The tail end of the twentieth century saw the push for milder, more skin-friendly cosmetic ingredients. That drive led researchers to 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate, a compound born from the blending of naturally inspired amino acids and high-molecular-weight alcohols. As someone who’s followed cosmetic ingredient trends closely, I recognize that chemists search for blends bringing together functionality and safety. They’re after improved texture in creams and lotions while cutting down on irritation—something that became a direct response to the rash of negative reactions reported in the ‘80s and ‘90s. This molecule arrived as a synthesis of knowledge about lipid compatibility in the skin and the need for gentle derivatives without parabens or harsh preservatives. You can track patent filings and published work in the early 2000s showing manufacturers leaping to include it as a “new generation” emollient ester. Major Asian and European companies pushed hard, chasing after the “natural” wave that still dominates beauty shelf space.
2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate exists as a high-purity ester with a luxurious, almost cushiony feel. It blends properties of fatty alcohols with subtle hints of amino acid chemistry, adapting for a wide range of personal care formulations. My own experience developing skin creams reflects how this ingredient creates a protective film on the skin, improving tactile quality without feeling greasy or clogging pores. It bridges gaps between greasy and watery, meaning formulators get an emollient that helps suspend actives and disperse pigments without upsetting skin’s balance. Customers—especially those in the sensitive skin segment—appreciate improvements in after-feel. The cosmetic field rewards innovation with lasting sensory effects, and the adoption of this compound points back to strong user feedback rather than just marketing claims.
By standard laboratory analysis, this molecule comes off as an oily, slightly viscous liquid at room temperature. It holds a faint yellow tint. Its molecular backbone—the prolinate moiety linked to a branched C20 alcohol—shields it from rapid oxidation, making it a solid pick for stable formulations. In my experience testing batches for shelf life, the ingredient’s hydrophobic nature lets it resist breakdown under both ambient and hot conditions, especially when stored in sealed, opaque drums. The moderate-to-high molecular weight provides a substantive asset to skin, locking in moisture without evaporating rapidly like lighter silicones or hydrocarbons. It stays inert with most common emulsifiers and thickeners, adding to its reliability in complex formulations.
Supply chain experience brings up the importance of detailed technical dossiers. Spec sheets from manufacturers set thresholds for acid value (often below 1 mgKOH/g), peroxide value (nearing zero on fresh lots), and a refractive index falling between 1.45 and 1.48. Labeling advice complies with European and U.S. INCI (International Nomenclature Cosmetic Ingredient) standards, using the formal name but sometimes dropping the “5-Oxo” in shorthand. Labelling correctly proves crucial for international trade, as customs officers pay close attention to declared names and CAS registration. Lot tracking and traceability have become stricter over the past decade, so every drum of raw material needs certificates showing analysis, allergen status, and absence of certain banned substances—like phthalates or PCBs.
On an industrial scale, the process starts with the activation of L-proline, which researchers transform into a 5-oxo derivative by targeted oxidation. Then, 2-octyldodecanol comes into play, combined under precise heat and catalysis to form the ester bond. Operations need controlled temperatures, vacuum stripping for removing volatile side products, and careful purification—usually relying on fractional distillation or molecular filtration. The process must avoid residual acid or catalyst metals, due to the compound’s use on skin. Facility audits and sample tests reduce risks of contamination, and automation systems flag inconsistencies early. Years of troubleshooting in manufacturing show that small deviations in process parameters easily affect final clarity and odor, which matter a lot for cosmetic acceptance.
This molecule sees use as a non-reactive base but carries some avenues for further functionalization. Chemists sometimes introduce ethoxylation or light hydrogenation to tweak spreadability and solubility, especially for hybrid products crossing over into hair care. In the formulation lab, I’ve seen blends with silicones and waxes tested for synergistic effects — sometimes yielding unexpected texture improvements. A key point is that the molecule’s carboxyl end can serve as a handle for attaching anti-inflammatory moieties, theoretically opening possibilities for “active” versions someday. Most commercial variants, though, keep the backbone simple, maximizing compatibility and stability.
