Dimethyl succinate, known in labs as DMS, grew from roots in organic chemistry that kicked into gear during the industrial expansion of the early twentieth century. Scientists noticed the potential behind aliphatic dicarboxylic esters, and found succinate derivatives up for investigation. As polymers and solvents grew in demand, the world saw attention drift to straightforward, cost-controlled ways to manufacture DMS. The turn towards petrochemicals in the 1940s spurred steady supply. After the 1970s, as green chemistry picked up steam, fermentation and bio-based approaches added another dimension, pulling DMS out of the shadow of gasoline feedstocks.
DMS works as an intermediate—always in the thick of resin production, plastics, fragrances, and specialty coatings. The structure relies on two methyl groups esterified to the four-carbon backbone of succinate, a small and flexible molecule that doesn’t shy away from new roles. Technicians in labs use it to test reactions or adjust polymer properties, while industrial chemists count on its easy incorporation in process chemistry. In my experience handling chemical portfolios, DMS always gets interest from both fragrance houses and polyester manufacturers, a sign of its tug across industries.
DMS shows up as a clear liquid or colorless crystalline solid, thanks to its modest melting point near room temperature—20 to 30°C. Odor comes across as mild, slightly fruity, almost reminiscent of some light esters in flavor chemistry. Solubility plays out best in common organic solvents like ethanol, ether, and acetone, but not as well in water. The boiling point sits close to 196°C. Chemically, DMS avoids issues with stability under mild acidic or basic conditions, though it won’t hold up if strong alkali attacks the ester bonds. Vapor pressure and flash points line up with similar dialkyl esters, making DMS manageable in typical processing environments.
Industrial DMS products usually ship with labels that spell out concentration, water content (often under 0.2%), purity (commonly above 99%), and residual alcohol or acid values. Standards ask for a transparent appearance and a faint, ester-like smell. Producers control for limits on heavy metals—especially lead, arsenic, and mercury—due to production regulations and food-contact rules. Specifications reach deep, covering checks for refractive index and density to prevent cross-contamination, especially if the next destination includes food additives or pharmaceutical intermediates.
Producers take two proven paths to make DMS. The classic way uses succinic acid and methanol in an esterification reaction, which needs a strong acid catalyst like sulfuric acid. Methanol reacts with succinic acid as water distills off, pushing the process to yield dimethyl succinate. Some groups chase newer biotechnological approaches, harnessing fermentation of sugars and bacteria to yield succinate, which then gets esterified. This switch-up plays into the demand for more sustainable chemical building blocks. Large plants recapture methanol, optimize temperatures, and recycle catalysts to squeeze extra efficiency out of every reaction cycle, a big deal for keeping costs down.
DMS shines when chemists want to build out complex molecules. Under mild hydrolysis, it goes back to succinic acid and methanol, a reversible and clean reaction. Transesterification opens up new esters by swapping out methyl groups for other alcohols in the presence of alkali or acidic catalysts. Hydrogenation can turn the ester into tetrahydrofuran-type rings, while amidation swaps out the esters for amide linkages—useful for advanced materials and pharmaceutical synthesis. Each reaction carries nuances; process temperatures, catalysts, and solvents all tune the outcome, shaping downstream products like polyesters and biodegradable plastics.
DMS pops up under several names: dimethyl butanedioate, methyl succinate, and simply its chemical formula, C6H10O4. Commercial suppliers might market DMS with proprietary trade names, targeting different grades for coatings, electronics, or adhesives. In regulatory papers, look for identifiers like the EC number 203-550-1 or the CAS number 106-65-0. Variant names appear on Safety Data Sheets, so facility managers and procurement teams need to keep track to avoid mix-ups, especially in large plants with multiple storage facilities.
DMS requires respect in storage and handling. Its flash point means that good ventilation and no open flames keep the work environment safe. Personal protective equipment like gloves and goggles feature in operational protocols, since direct skin contact can cause irritation, and inhaling vapors after heating or mixing can bother the respiratory system. Storage tanks need shatter-resistant linings and secure lids to limit methanol emissions. Emergency procedures include spill kits and eyewash stations, with training on prompt reporting of leaks. The chemical itself doesn’t build up in the human body, but organic esters often draw attention from safety authorities looking out for workplace exposure and downstream pollution.
