Chemists started tinkering with sulfonic acid derivatives in the hunt for stable, water-soluble buffers. Picture academic labs in the 1960s crowded with glassware and white coats, and out of that bustle, someone mixed up 2-[Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)Amino]Ethanesulphonic acid—often called BES. Researchers wanted a buffer that didn’t mess with enzymes or proteins, and BES came in handy pretty quick. Once word got out, the use of BES stretched across biochemical experiments, later finding its mark in industrial and clinical circles. Unlike more basic buffering agents, BES could handle the delicate dance required in pH measurement. Through the years, BES became a staple, and companies began standardizing production, making sure a reliable product appeared on the shelves of both research and manufacturing labs.
Walk into any life sciences supply warehouse and ask for BES, and most attendants don’t blink. The compound typically comes as a white crystalline powder, known for its high solubility in water. Most bottles of BES sport purity levels north of 99%, minimizing background interference in sensitive reactions. Its shelf stability owes much to its chemical backbone: N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)amino group paired with an ethanesulfonic acid moiety. Labs dealing with proteins, nucleic acids, or even high-precision calibration tasks value BES because once you dissolve it, the pH doesn’t drift wildly as temperature or concentrations shift. Suppliers usually tuck away any heavy metal content below sub-ppm levels, and you can always find documentation stating it meets reagent or molecular biology grade criteria.
BES appears as a free-flowing white powder, dense but not clumpy. In the palm, it feels a bit slick—like a fine sugar substitute— which makes weighing it easy in drafty labs. The melting point hover around 260°C before it decomposes. The pKa comes in close to 7.1 at room temperature, a sweet spot for many biological processes. Chemists appreciate its freedom from strong UV absorbance, which means adding BES into sensitive assays doesn’t throw off readouts. Solubility numbers for water go up to about 1 M; anything more and it turns syrupy. The presence of two hydroxyethyl groups provides a bit of chemical heft, preventing unwanted redox shifts, while the sulfonic acid keeps everything nice and ionic. It remains chemically inert with most biochemicals at working concentrations and stands up to repeated autoclaving cycles without noticeable breakdown.
Bottles of BES usually feature clear manufacturer data sheets. Data include product code, batch number, purity, molecular formula (C6H15NO5S), and molecular weight hovering near 213.25 g/mol. Labels carry handling statements, storage temperatures—generally between 2°C and 8°C—and a warning to keep it sealed against humidity. Proper labeling goes beyond regulatory box-ticking; it lets labs trace potential source problems if an experiment goes sideways. High-purity BES has documentation for endotoxin and heavy metal levels, making it a mainstay when prepping buffers for cell cultures or enzyme assays. Some suppliers offer certification for GMP manufacturing or specific uses like clinical diagnostics, underscoring the push for reliable sourcing.
To make BES, synthetic chemists usually start with ethylene oxide and monoethanolamine, combining these to form the basic N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)ethylenediamine structure. This intermediate then faces sulfonation—often with ethanesulfonic acid chloride or similar sulfonating agents. The process runs under tightly controlled temperatures, and careful adjustment helps achieve high yield while minimizing tough-to-remove byproducts. After the reaction, filtration and repeated crystallization help purify the product, with final washes removing any unreacted feedstocks or side products. The drying step, often done under vacuum, brings out that familiar snow-white finish everyone in the trade knows. Consistently clean product hinges on good process controls, a truth that shows up in every high-performing biochemical supply firm.
BES stands up to routine lab treatment thanks to its chemical stability. Its hydroxyethyl arms rarely participate in spontaneous side reactions under regular conditions, which is why enzyme and cell biologists lean on it. Exposure to strong acids or bases causes degradation, which users avoid by sticking to neutral pH ranges. In organic synthesis, chemists sometimes exploit the sulfonic acid group for temporary ionic tagging or to mask reactivity elsewhere in a molecule. While direct structural modification of BES remains uncommon, creative minds in chemical biology have occasionally attached reporter groups or affinity tags under mild conditions, using the hydroxy groups for coupling. Handling the compound in typical aqueous solutions sees no risky exotherms or weird odors, a major plus compared with some aminosulfonic cousins.