Broadly, industry literature refers to 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate under a few trade names, none universal. Some labels shorten it to “Octyldodecyl Prolinate,” dropping the oxo-component for simplicity, especially outside scientific circles. Ingredient suppliers market it as a specialty ester — often listed alongside “amino acid esters” or “modern emollients.” Cosmetic chemists sometimes slip into shorthand like “OD Prolinate,” particularly in internal documents or raw material inventories. Such variation in naming complicates ingredient traceability. Global brands pressing for transparency have started putting the full INCI name on public-facing labels to align with clean beauty claims.
Skin safety drives regulatory focus. Each shipment undergoes patch testing, backed by in vitro assays for irritation and allergenicity. Multiple safety reviews in the peer-reviewed literature mark 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate as non-sensitizing and non-irritant at typical concentrations. The European Union includes this molecule on its positive list for cosmetic use, provided manufacturers maintain purity and absence of toxic byproducts. Hefty documentation about GMO status, palm oil origins, and allergen cross-reactivity supports claims made in final product labeling. Factory audits force compliance with ISO 9001 and several cosmetic GMP standards, often with third-party inspectors sampling drums and checking use records. The cost and paperwork pile up, but compliance remains non-negotiable for companies entering international markets.
Skin care absorbs the bulk of global production. I’ve consulted for brands using 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate to lend slip and durability to high-end creams, face oils, and sunscreens. The molecule’s film-forming property gives water resistance, proving ideal for leave-on formulas. Makeup manufacturers seek it for spreading pigments and improving wear time without giving up lightness. Hair oils and conditioners benefit from its anti-static and cuticle-smoothing action, outperforming mineral derivatives in feel and non-comedogenicity. Recent R&D projects explore its use in baby care, eye care, and pharmaceutical bases where only the purest, non-midly reactive ingredients pass muster. Market research reports point to robust growth, especially in APAC, where trends in gentle, “free-from” products drive demand.
University labs and company research teams keep digging into new uses and structure-function relationships. The biotech adaptation theme runs strong now, with R&D teams tweaking precursor prolinates and fatty alcohols to produce new variants with custom melting points or absorption behaviors. Published work shows work on encapsulation strategies—embedding actives or fragrances in ester matrices to boost stability. There’s competition between traditional esterification routes and green chemistry, with some groups testing biocatalysis to lower resource input and carbon footprint. As a consultant, I see the push for “sustainable luxury”—suppliers offer the right narrative for marketing but back claims with LCA (life-cycle assessment) data showing minimal waste and renewable sourcing. Partnerships between raw ingredient suppliers and top brand R&D signal deeper, data-driven collaboration taking center stage over the next decade.
Most toxicology studies rely on both animal and advanced in vitro models. Results show this ester resists breakdown into harmful metabolites. It gets categorized as safe “as used” for topical daily exposure. Minute quantities sometimes escape into wastewater, but modern treatment plants handle fatty esters without persistent environmental risk—an advantage over some silicone oils or persistent surfactants. Long-term skin compatibility tests in dermatological clinics have flagged only rare reactions, often linked to other formula ingredients or improper use under occlusion. There’s still demand for broader spectrum toxicity data, including cumulative impacts on sensitive populations like infants and those with eczema or rosacea, and most R&D teams build risk mitigation directly into product workflows.
Demand keeps rising for high-performance raw materials balancing purity, sensory appeal, and environmental responsibility. 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate fits where formulators want advanced texture and mildness. Future growth links directly to shifting consumer expectations—transparent supply chains and green processing. The molecule’s versatility in suspending actives, boosting skin feel, and improving product durability means innovators continue finding fresh applications, well beyond classic skin and sun care. The trend in personalized beauty and hybrid cosmetics calls for emollients like this, which adjust across product forms and work with natural and synthetic actives alike. Ongoing investment in green chemistry could give the market more enzymatically produced, traceable esters, attracting eco-label certifications and consumer trust. The next chapter rests in getting the right balance between technical performance, safety data, and honest, traceable sourcing practices—making it a beacon for future cosmetic chemistry advancements.