DMS plays a central role in synthesizing polyesters—especially unsaturated polyester resins found in fiberglass, paints, and adhesives. The low volatility fits fragrance design, adding base notes and stability to perfumes and household air fresheners. Pharmaceutical chemists build off DMS for certain active compounds, using its backbone to generate molecular diversity or improve solubility. DMS handles plasticizer duties in plastics manufacturing, giving flexibility to products ranging from consumer packaging to automotive parts. Some researchers have looked at DMS as a potential solvent or carrier in specialty inks and coatings, especially where a clean break from petroleum-based solvents fits green marketing strategies.
R&D teams keep pushing the boundaries for DMS. During the last decade, labs have pushed for greener synthesis—converting waste biomass and even CO2 into succinic acid, then directly to DMS. Projects have popped up exploring new catalyst systems, reducing waste acid generation and energy consumption in reactions. Analytical chemists have focused on high-purity processing, driving innovation for electronics and biomedical polymers. At international conferences, DMS appears as a case study for integrating biorefinery concepts into existing petrochemical supply chains. It’s become a tool for showing how minor tweaks in esterification or downstream chemistry can swing whole product portfolios into new, higher-value markets.
Toxicity studies painted a picture of relatively low acute toxicity for DMS, comparing favorably with many industrial aliphatic esters. Rats and mice given large oral doses tend to exhibit minimal distress, though chronic exposure data still gets close attention. Dermal tests raise skin sensitivity flags, making hand protection mandatory. Inhalation studies suggest irritation thresholds well above typical occupational exposures, but recommendations push for closed loop systems. Regulatory reviews point out that breakdown in the environment yields methanol and succinic acid, with neither viewing as persistent pollutants. That being said, reports from Eastern European labs flagged continued study of metabolites, since repeated low doses could lead to subtle effects in some species.
Innovation around DMS keeps circling back to sustainability. The largest opportunities lie in using agricultural waste as a feedstock, using engineered bacteria or yeasts for fermentation and pushing for cost parity with petroleum origins. The plastics sector looks set to lean harder on biodegradable polyesters, with DMS featuring as a preferred intermediate. Fragrance and personal care sectors also expect to grow, powered by changing consumer preferences and clean label standards. As industry races to phase down volatile organic compounds, DMS offers a rare mix of performance and manageability, carving out a spot in new specialty polymers and flexible packaging. Real changes will happen as companies crack scale-up challenges for bio-based DMS, tying together economic value and cleaner supply chains.
Dimethyl succinate (DMS) usually pops up in technical circles, but for a lot of people, it’s something you’ve likely encountered without knowing it. It comes from succinic acid, a natural component found in everything from plant cells to fermented foods. Chemists started making dimethyl succinate at scale as a clean, adaptable building block, which means it can form the backbone for all kinds of products you see every day.
One of the clearest uses for dimethyl succinate shows up in the world of flavor and fragrance production. I’ve seen it listed as a base ingredient in certain perfumes, adding that gentle, fruity tang that lingers without overpowering the senses. That’s not just marketing flair—DMS has a mild, pleasant scent that works well for blending other aromas, so perfumers reach for it when crafting natural-smelling products. It also appears in food flavoring, mostly as a solvent so other flavors can do their job. It’s been considered safe by food safety authorities when used at sensible levels.
In industrial settings, DMS offers more than just a sweet scent. Manufacturers lean on its chemical structure to produce polyesters and resins. For example, the plastics industry uses DMS as a step along the way to create biodegradable plastics and films. That offers one tangible way to shift away from petroleum-based packaging. In the coatings and paint sector, it helps build resins that give surfaces a strong, attractive finish, something property owners and makers of outdoor equipment recognize in their daily work.
Sustainability buzzwords swirl around nearly every raw material these days, but DMS stacks up well. The fact that it can be sourced from renewable sugars means producers can lean into greener supply chains as long as the economics work out. Some newer processes have cut the need for harsh chemicals, so you get fewer emissions and a safer working environment for staff. Having worked in a lab where traditional solvents racked up costs for disposal and required constant safety drills, I see real value in a switch to something less toxic and easier to break down if it escapes into waterways or soil.
No building block comes without tradeoffs. For DMS, production can still get expensive depending on feedstock availability and energy costs. Back in college, I helped on a project looking at price volatility for bio-based chemicals like this, and every time the cost of corn or sugar rose, the economics shifted fast. Scale also matters. Big manufacturers can push out volumes, but smaller facilities may struggle to compete unless regulations or customer preference specifically demand greener inputs. Then there’s the technical side: DMS won’t solve every problem in plastics or coatings, so relying too much on one compound creates supply risks.