Ask around for BES, and that acronym pops up almost every time. The systematic label—N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-aminoethanesulfonic acid—makes appearances in more formal inventories. In regulatory papers or supplier catalogs, you might meet names such as Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)aminoethanesulfonic acid, or for clarity, 2-(Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)amino)ethanesulfonic acid. On the clinical or diagnostics side, people sometimes refer to it simply as “Good’s buffer BES,” after Norman Good, whose team charted the landscape of biological buffers. CAS registry numbers and EC references show up on safety data sheets, cementing the identity of BES across regions and industries.
BES doesn’t smell, fume, or explode in warm air. Like many fine lab powders, it can irritate skin, eyes, or lungs if handled carelessly, so wearing gloves, goggles, and a dust mask remains best practice. Anyone who has wiped powder from a benchtop knows how easily it travels. Its toxicity profile stays benign, but repeated contact still dries out the skin, and direct inhalation triggers mild coughing. Safeguards for storing BES look like most lab chemicals: sealed jars, dry shelves, labeled bins. In my years working with buffers, I’ve seen more problems from poor labeling or spills than from any chemical hazard. The simplicity of BES means no wild “reactivity hazards,” but quality operations treat every spill as a cleanup job—not just a quick swipe. Larger scale users sometimes set up vacuum lines or extraction hoods, particularly when handling drum quantities for food or pharma buffers.
The reach of BES stretches far beyond academic pH adjustment. Research labs use it to fine-tune buffer systems for protein purification, DNA extraction, and cell culture. Hospitals lean on its stable pH for some diagnostic kits, where enzyme behavior needs tight control. In biotechnology manufacturing, BES plays a crucial role in scaling up cell lines for vaccine or therapeutic protein production, where small pH shifts can cause costly batch failures. Electronics factories sometimes use BES-based cleaning solutions for sensitive circuit work, thanks to its mild reactivity. Water treatment specialists use BES to maintain pH in systems monitoring trace metals or organics, because the buffer doesn’t skew their readings. I’ve seen BES perform in chromatography, crystallography experiments, and even in food testing, showing just how versatile and trusted this buffer has become.
Buffer chemistry never rests. Teams keep looking for tweaks to improve BES’s stability, minimize any potential interference in complex assays, and lower the environmental impact of synthesis. Analytical chemists have studied how BES compares to alternative buffers under stress—think freezing, thawing, or long-term storage—and the verdict points to solid reliability, though there is always room for less packaging waste or greener feedstocks. Niche projects target functionalizing BES for targeted drug delivery or molecular probing, taking advantage of its chemical inertness. Partnerships between academic groups and industry keep pushing for bulk production methods with lower energy requirements or less aggressive solvents, making BES a living example of how simple molecules still sit at the heart of modern innovation. A few development outfits are even testing buffered BES systems in sustainable agriculture, banking on its precise control over hydroponic nutrient mixes.
Diving into toxicity, most animal studies show BES ranks low in acute oral or dermal risk, aligning with other Good’s buffers. Investigations into chronic exposure suggest little bioaccumulation and limited metabolic breakdown. Biodata hint that BES doesn’t pose the hazards of aromatic amines or persistent chlorinated sulfonates, which show up in more worrying pollution reports. Researchers in occupational hygiene report few incidents with BES, mostly skin or eye contact complaints on poorly ventilated sites. Environmental testing points to rapid dispersal and breakdown in soil and water, but with the world shifting towards more eco-conscious production, some labs dig into long-term ecotoxicity just to be sure. Regulatory agencies in North America and Europe track supplier compliance, but so far, BES stands up as a lower-risk alternative in most applications.