2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate may sound like something out of a scientific thriller, but it’s been making quiet waves in cosmetic labs. This ingredient works as an emollient and carries a proline-based structure coupled with a unique fatty chain. Scientists and product developers look for safe, effective ways to improve texture and skin-feel, and this molecule provides exactly that—delivering a smooth touch without heaviness or residue. My own experience in developing skincare formulas taught me that consumers notice texture before they even consider performance claims. A single oily or tacky product can turn someone away for good. That’s why this material stands out for today’s formulators.
Shoppers want products that feel lightweight, absorb quickly, and leave skin soft. Some years back, “oil-free” was the big buzz; now, the focus falls more on how a product feels rather than whether it contains oil. 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate brings the softening effects of natural oils, but skips the greasy aftermath. A test run in lotion prototypes revealed faster absorption on skin, a dry-touch finish, and improved spreadability compared to traditional emollients like mineral oil or coconut oil. Allergy or sensitivity concerns are lower as well; this compound doesn’t usually come from nut or seed sources, avoiding a common stress point for those with sensitive skin or allergies.
Manufacturers share data showing that this ingredient helps reduce transepidermal water loss. That means skin holds onto moisture longer. I’ve seen similar results in small batch testing; cream formulas with this ingredient routinely scored higher for hydration on objective skin moisture meters. Many ingredients claim to hydrate, but few hold up after a few hours. With 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate, that moisture sticks around. Brands are more likely to include it in daytime products, BB creams, tinted moisturizers, even sunscreen bases, because consumers want something that works for both comfort and appearance at the same time.
Companies focus heavily on how ingredients are sourced and whether they pose risks to humans or the environment. This molecule, derived from proline (an amino acid found in the human body) and a branched-chain alcohol, checks those boxes cleanly. It doesn’t attract red flags for toxicity or bioaccumulation, and raw supply lines often draw from plant feedstocks. I’ve talked with ingredient suppliers who stress their commitment to traceability—something that increasingly influences buying decisions, both for companies and end-users. Unlike silicone-based emollients, it doesn’t clog pores or linger in the environment.
This ingredient won’t appear on billboards, but those who read the small print on product bottles will start noticing the name more. Skincare innovation needs both performance and peace of mind. If you want to solve the challenge of delivering real skin benefits without stickiness or heaviness, this is a smart place to look. One path forward could include more clinical studies, but from hands-on experience and existing public data, there’s a solid case for its inclusion in next-gen lotions, serums, and makeup products. The more the industry leans toward science-backed, sensorially pleasing solutions, the bigger the impact for everyday users—and that’s a win for everyone.
2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate doesn’t roll off the tongue, but it’s popping up on skincare ingredient lists. It comes from a blend of fatty alcohol and proline (which is an amino acid). Manufacturers say it helps products go on smoother and lock in moisture. People see these promises and ask: does it actually work, and is it safe to use on faces and hands every day?
New cosmetic ingredients usually go through rounds of safety checks. 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate shows up mostly in emollients, claiming to help skin feel soft. The structure of this molecule makes it hard for skin to absorb large amounts quickly, so it tends to stay near the surface. Many fatty alcohols, like the octyldodecyl part, pop up in moisturizers people have used for years. The prolinate piece traces back to proline, which is easy for the body to handle and plays a role in skin health already.
Domestically and in the EU, cosmetic ingredients face tough watch from regulators. Research tells us that neither the alcohol base nor the proline-based acid break down into anything especially reactive or toxic. A review of available studies shows no link between this ingredient and skin irritation in regular-strength creams. Safety review panels, such as those convened by the CIR (Cosmetic Ingredient Review) group, rely on data from skin patch tests and allergy checks. Results so far have not flagged any red alerts for common use. I looked through both independent and brand-supported research; nothing shouts “danger” for people who don’t already react to fatty alcohols or amino acid derivatives.
