals treated with it cannot go straight to market, which protects consumers. Regulatory bodies like the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration keep a strict watch on things, demanding exhaustive evidence before allowing it on the market. Still, questions about animal stress and pharmaceutical residues remain. Responsible farmers run regular checks and keep solid records, making sure the withdrawal periods are respected and only healthy animals move into the food stream.
Livestock production isn’t going back to the old days of unpredictable breeding and sleepless nights for everyone involved. As our population grows, efficiency matters. Yet, that doesn’t excuse ignoring tougher questions about how and why these tools are used. Investing in better farm education, more transparent labeling, and smarter hormonal programs lets everyone—producers and consumers—have a real say. No single trick solves all problems, but with ongoing research and clearer conversations, the gap between supermarket and farm gate can start to close a little bit more.
People tend to overlook the details about what goes into animal husbandry, unless raised on a farm or, like me, spent too many evenings listening to relatives talk breeding cycles and livestock management. Fluorogestone acetate gets discussed when people want to synchronize sheep and goat breeding. This synthetic hormone brings the herd’s reproductive cycles closer together, which means less time juggling individual animal schedules and better planning for both small farmers and bigger operations.
The main way fluorogestone acetate goes into an animal’s system is with a vaginal sponge. Forget syringes or feed additives—here we’re talking about a device that looks a lot like a small sponge soaked in the hormone. A veterinarian or experienced handler inserts it in the animal’s vagina, all sterile and careful, because hygiene counts for a lot. That sponge stays inside for close to two weeks; during that time, the hormone slowly releases and tells the animal’s body to hit pause on ovulation.
After about 12 to 14 days someone removes the sponge. Removal tends to kickstart the hormone shift in the animal, so a surge of natural hormones follows. Breeding typically happens within a couple of days, often with artificial insemination to make best use of the timing. This isn’t a subtle shift—it lines up estrus across the flock, which lets breeders plan lambing or kidding more predictably.
Timing out breeding like this means herds become easier to manage. You get healthier lambs and kids when birth happens seasonally instead of scattered. For smaller farmers, this practice can make all the difference in hitting market windows or controlling labor costs. If you grew up waiting for midnight calls in breeding season, you’ll know that avoiding scattered births means better sleep for everyone.
The sponge method isn’t fuss-free. Each animal needs attention. Improper placement can cause irritation or even infection. Clean handling helps prevent that, and pulling the sponge at the right time means the process works as intended. It requires hands-on work and attention to detail. But many farmers say it pays off—not only with more predictable herds, but also in profits that can keep a small operation afloat.
Anyone who’s cared for animals knows no procedure comes risk-free. Vaginal sponges can cause discomfort or, rarely, more serious infections if people work too quickly or use unclean tools. Responsible handling—always with gloves, always with care—cuts down these risks.
For farms focused on organic or natural methods, there’s an ongoing debate about drawing a line between efficiency and traditional practice. Some choose to forgo hormone treatments. Others argue that improving animal welfare by reducing stress and synchronizing breeding makes good sense. Regulations in many countries limit or monitor these hormone uses, mostly to make sure food products stay safe and sustainable.
No method stands still. Research looks at smaller, more comfortable sponges, better insertion tools, and different hormone dosages. Some teams focus on training farm staff, recognizing that knowledge can keep problems from cropping up in the first place.
Clear labeling and record-keeping about hormone use benefit both farmer and consumer. As consumers continue to ask questions about what’s in their food, transparency supports trust up and down the line. In my experience, honest conversations between producers, vets, and buyers make a world of difference.
Fluorogestone acetate given by sponge won’t disappear from livestock management anytime soon, but the real key sits with education, responsibility, and keeping up with new science. When everyone works with clear eyes, the process works for flocks, farmers, and people who want to know where their food comes from.
Fluorogestone acetate shows up most often in veterinary medicine, especially for reproductive management in livestock. Vets and researchers trust it for synchronizing estrus in sheep and cattle. That sounds clinical, but for anyone working with animals, the day-to-day practicalities become a balancing act. It’s not just about pushing for better livestock productivity—every intervention swaps benefit for possible risk.