Keeping an eye on both cost and sustainability means more collaboration between growers, chemists, and factory managers. More consistent crop prices would help. Funding research into better fermentation or synthetic routes could drop the price closer to that of traditional oil-derived chemicals. I also think policy support matters—tax breaks for using low-toxicity or renewable compounds would nudge more companies to take the risk. At the end of the day, consumers who ask more questions about what’s in their products can drive change faster than any regulation. Dimethyl succinate sets a decent example of how chemistry can edge toward a cleaner future, but it can’t get there alone.
Dimethyl succinate shows up in products people use every day — from flavorings in food to delicate fragrances and lotions. This substance comes from succinic acid, a natural acid present in fruits, vegetables, and even our own bodies. Because people encounter it in so many forms, the safety question deserves real attention.
Groups like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) hold a tough line on safety. The FDA lists dimethyl succinate as “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) for use as a flavoring substance. That means it passed toxicology testing at the amounts used in food, and there’s no sign it triggers problems such as organ damage or cancer. The EFSA looked at data on esters related to dimethyl succinate. The panel pointed out that its likely breakdown products, succinic acid and methanol, are both well-known to human metabolism — the body can handle small quantities. Even animal studies found almost no adverse effects at the typical dietary intake.
Personal care products tell a similar story. Many perfumes, soaps, and lotions make use of dimethyl succinate for its faint, sweet aroma and ability to dissolve other ingredients. Cosmetics experts point to its low skin irritation potential. Reports of allergic reactions to dimethyl succinate itself are extremely rare.
Fact is, not all chemicals earn a clean bill of health just because regulators say “safe.” Oversight relies on current science, but science moves forward. Some folks worry about the slow buildup of such substances in the environment or their interaction with other compounds rarely studied in combination. My experience reading studies and watching trends shows that regulators update advice only after gathering a huge pile of evidence.
There’s also an issue with purity. Industrial processes sometimes introduce side-products or contaminants, no matter how careful a company tries to be. The pure form of dimethyl succinate may be safe, but less-than-pure batches deserve extra care, especially for people with sensitive skin or those with chronic health conditions. Trace levels may seem minor, though over a lifetime, exposure can add up.
No one should play loose with chemicals in food or on the skin. It never hurts to push companies and regulators for ongoing studies. Keeping an eye on new findings brings peace of mind. For anyone at higher risk — those with allergies, young kids, the elderly — choosing products with transparent labels makes sense.
People can ask companies for quality certificates or third-party testing info. Some beauty brands share this data on their websites. Sustainable sourcing of ingredients lowers contamination risk too, and supporting brands with public safety records matters more than clever marketing.
People worry less about flavored candies or a dollop of lotion containing dimethyl succinate if they know it’s coming from a clean process, backed by transparent science. Above all, whenever big questions stick around, a little skepticism and a lot of curiosity always lead to better choices.
Dimethyl succinate goes by the chemical formula C6H10O4. This formula means each molecule holds six carbon atoms, ten hydrogen atoms, and four oxygen atoms. Its molecular weight lands at 146.14 grams per mole. The number might feel like trivia, but it comes in handy in labs and production sites across the globe. For anyone calculating quantities or setting up a reaction, knowing the molecular weight streamlines the process and helps avoid waste.
Plenty of everyday plastics, textiles, and solvents rely on esters like this one. Chemists choose dimethyl succinate because the structure offers two ester groups on each end of a four-carbon chain. The predictable structure and physical properties push companies to use it for synthesizing biodegradable polyesters or adjusting solvent blends. These molecular details can either open doors for greener chemistry or block innovation, depending on how well teams understand them.
Some years ago, I watched engineers at a specialty chemical facility run production batches using data like molecular weight and formula every hour. They checked their raw materials, crunched numbers, measured methyl alcohol by the drum—all to keep the final outcome pure enough for use in polymers. There’s no shortcut around the basics; understanding the formula keeps everyone on the same page and minimizes waste.
The formula C6H10O4 shapes how this compound performs in real-world conditions. It stays stable under most storage conditions and breaks down fairly cleanly in the environment. No wonder industries with sustainability goals have their eye on it. It’s used as a building block for making polybutylene succinate (PBS), a biodegradable plastic valued in compostable packaging. If you’ve ever wondered how those bioplastics break down instead of lingering in landfills, credit goes partly to compounds like this one.