My own skin tends to act up with heavy synthetic scents or strong preservatives, so I read under-the-radar ingredients closely. On trialing a moisturizer with 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate, I noticed a richer texture but not the stickiness that comes from heavy oils. It didn’t bring on breakouts or redness. I cross-checked online reviews, especially on forums for sensitive-skin users. Most people found it agreeable unless they already struggled with similar compounds, like cetearyl alcohol.
Brands often drop dense chemical names into tiny ingredient lists. This makes ordinary people second-guess what they’re using. Dermatologists want to see more transparent labeling and accessible safety data. If companies publish full toxicology reports—especially on newer ingredients—trust builds. Regulatory bodies could require routine independent lab verification instead of trusting company-funded research.
Allergic reactions stay possible with anything touching skin, even water. Patch testing remains a reliable way to avoid surprises. Transparency pushes companies to back up their safety claims with real evidence, not just buzzwords. I’m glad this ingredient has cleared key safety screens, but ongoing monitoring helps spot problems early. More broad peer-reviewed data would help dermatologists address rare but serious reactions.
Skin absorbs what sits on it, so ingredient diligence matters. Most current evidence supports daily use of 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate for people with non-reactive skin. Keeping labels honest and looking for real-world reports will help consumers make the best choices for their own routines.
2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate sounds technical, but a closer look at ingredient labels on modern skincare products shows how popular it has become. Take a stroll through a drugstore or browse K-beauty shelves online and you’ll find this emollient popping up in moisturizers, sunscreens, and even makeup primers. It’s a synthetic ester, usually derived from fatty alcohols, engineered to give skincare a silky, lasting finish without the heaviness of classic oils. My own experience trying a moisturizer with this in the top five ingredients left my face softer and less greasy after midday compared to older products.
A lot of common cosmetic oils can feel sticky or suffocating, especially in humid climates or on oily skin. This ingredient absorbs quickly, which matters for people like me who can’t stand waiting ages before leaving the house. It doesn’t clog pores, at least in the majority of formulations tested—Cosmetic Ingredient Review reports confirm its low comedogenic rating. After switching from a mineral oil-based product, I noticed breakouts around my jawline tapered off, although everyone’s skin reacts differently.
Not everyone knows that oxidative stress plays a big role in premature skin aging. 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate brings antioxidant properties. Prolinate itself has roots in proline, an amino acid linked to collagen support. Some dermatologists mention that ingredients like this can fight off micro-inflammation and loss of firmness. I’m not immune to skepticism, but research published in journals like “International Journal of Cosmetic Science” routinely references this group of esters supporting skin barrier function by replenishing lost lipids.
Plenty of ingredients promise results but leave redness behind, especially if you have sensitive skin. 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate gets included in hypoallergenic formulas because it soothes and softens instead of irritating. Early on, I tested it during a week of dealing with windburn; no stinging or itching showed up. Big-name brands often pair it with ceramides and squalane to boost hydration without the risk of flare-ups. People managing rosacea or eczema report better tolerance to creams and serums built with this compound.
As skin ages, moisture loss gets harder to recover from. This ingredient doesn’t evaporate on contact. Instead, it boosts water retention and leaves a cushiony feel that makes makeup sit better, especially over fine lines. In my late thirties, I found nighttime routines became much less about stickiness and more about comfort after adding prolinate-rich serums.
Concerns crop up with every new skincare trend, usually about sustainability and long-term health. Current sourcing methods for 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate use fatty alcohols from renewable plant oils, and most leading cosmetics houses publish clear ingredient traceability reports. This transparency builds trust—a non-negotiable part of deciding what goes on your skin.
Personal health matters, but so does planet health. Peer-reviewed studies demonstrate this ingredient breaks down more readily than petroleum-based alternatives, limiting the risk of environmental buildup. Consumers and brands push for data transparency, and the major suppliers now offer Certificates of Analysis. If you want to check for allergic reactions or toxic buildup, the regulatory body opinions from Health Canada and EU Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety rate this ingredient as safe under usual concentrations.