BES finds itself on the frontier of buffer technology, riding the need for precision, low-toxicity chemistry. As fields hit greater complexity—think gene editing, precision fermentation, personalized therapies—reliable neutral buffers like BES stand to gain even more ground. Innovation will likely focus on cleaner, less energy-intensive synthesis, improved packaging to cut waste, and tighter analytics for purity. As pharmaceutical and diagnostic kit manufacturers sharpen their standards around trace contaminants, demand for ultra-high purity BES grows. The growing market for bespoke buffers in synthetic biology and advanced materials may push BES into custom formulations and new functional hybrids. On the regulatory front, stricter oversight in Europe and Asia may drive producers toward more evidence-backed safety and shelf-life claims. Out in the field, the next generation of researchers will likely count BES among their default choices, thanks to its proven balance of performance and safety.
You don’t find 2-[Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)Amino]Ethanesulphonic Acid, often called BES, in most kitchens or garages. Step into a modern biology or chemistry lab, though—chances are a few bottles sit among the buffers and reagents. BES, with its long name and even longer track record in research, plays a quiet but crucial role in scientific experiments, especially those that depend on keeping pH steady.
Imagine a scientist studying how enzymes break down sugar. If the pH shifts, even a little, results get skewed or ruined—too acidic or too basic and the data loses its meaning. Here’s where BES steps in. It keeps pH locked in, especially in that slightly acidic to neutral range around pH 7.15. Buffers like BES act like shock absorbers. Drop in acid, add a splash of base, the pH stays near the level researchers set. That reliability makes BES a staple, not just a backup option.
Plenty of buffers fill the shelves: Tris, HEPES, phosphate. Each has upsides and weak points. BES wins favor because it doesn’t muck about with metal ions as much as many others. Enzyme work depends on ions like magnesium or calcium. BES keeps pH balanced without tying up these metal helpers. In personal experience mixing up enzyme reactions, BES holds strong—no weird side effects, no unexpected results caused by buffer interference. It's especially useful in electrophoresis, that classic gel experiment where scientists separate proteins or DNA by size. BES lets everything run clean and clear, so bands don’t blur and mistakes fall away.
Beyond academic labs, hospitals use BES in diagnostic kits. Blood tests many have taken rely on chemical buffers to keep substances stable or reactions in check. Lots of diagnostics tools, like immunoassays, need precise conditions to give a clear result. When lives depend on accuracy, scientists and technicians turn to methods they trust. BES stands out because it’s strong enough to weather sudden changes in conditions and pure enough for sensitive reactions.
Chemists always ask what happens after experiments wind down. BES doesn’t carry the same risks that harsh acids or heavy metals bring. Even so, safety sheets list a few hazards—irritation, mainly—so lab coats and gloves stay on. Researchers flush leftover buffer with care, watching for local rules and making sure nothing harmful ends up in the water supply. Cleaner chemicals lead to less hassle later, whether working in universities or industry.
Green chemistry looks for safer, more sustainable tools. BES isn’t perfect, but it stacks up well against many synthetic chemicals out there. Labs keep looking for better ways, but for now, BES stands as a solid choice for balancing precise science with day-to-day responsibility.
Take a regular jar of peanut butter. Leave it open on a humid shelf for a week, and it starts to taste funny. Now imagine a medicine, some fertilizer, or even a paint that ends up in the wrong spot—think what could go wrong. Storing a product isn't about stashing it anywhere. It's about keeping quality, safety, and trust intact.
I once saw a warehouse where bags of flour sat right under a leaking air vent. Mold crept through almost every sack before anyone noticed. Small mistakes like dampness, unchecked light, or heat can spoil a product faster than most realize. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration reports that about 10% of medical recalls trace back to improper storage. Storing something the wrong way wastes money and creates real risk.
Many items—medicines, foods, chemicals—have specific temperature and humidity ranges for good reason. Penicillin loses power above 25°C. Chocolate turns grainy and white in the sun. A bit of basic knowledge and commitment goes a long way.
Storing things right has saved me headaches more times than I can count. If we're talking about perishable food, cool and dry shelves or reliable fridges do the job. Sticky candy, cookies, and bread all last longer away from light and heat. For medicines, I learned to read those small labels: “Keep in a cool, dry place” usually means under 25°C and away from steamy kitchens or bathrooms. Insulin and some vaccines go straight to the fridge door, not the freezer.