At the same time, safety data sheets for dimethyl succinate emphasize the need for sensible handling. Small molecules with methyl ester groups can be irritants if they land on skin or get in the eyes. Safety teams lay out best practices: gloves, goggles, good ventilation. Following the basic safety facts keeps workers from unnecessary harm and cuts costs due to lost work hours or medical incidents. In the push for greener and safer chemicals, these daily routines make the difference between success and setback.
Access to reliable data on dimethyl succinate gives universities, manufacturers, and startups the confidence to run pilot projects. As green chemistry expands its reach, researchers and engineers will likely keep pursuing this compound—both for creating novel biodegradable materials and reducing dependency on traditional petrochemical streams. Government policies promoting responsible sourcing and transparent labeling could boost trust. Efforts to educate more technicians on basic chemical literacy also matter, as small knowledge gaps can snowball into bigger problems on the plant floor or in environmental compliance.
Dimethyl succinate might look like just another line in a catalog, but understanding its details shapes safe workspaces, cleaner products, and better resource management. The world’s focus on circularity and low-impact chemistry gets a boost every time facts like chemical formula and molecular weight are put to practical use.
Keeping Dimethyl Succinate safe goes far beyond just 'putting it on a shelf.' This stuff isn’t just a lab curiosity — folks use it in perfumes, biodegradable plastics, and even pharmaceuticals. It may look unassuming as a clear liquid, but don’t let appearances fool you. Leaving a chemical like DMS at room temperature in some dusty corner is like letting a milk carton sit out all week.
Experience tells me most accidents happen not because the hazards are unknown, but because people get complacent. A forgotten label, a leaky cap, or a shelf close to a heater — these are the real-life causes behind workplace incidents. DMS has a low boiling point around 196 °C and releases vapors that combustible if given the right spark. Fumes build up over time and without proper ventilation, you set yourself up for trouble.
Leaving a bottle of DMS uncapped invites vapor to travel and mingle with the air. All it takes is one static discharge or a faulty wire to ignite those fumes. Proper storage means more than screwing the lid on tight. Always place DMS inside a chemical storage cabinet, away from heat sources and direct sunlight. Even fluorescent lamps throw off a surprising amount of heat.
It's easy to forget about temperature stability, especially in older facilities without climate control. Too much heat and you risk pressure building up in storage containers. Too much cold and you could cause condensation, making the label smear or fall off. Wet bottles slip through hands and break on floors, spreading trouble fast.
Sharpies fade with time. Handwritten labels peel off. A container without clear identification creates confusion when staff changes shifts. I've seen more than one laboratory grind to a halt after someone realized the open bottle on the bench was not water but something volatile. Using printed, chemical-resistant labels and storing similar items together by hazard class keeps accidents at bay.
Gloves, goggles, and lab coats sound like old-school advice, but they’re easy to skip on a busy day. Spills don’t wait for anyone to relax — even a few drops of DMS on unprotected skin can cause irritation, and breathing the vapor is no picnic either. Make sure everyone knows what to do, not just by reading the SDS, but by practicing response drills. Training should be part of the routine, not a one-off event.
Turning safety into culture pays off. I’ve worked in teams where folks watch out for each other, reminding a newcomer to store chemicals properly or mop up a spill before it gets out of hand. Open conversation about close calls, near misses, or simple mistakes helps everyone grow wiser, not more fearful.
Safer alternatives sometimes exist, but replacing DMS isn’t always practical. Ventilation systems with fume hoods, routine maintenance checks, solvent waste containers, and responsible inventory help keep the workplace secure. Digital tracking makes it easier to avoid stockpiling and ensures nothing goes out of date, which reduces unexpected risks.
The heart of the matter isn’t just about following rules — it’s about respect. Respect for chemicals, yes, but even more so for colleagues and for life itself. Proper DMS storage and handling doesn’t cost much compared to the cost of a single accident. Each day brings a new chance to do things right and keep everyone safe.
Almost every specialty chemical buyer I’ve spoken with has the same worry after cost: consistency. Dimethyl succinate pops up everywhere from food packaging solvents to coatings to fragrances, but none of these sectors accept the same specs. Purity, usually listed between 98% and 99.5% on most product sheets, acts as a signpost for reliability.
The producers who take the time to publish full specs tend to win the trust of their customers. Most chemists and formulators want a certificate of analysis confirming they actually get what the label says. For commercial DMS, the spec sheet usually confirms the product is colorless or nearly so, and liquid at room temperature.