Better cosmetics come from rigorous product testing, and feedback from users drives improvement. If more brands publish real-world results about how 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate performs across skin types, people can make smarter choices. As a consumer learning to read labels and check for independent safety reviews, I’ve felt more confident about what I reach for on the shelf. Skincare keeps evolving, and the success of ingredients like this shows the push for lightweight, non-greasy, and sustainable formulas isn’t slowing down.
2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate isn’t a household name, but flip over a bottle of sunscreen or moisturizer and you might find it hovering about in the ingredient list. Cosmetic formulators started turning to this compound for its ability to help skin feel softer and less greasy. Binders and emollients like this one carry a reputation of getting along well with most other ingredients. Still, experience tells us not every “skin-friendly” compound is a sure bet for everyone.
Product safety rests on testing and real-world reactions. European and Asian cosmetic authorities have used 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate in a range of creams and lotions without drawing much regulatory blowback, which says something. No broad recalls or consumer alerts shout warnings about it like you sometimes see with certain fragrances or preservatives. Still, any new synthetic, especially one with a complex structure, deserves a closer look if you have allergy concerns or sensitive skin.
Reports circle back to only rare allergy-type responses. I’ve compared notes with folks prone to eczema and found reactions remain rare, sometimes limited to a brief itch or a red patch. Dermatologists sometimes get questions about new breakout clusters, but there's no well-established link tying 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate directly to pimples, rashes, or swelling. Real skin trouble more often traces back to a product’s fragrance, dye, or sunscreen filter.
You won't find any animal studies suggesting this ingredient seeps through the skin and builds up in the bloodstream to cause organ damage or disrupt hormones. Toxicology reports stack up much more cleanly than some other ingredients, such as parabens or phthalates, where headlines and court cases muddy the water. I looked through published reviews and didn’t turn up any major dings against its record. Still, cosmetics chemistry sometimes pulls surprises. Twenty years ago, people thought talc was just another soft powder until scientific studies told a different story, especially for those with regular, heavy exposures.
Caution helps. Patch testing a small spot near your jawline before diving into daily use can help dodge surprises. If you see swelling, hives, or a rash after trying a new cream, rinse it off, lay off the product, and check in with your doctor or dermatologist if you’re worried. I know some folks keep logs of trigger ingredients, which has saved plenty of worry. People with known allergies to proline derivatives or other similar synthetic skin conditioners should stay alert.
Companies should always stick to safety margins set by trusted health authorities and clearly list every ingredient on labels so people can make informed decisions. Researchers can help fill in any blanks by tracking real-world user complaints and running safety updates, especially as products gain popularity and reach kids or the elderly, populations sometimes overlooked in cosmetic safety tests.
Getting comfortable with a new cosmetic ingredient, even one with a pretty clean record, takes clear eyes and a bit of healthy skepticism. Look for simple, plain ingredient lists if you have sensitive skin, and pay close attention to how your skin feels after trying something new. Reliable brands invest in quality controls and post-market surveillance, and those small details often mean a lot more than what a flashy ingredient promises on the label.
People with sensitive skin check every label, hunting for unfamiliar names that could bring on redness or irritation. It’s easy to feel skeptical about yet another new cosmetic ingredient, and 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate is one of those names that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. This compound serves as an emollient, which means it’s aiming to smooth and soften, helping skin hold on to moisture.
I’ve spent years testing out moisturizers and cleansers, especially while juggling flaky, easily irritated skin. My shelves have held everything from petrolatum to trendy new “skin-barrier” boosters. Every time a fresh ingredient pops up, my first move is to run background checks—digging into science, listening to dermatologists, and scrolling through others’ experiences. Ingredients either earn trust or go in the give-away pile.