Personal experience taught me the value of regular checks. Dust, insects, and broken packaging must go. Shelves should be sturdy—not just for safety, but also to avoid spills or cross-contamination.
Chemical products like fertilizers, paints, or solvents deserve extra care. Never mix bases with acids, and keep oxidizers far from organic materials. My uncle had a shed fire after stacking pool chemicals next to old towels—lesson learned.
Thermometers, hygrometers, and even simple mobile alerts can help track storage. Modern warehouses “see” their conditions in real time. At home, a digital fridge thermometer warns if milk has gotten too warm. RFID tags track medicines’ history from the factory to the pharmacy. Stronger packaging that blocks oxygen and light stretches shelf life and cuts waste.
Training makes or breaks storage habits. Workers should know what to look for: damaged seals, open containers, changes in smell or color. At home, I check the pantry monthly and have a rule that new groceries go to the back. It keeps older ones from gathering dust.
Industry players need clear protocols—easy-to-understand signs, color-coded shelves, and regular inspections. Policies that require temperature logs and batch tracking don’t just cover legal bases; they help spot trouble before it grows.
If a product lasts longer or stays safer because of these conditions, it saves everyone—producers, stores, and customers—a lot of money and stress.
Getting storage conditions right isn't just good business. It prevents lost stock, stops sickness, and builds real trust in products. Every time someone sticks to the basics—cool, dry, clean, protected—they cut problems before they start.
Many people think hazardous materials only show up in factories or construction sites. The truth is, most folks walk right past these materials every day without noticing. Take common household cleaners or paint thinner. The label often gives warnings in small letters: flammable, toxic, corrosive. Messages like these usually blend into the background until something goes wrong. Years ago, I worked at a hardware store. One customer carried a broken bleach bottle up to the register, unaware the leak was slowly eating through his plastic grocery bag. That day made me realize hazard labels aren’t just about regulations—they actually save people from serious harm.
For businesses, ignoring hazardous material rules can get expensive fast. OSHA reports show that every year, thousands of workers end up in the hospital because a toxic chemical wasn’t labeled right, or spilled, or mixed when it shouldn’t be. A single violation racks up fines, legal costs, and sometimes even criminal charges. Beyond that, a bad incident can kill a business’s reputation overnight. I remember a local garage that got shut down because they ignored rules about waste oil and solvents. You don’t get a do-over after the EPA shows up on your doorstep.
Hauling chemicals or flammable goods on highways calls for special training and equipment. Truck drivers carry papers with details about every load because police and first responders count on that information in an accident. Back in high school, a semi carrying pool chemicals rolled over outside my town. Firefighters moved quickly to stop leaks, and the driver’s paperwork gave them a head start. If workers had treated that shipment like a load of bottled water, who knows what could have happened. Storage rules make the same kind of difference. Flammable materials go in fire-rated cabinets. Strong acids stay away from stuff like bleach or ammonia that could react and release toxic gas.
Most problems with hazardous materials start small. Someone skips gloves. A warning sign goes missing. Containers don’t get closed tight. Simple routines—washing hands, wearing goggles, reading labels—make the difference between a safe workplace and a news story. A neighbor once poured leftover fertilizer down a storm drain because he didn’t know the rules about disposal. That mistake led to fish dying in our local creek a few days later. Nobody intended harm, but without the right information and some care, accidents stack up fast.
Fixing these issues never boils down to just buying more safety equipment. Grown-ups and students alike need honest, straightforward education. Schools can add lessons on household and lab safety so those lessons stick long after graduation. Employers need to go beyond checklists—leaders should walk the floor, point out risks, and show everyone the right way to handle each product. Companies can set up anonymous hotlines for workers to report close calls or hazards. This isn’t about assigning blame, but about listening and learning every day. Everyone deserves the chance to work, shop, and live without fear of hidden dangers. It starts with understanding what’s in the bottle on the shelf—and never taking those warning labels for granted.