Animals can react in all sorts of ways to hormone treatments. Fluorogestone acetate counts as a synthetic progestogen, so you’d expect its effects to mirror or modify natural hormonal rhythms. The most reported physical side effects include changes in appetite and activity. Sometimes, animals grow restless or appear lethargic. I’ve seen ewes go either direction in the lambing shed. That unpredictability can worry even seasoned farmers.
Local reactions at the site of application can crop up—swelling or soreness, especially if a device like a vaginal sponge delivers the drug. Basic animal welfare requires us to check for pain or infection. A veterinarian running herd synchronization during breeding season needs to stay on the lookout, as untreated infections mean lost time and losses come fast.
Fluorogestone acetate’s core purpose is to alter the animal’s reproductive cycle. That sounds straightforward, but shifting hormonal patterns sometimes sparks off-target effects. Animals may develop irregular estrus cycles after a course, with some failing to return to fertility at the expected time. These delays upset breeding schedules and, longer term, affect herd income for families relying on good conception rates.
Reports suggest other outcomes—delayed ovulation or, more rarely, cystic ovaries. In our community livestock projects, I’ve spoken with farmers frustrated by animals failing to conceive after synchronization attempts. Discussing those outcomes in person, their worries ring true: smaller herds, tighter margins, extra feed costs, and uncertainty on whether to repeat treatments.
Residue in edible tissues matters just as much as animal health. If withdrawal times aren’t followed, traces could show up in meat or milk. Regulatory bodies expect routine adherence to food safety guidelines, and for good reason. Globally, research on progestogen residues in food keeps building. One study published in “Food and Chemical Toxicology” underlined the need for tight monitoring, pointing out potential risks especially for sensitive groups like children and pregnant women.
My own experience says most farmers follow label directions, yet mistakes slip in under pressure. Education and tighter protocols help, but so does having reliable testing infrastructure at slaughterhouses and dairies. That way, food safety lapses become rare rather than routine.
Clear communication between veterinarians and livestock owners goes a long way. Nobody benefits from guesswork or missing information. Monitoring after administration—physical exams, careful observation—should be routine, not a box-ticking exercise. Any unexpected reactions warrant immediate investigation; with so much at stake, small oversights ripple out fast.
There’s promise in research and emerging alternatives, too. Newer protocols and different progestogens claim fewer side effects, but they all need scrutiny. In my experience, weighing old versus new calls for trust in hard data and firsthand field results, not just marketing. Shared decision-making grounded in real outcomes keeps herds healthy and keeps food supplies safe for everyone.
Fluorogestone acetate isn’t something you find in your neighborhood pharmacy’s cold-and-flu aisle. Used mostly in veterinary medicine, especially in livestock like sheep and cattle, this hormone compound helps manage animal reproduction. In some regions, there’s talk about its role in assisted reproduction for animals. The conversation about whether a prescription should be mandatory keeps coming up for a simple reason: using hormones without real oversight leads to risks—both for animals and the food we eventually eat.
Accessing powerful hormones without a vet or doctor’s guidance doesn’t just threaten animal well-being; it also clutters up the food chain with traces of drugs. Twenty years ago, I witnessed a small dairy farm deal with the aftermath of unsupervised hormone use. Milk production rose for a few weeks, then several cows ended up with severe infections. The local vet warned them that the drugs had been used too frequently and at the wrong doses. That experience still sticks with me. Over-the-counter access would open the door to misuse like that, across many farms and ranches.
It’s not just about misuse, either. Hormones like fluorogestone acetate may leave residues in meat or milk. Regulators, such as the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency, demand strict withdrawal periods to keep residue levels in check. If anyone could pick up a packet of this compound, tracking and enforcement would fall apart, and consumers could be exposed to drugs without even realizing it.