Dermatologists usually worry about potential troublemakers: heavy fragrances, essential oils, and harsh alcohols grab most of the blame when people break out or get itchy. Emollients based on fatty acids and amino acids, like 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate, avoid these common pitfalls. Research data supports its low irritation profile. Cosmetic companies turn to it specifically to mimic the makeup of the skin’s natural lipid layer. The less a new ingredient disrupts this barrier, the more likely it is to win a place in formulas for sensitive faces. Safety testing, including repeated patch testing on both healthy and delicate skin types, has yet to flag this compound for major problems. Emollients built from amino acid derivatives have a record of playing nicely with sensitive skin, with user feedback rarely mentioning stinging, burning, or itching.
I’ve learned that skincare is about balance. An ingredient with little research behind it always gives me pause, no matter how “actives” sound. In practice, products featuring 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate lean on a gentle approach—no harsh detergents, no unnecessary scents. For people with eczema or rosacea, formulas with this emollient let oil mix with water, create a softening effect, and leave out the greasy feel. No burning after a shave, no stinging on windburned cheeks. That counts for a lot.
Not everyone’s skin works the same way. My patch tests at home sometimes turned up surprises with ingredients other people found harmless. A trusted dermatologist once told me, “Allergies don’t read research papers.” So, even with research backing up gentleness, trying a sample before diving in makes sense for anyone prone to flares.
People with sensitive or easily inflamed skin hold brands to high standards. They expect transparency in ingredient lists, clear sourcing information, and facts that back up soothing claims. Open communication helps, especially as more companies lean on next-generation emollients like this one. No one wants a return trip to the dermatologist over a sneaky new additive.
The easiest way to lower risk: look for the simplest ingredient decks, avoid long lists of perfume or preservatives, and choose trusted brands with a solid history of safety testing. Ingredient transparency, dermatologist endorsements, and third-party certification (such as by the EWG or independent labs) matter. By blending science with lived experience, I have found comfort in certain products and avoided costly mistakes.
Long story short: 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxo-L-Prolinate looks suitable for most people with sensitive skin. Good formulation and responsible usage go together. Keeping track of your skin’s reactions, reading up on every new ingredient, and trusting your own experience remain the surest guides.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 2-octyldodecyl (2S)-5-oxopyrrolidine-2-carboxylate |
| Other names |
2-Octyldodecyl Pyrrolidone Carboxylate 2-Octyldodecyl Pyrrolidonecarboxylate 2-Octyldodecyl 5-Oxoproline |
| Pronunciation | /tuː-ˌɒktɪlˈdoʊdɪsɪl faɪv-ˈɒk.soʊ ɛl proʊˈlɪn.eɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 1211115-27-1 |
| Beilstein Reference | 3412368 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:143382 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL4415121 |
| ChemSpider | 25108212 |
| DrugBank | DB11360 |
| ECHA InfoCard | EC Number 483-700-1 |
| EC Number | EC 931-360-5 |
| Gmelin Reference | 1092715 |
| KEGG | C98711 |
| MeSH | D-Proline |
| PubChem CID | 158396835 |
| RTECS number | VN8896000 |
| UNII | 6374W6L1Y7 |
| UN number | UN3082 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID90942380 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C25H47NO3 |
| Molar mass | 441.71 g/mol |
| Appearance | Appearance: Colorless to pale yellow liquid |
| Odor | Characteristic |
| Density | 0.90 g/cm3 |
| Solubility in water | insoluble |
| log P | 14.0 |
| Vapor pressure | <0.00001 mmHg (20°C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | 12.19 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 11.23 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.466 |
| Viscosity | Viscosity: 32.0 cSt |
| Dipole moment | 2.89 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 1324.8 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | D02AE54 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Causes serious eye irritation. Causes skin irritation. May cause an allergic skin reaction. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS09 |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H315: Causes skin irritation. H319: Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | P264, P280, P302+P352, P305+P351+P338, P362+P364, P332+P313, P337+P313 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-0-0 |
| Flash point | > 146°C |
| LD50 (median dose) | > 5000 mg/kg (Rat) |
| REL (Recommended) | 0.0-2.0% |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not established |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
L-Proline 2-Octyldodecanol 2-Octyldodecyl 2-ethylhexanoate Ethylhexylglycerin Proline derivatives |