Purity in a chemical doesn’t just tell you how clean something looks under a microscope; it plays a direct role in how a product works and in its safety. In the lab during my studies, we would get different containers labeled with terms such as “reagent grade,” “ACS grade,” or “technical grade.” Each tag describes a level of cleanliness and the amount of contaminant allowed, details that can determine success or failure in experiments.
Chemical manufacturers don’t just slap a purity value on the label. Reagent grade chemicals support research and laboratory testing, and these must not introduce any impurities that would cloud the results. Pharmaceutical grade goes even further, since a mistake there could affect people’s health and safety. On the other side, industries like agriculture or construction rely on technical grade, which doesn’t come with such tight restrictions. For them, small traces of impurities don't always ruin the end result.
Consider an everyday product like table salt. Regular table salt doesn’t carry the same pure message as pharmaceutical sodium chloride sitting on a hospital cart. Minor impurities in table salt don’t usually matter on your plate, but those same impurities could create big problems in an IV drip. The same basic concept holds for solvents, metals, acids, and other chemicals across the board.
Back in a college chemistry lab, if we picked the wrong bottle, our whole experiment could go sideways. In business, mistakes like that aren’t just inconvenient—they can get expensive fast. Semiconductor manufacturing, for example, demands the purest chemicals around, because any rogue speck can ruin a microchip. A story I remember from a friend who worked in a semiconductor factory: A less-pure acid found its way into the cleaning process, and an entire batch turned into scrap. Just one impurity can do that kind of damage.
No one can check chemical composition with their eyes. Manufacturers and suppliers have the job of providing transparent data in the form of Certificates of Analysis or detailed spec sheets. These reports give consumers and businesses the information needed to avoid nasty surprises. Certificates don’t just serve as paperwork; they represent a promise about what’s inside each barrel or bottle.
Sadly, faked certificates and overblown claims occasionally make headlines, putting trust at risk. That’s why lab testing—either in third-party or in-house facilities—protects buyers. In my experience, the labs that invest in their own quality checks usually develop a reputation for reliability, because their customers start to rely on them for more than just price.
Better training for buyers and end-users can cut down the confusion. For students, early lab classes need to cover the real meaning of each grade of purity, connecting labels to practical work. Businesses do well when they work with reputable suppliers, ones who encourage site visits or audits, not just marketing brochures and tall promises.
Digital systems and traceability tools now offer hope, as they can track each batch from raw materials to finished product. This helps spot problems fast, supporting strong supply chains and consumer safety. Purity levels carry more weight than many people realize—whether in food, medicine, or technology, a focus on the details pays off.
Anyone who has spent time preparing buffers in a lab knows how tempting it gets to just “eyeball” concentrations, especially on busy days. Maybe you’ve worked with 10 mM phosphate buffer for routine DNA isolation or 50 mM Tris for protein work. My early days in academic research taught me pretty quickly: buffer concentration can make or break a result.
You’ll hear that most biological research uses buffers in the 10–100 mM range. Take Tris, HEPES, phosphate, or acetate—these sit comfortably at 20 to 50 mM in protocols found in respected journals. For cell culture, 25 mM HEPES supports pH stability without hurting cell health. Protein purification setups often rely on 20 mM Tris for its gentle control. Go below 5 mM, and you might notice stubborn pH shifts; push above 200 mM and side effects creep in, like altered protein activity or disrupted ion balances.
Buffer concentration shapes the outcome. Low concentration allows sharp pH changes, undermining enzyme assays or cell growth. But a buffer that’s too strong pulls its own weight—high ionic strength can nudge protein folding or disrupt enzyme active sites. Having seen colleagues troubleshoot inexplicable PCR failures or lost months on recombinant protein work, I’ve learned to stick to published ranges, testing a new buffer recipe before trusting it with a key experiment.
Peer-reviewed studies say that for most biological applications, 10–50 mM works. A survey of clinical diagnostic labs shows 20 mM Tris-HCl as a standard. The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) notes 40 mM as a sweet spot for many applications, with some tools listing 10, 25 and 50 mM as the most repeatable. In chromatography, phosphate buffers don’t go past 100 mM unless a specific binding effect is tested. Keeping osmolarity in check is crucial: tissue culture buffer at 150 mM sodium chloride matches blood's own, preventing cellular stress.