Industry experience shows the chemical itself is rarely the only concern. Trace water can cause hydrolysis problems, especially if you are making a polymer or resin. Most large-scale buyers ask for moisture content below 0.2%. Color gets measured against APHA values; yellow or brown tints suggest the vendor skipped purification steps. Residual methanol and succinic acid—leftovers from the synthesis—should stay under 0.5%, or quality gets hit. Distillation steps help remove much of the contamination, but only reputable suppliers invest in repeat purification and tight process controls.
Impurities aren’t just “minor issues.” At one client’s lab, even a 0.5% impurity showing up unexpectedly led to several batches of failed product. A little extra methanol in DMS can mess with downstream reactions, creating foaming or weakened plastics. Iron contamination creates a nightmare for folks in food contact or electronics. My contacts in the flavors and fragrances industry say that even trace contaminants, far below one percent, can ruin sensory qualities. I’ve seen excess acid trigger corrosion in production equipment. These headaches turn into real costs very fast.
The drive toward cleaner, more traceable chemicals comes from a combination of tougher regulations and competitive pressure. Europe has its REACH standards, the US has TSCA, and even smaller buyers now demand tight documentation of residual solvents and heavy metals. Some buyers in specialty markets, like pharmaceuticals or high-performance polymers, want DMS at >99.9% purity, checked by gas or liquid chromatography. That level of guarantee sometimes doubles or triples the price per kilo. Yet strict specs can become necessary if a contaminant triggers an allergy, a smell, or a legal problem.
Putting trust in a supplier goes beyond reading numbers on a data sheet. Site visits, third-party audits, and routine testing of each batch add trust. For those making food-contact or pharma ingredients, auditing supply chains protects brands from recalls and product failures.
The market shifts every time a new application for dimethyl succinate comes to light. Bio-based and green DMS are gaining attention, but without rigorous, published specs, customers take a risk. The industry benefits enormously from transparency. Open communication between supplier and buyer keeps things smoother. I encourage chemists and purchasing agents: ask for recent test results before placing large orders, and don’t hesitate to question anomalies. Stricter specs cost more up front but beat out the risk of product failure or regulatory trouble every time.
At the end of the day, what goes into the barrel determines what comes out of your line. Purity is less about marketing claims and much more about building solid, repeatable results in the plant or the lab.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Dimethyl butanedioate |
| Other names |
Dimethyl Butanedioate
Dimethyl Succinic Acid Succinic Acid Dimethyl Ester |
| Pronunciation | /ˌdaɪˈmiːθəl səˈksaɪneɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 106-65-0 |
| Beilstein Reference | 1209274 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:34786 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL133035 |
| ChemSpider | 8498 |
| DrugBank | DB13783 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 03a2cfdb-54e2-408e-b5f3-84500faaea70 |
| EC Number | 203-550-1 |
| Gmelin Reference | 6138 |
| KEGG | C11137 |
| MeSH | D005912 |
| PubChem CID | 8026 |
| RTECS number | WS0175000 |
| UNII | HEX606OQW9 |
| UN number | UN3272 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID2020288 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C6H10O4 |
| Molar mass | 146.14 g/mol |
| Appearance | Colorless transparent liquid |
| Odor | Sweet, fruity |
| Density | 1.071 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Insoluble |
| log P | 0.36 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.03 mmHg (20 °C) |
| Acidity (pKa) | 14.4 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -6.41 × 10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.415 - 1.419 |
| Viscosity | 1.9 mPa·s (at 25°C) |
| Dipole moment | 2.80 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 225.6 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -743.8 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -1965.1 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | 'V09IX10' |
| Hazards | |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, Warning, H319, P264, P280, P305+P351+P338, P337+P313 |
| Pictograms | GHS02,GHS07 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H319: Causes serious eye irritation. |
| Precautionary statements | Precautionary statements: P210, P233, P240, P241, P242, P243, P280, P303+P361+P353, P305+P351+P338, P370+P378 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | NFPA 704: 1-1-0 |
| Flash point | Flash point: 103 °C (217 °F) (Closed cup) |
| Autoignition temperature | 370°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 Oral Rat: 5000 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | LD50 (rat, oral): 6,100 mg/kg |
| NIOSH | WN5250000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL: 5 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | 200 mg/L |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Dimethyl glutarate
Dimethyl adipate Succinic acid Methyl succinate Diethyl succinate |