In places with weak controls, black-market versions of veterinary drugs flood the market. Counterfeit hormones aren’t just less potent—sometimes they include toxic fillers or entirely different chemicals. There’s a real reason we put safety barriers between buyers and certain compounds. Without prescription rules, counterfeit products spread, causing animal illness and financial ruin for farmers.
Pharmacies, whether for humans or animals, rely on licensed professionals to make judgment calls every day. If prescription-only status exists for a hormone, it means experts see enough risk to justify a gatekeeper. Every phone call to a vet to request fluorogestone acetate gives the animal an extra layer of protection. The vet asks about other medications, the timing in the reproductive cycle, and potential complications—things a farmer on their own might overlook.
Tighter rules and oversight around sales can filter out some of the biggest risks. Buyers who need hormones for legitimate reasons should work with vets, who in turn should face regular training and audits. Technology brings new options—some countries now register every dose dispensed with national databases, helping track drug flow from wholesaler to farm. This approach would not block access for professionals but could flag misuse early on.
I’ve seen firsthand the difference that careful stewardship makes, both for livestock health and for farmers’ peace of mind. Having a prescription system in place for drugs like fluorogestone acetate sets a standard of care the entire industry can stand behind. That kind of trust pays off: for animals, for food consumers, and for producers working hard to do things right.
Anyone who’s handled pharmaceuticals or veterinary products knows storage isn’t just about putting bottles on a shelf. The way you store a compound shapes not only its shelf life but its ability to do the job it’s designed for. Fluorogestone acetate plays a crucial part in veterinary reproductive management, especially in synchronizing the estrus cycles in livestock. When storage conditions slip, you risk more than inventory loss—you risk animal health, wasted resources, and missed livings for farmers.
This compound lives up to its duties only if it stays stable. Heat, moisture, and light can do real harm. Chemical breakdown happens faster at higher temperatures, and moisture can start unwanted reactions, leading the product to lose potency. I’ve seen what happens when drugs break down—the end user gets poor results, and corners get cut to recoup losses. Suddenly, cows aren’t cycling on schedule and producers feel the pinch. In places where climate control is expensive, some folks resort to makeshift solutions, like keeping medicines in ice chests or even cool basements. That kind of improvisation might work in a pinch, but it doesn’t provide the consistency that products like fluorogestone acetate demand.
Regulatory agencies like the FDA and EMA provide clear directions. Recommended storage for fluorogestone acetate is in a cool, dry place—usually, that’s under 25°C (about 77°F). Containers should stay tightly sealed, away from dampness and sunlight. Not following these steps sets off a cascade of problems, both financial and ethical. The World Health Organization found that up to 25% of medicines in developing regions fall below safety and potency standards, with improper storage listed as a main culprit. It’s not hard to see how a country’s whole livestock sector might suffer knock-on effects.
On a practical level, folks do best by investing in reliable refrigerators or temperature-controlled cabinets, even in basic veterinary clinics. In rural settings where power outages happen, battery backups and monitoring devices—like data loggers—keep things on track. I’ve seen some creative operations store medicine with silica gel packs or in secondary containers to defend against humidity. It’s not just high-tech solutions; clear labeling and rotation of stock prevent expired or degraded product from ever reaching an animal.
No one wants to waste valuable medicine or lose gains from improved reproductive management. Training counts too. Workers who really understand why proper storage matters tend to spot early signs of trouble—discoloration, broken seals, or clumping. Suppliers and vets who check in and educate their clients on proper care for these products set both sides up for better outcomes. Industry support for bulk packaging and tamperproof seals makes a difference as well, cutting down on accidental contamination during transport and use.