Labs aren’t just about following recipes. Good science stays credible through repeating what works. If a drug test changes culture media from 10 mM to 200 mM buffer, results could differ enough to confuse or mislead a whole team. Outside of research, I’ve watched food companies tinker with buffer recipes—small tweaks can affect shelf life or safety tests. Medical technology companies keep to tried-and-true buffer strengths, knowing licensing bodies review every detail.
Any time you face a new experiment or method, check published work. Try starting at 10–20 mM for general cell work, 20–50 mM for molecular biology, and never assume stronger is better. Batch consistency means weighing reagents carefully and adjusting pH at the right temperature. Working in a team? Write concentrations clearly on bottles. I’ve kicked myself for skipping this step more than once—no one wins when you have to throw out an entire day’s data for a mislabeled buffer.
Set up a mini test: measure pH stability over time with your intended buffer concentration before starting anything big. If precipitation forms, or if cells seem stressed, dial it back and check your osmolarity and ion composition. Many labs now post quick-glance tables near the buffer-making bench, so no one has to rely on memory during busy runs. Invest time in training new staff to follow best practices for buffer prep—this up-front effort easily pays for itself.
Getting buffer concentration right isn’t flashy—but it underpins every reliable result, every reproducible method, and every confident data point. Sticking with tested concentrations, adjusting thoughtfully, and recording every tweak help avoid guesswork and lost effort. In the lab, as anywhere, sweat the small stuff for results you can trust.
![2-[Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)Amino]Ethanesulphonic Acid](/static/81c4c90b-3bfe-4770-bbec-fcbf5e0a3809/images/2d/2-bis-2-hydroxyethyl-amino-ethanesulphonic-acid.png)
![2-[Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)Amino]Ethanesulphonic Acid](/static/81c4c90b-3bfe-4770-bbec-fcbf5e0a3809/images/3d/2-bis-2-hydroxyethyl-amino-ethanesulphonic-acid.gif)
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | 2-[bis(2-hydroxyethyl)amino]ethane-1-sulfonic acid |
| Other names |
BES N,N-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-aminoethanesulfonic acid N,N-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)taurine N,N-Bis(2-hydroxyethyl)aminoethanesulfonic acid |
| Pronunciation | /tuː bɪs tuː haɪˈdrɒksɪˌɛθɪl əˈmiːnoʊ ˌɛθənˈsoʊfɒnɪk ˈæsɪd/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 6706-59-8 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | `3Dmol.js?modelid=molecule&mol=CCN(CCO)CCOCCS(=O)(=O)O` |
| Beilstein Reference | 4129630 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:39097 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1136 |
| ChemSpider | 16735847 |
| DrugBank | DB08818 |
| ECHA InfoCard | ECHA InfoCard: 03-2119457018-46-0000 |
| EC Number | 652-299-2 |
| Gmelin Reference | 108222 |
| KEGG | C01853 |
| MeSH | D017921 |
| PubChem CID | 78928 |
| RTECS number | WL7520000 |
| UNII | DRT4O12USF |
| UN number | Not classified |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID6013017 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C6H15NO5S |
| Molar mass | 207.24 g/mol |
| Appearance | White crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.216 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | soluble |
| log P | -4.1 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Acidity (pKa) | 7.1 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 1.0 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | −8.0×10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.482 |
| Dipole moment | 8.66 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 229.3 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -1616.6 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -2064 kJ mol⁻¹ |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | B05CX03 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | Causes serious eye irritation. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS hazard statements: H315, H319 |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Hazard statements | H319: Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | P264, P270, P273, P301+P312, P330, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-1-0 |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat): > 5,000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (median dose): Rat oral >10,000 mg/kg |
| NIOSH | RN: 6976-37-0 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL (Permissible Exposure Limit) for 2-[Bis(2-Hydroxyethyl)Amino]Ethanesulphonic Acid: Not Established |
| REL (Recommended) | 10 mg/ml |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
CHES CAPSO CAPS MES HEPES TES Tris ACES |