Good storage means better results for farmers and healthier animals. It rewards everyone who invests time and money, respects the guidance of regulators, and remembers the real-world consequences when standards slide. No fancy jargon—just the everyday practice of protecting something valuable until it’s needed most.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | [(8R,9S,10R,13S,14S,17R)-17-acetyl-9-fluoro-10,13-dimethyl-3-oxopregna-4,9-dien-17-yl] acetate |
| Other names |
SC-9880
Synchro-Mate Fluorgestone acetate FGA Flurogestone acetate |
| Pronunciation | /fluːˌrɒdʒ.oʊˈstiːn əˈsiːteɪt/ |
| Preferred IUPAC name | (1R,2R,8S,10R,11S,14S,15S)-14-Acetyl-15-fluoro-2,10,15-trimethyltetracyclo[8.7.0.0²,⁷.0¹¹,¹⁵]heptadeca-6,8-dien-5-one |
| Other names |
FGA
Fluorgestone acetate Flurogestone Fluorogestone 17α-Acetoxy-9α-fluoro-11β-hydroxyprogesterone 9α-Fluoro-11β-hydroxy-17α-acetoxyprogesterone |
| Pronunciation | /fluːˌrɒ.dʒəˈstiː.oʊn ˈæs.ɪ.teɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | [2529-45-5] |
| Beilstein Reference | 3858739 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:31622 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1431 |
| ChemSpider | 126508 |
| DrugBank | DB04574 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 100.044.232 |
| EC Number | 206-757-0 |
| Gmelin Reference | 69519 |
| KEGG | C13663 |
| MeSH | D005410 |
| PubChem CID | 3032255 |
| RTECS number | GW7520000 |
| UNII | 5V0B346MAO |
| UN number | UN3271 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID3024345 |
| CAS Number | 2529-45-5 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1598096 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:51745 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL2096822 |
| ChemSpider | 157364 |
| DrugBank | DB04574 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03c616656232-46df-b952-72fc166b8b6e |
| EC Number | 206-969-2 |
| Gmelin Reference | 78608 |
| KEGG | C14709 |
| MeSH | D005650 |
| PubChem CID | 13996 |
| RTECS number | TU4375000 |
| UNII | D7TTI6P1A3 |
| UN number | UN3271 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DJ1M332L9Z |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C24H32O4F |
| Molar mass | 414.489 g/mol |
| Appearance | White or almost white crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.26 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble in water |
| log P | 3.88 |
| Vapor pressure | 9.6 x 10^-8 mmHg |
| Acidity (pKa) | 12.65 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 12.71 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -6.3e-6 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.559 |
| Viscosity | 200-300 mPa.s (25°C) |
| Dipole moment | 2.98 D |
| Chemical formula | C24H32O4F |
| Molar mass | 414.463 g/mol |
| Appearance | White or almost white crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.27 g/cm3 |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble in water |
| log P | 2.9 |
| Vapor pressure | 8.6 x 10⁻⁸ mmHg at 25°C |
| Acidity (pKa) | 12.43 |
| Basicity (pKb) | pKb = 5.92 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | NA |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.594 |
| Viscosity | Viscous liquid |
| Dipole moment | 2.71 D |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | G03DB02 |
| ATC code | G03DB02 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause harm to the unborn child. Causes skin irritation. Causes serious eye irritation. May cause respiratory irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS05, GHS07, GHS08 |
| Pictograms | GHS06,GHS08 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H302, H315, H319, H335, H360 |
| Precautionary statements | P260, P264, P270, P272, P280, P302+P352, P308+P313, P362+P364 |
| Flash point | Flash point: 9.1°C |
| Autoignition temperature | 730.6°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (rat, oral): >2000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): >2000 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | NIOSH RA1750000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | Not established |
| REL (Recommended) | 0.03 mg |
| Main hazards | May cause damage to fertility or the unborn child. |
| GHS labelling | GHS05, GHS07 |
| Pictograms | GHS06,GHS08 |
| Signal word | Danger |
| Hazard statements | H302, H315, H319, H335 |
| Precautionary statements | P201, P202, P261, P264, P270, P272, P280, P308+P313, P405, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-1 |
| Flash point | 150.0°C |
| Autoignition temperature | 460 °C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 oral (rat) 6g/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): 6,000 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | Not Established |
| PEL (Permissible) | Not established |
| REL (Recommended) | 8-14 days |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not listed |
Providing high-quality chemical products and logistics solutions for global trade partners.
