3-Methylpentyl angelate

CAS:
53082-58-9
Family:
aliphatic ester
Also:
2-butenoic acid, 2-methyl-, 3-methylpentyl ester, (2Z)-, 3-Methylpentyl angelate, 3-methyl pentyl angelate, 3-methylpentyl (Z)-2-methylbut-2-enoate
Recorded sensory reference values
  • Affect valence: 0.5
  • Affect arousal: -0.2

Reference values depend on measurement conditions and do not describe an effective dose or the perception of a custom blend.

3-Methylpentyl angelate is an aliphatic angelate ester associated most strongly with Roman chamomile-type essential-oil profiles. In the current archive and live sources, it functions primarily as a chemistry and aroma marker rather than a well-studied standalone wellness constituent. Evidence is solid for identity and occurrence, but direct constituent-specific mechanism, toxicology, and human-use literature are limited.

Aroma and practical use

woodyfloralcelery seedchamomileseedy
  • Use the recorded woody, floral, celery seed, chamomile, seedy descriptors to explore a blend's scent character; perceived strength also depends on the other ingredients.
  • Read the route, preparation and experimental context before using a study finding to choose an oil.

Reported benefits and effects

Findings retain their study context. An animal or laboratory result describes that experiment.

A recent Roman chamomile composition paper listed 3-methylpentyl angelate among the major essential-oil constituents, reinforcing its relevance as a chemotype marker rather than proving a standalone biological effect.

A recent Roman chamomile composition paper listed 3-methylpentyl angelate among the major essential-oil constituents, reinforcing its relevance as a chemotype marker rather than proving a standalone biological effect.

reference dataRoute not recorded

This reference does not establish a therapeutic result or a safe use level for a custom oil blend.

Use concerns and concentration limits

Sensitization concernNot flagged

Not flagged in the current model. This is not proof of absence or unrestricted safety.

Phototoxicity concernNot flagged

Not flagged in the current model. This is not proof of absence or unrestricted safety.

Oxidation concernNot flagged

Not flagged in the current model. This is not proof of absence or unrestricted safety.

Penetration enhancementNot flagged

Not flagged in the current model. This is not proof of absence or unrestricted safety.

Recorded dermal reference20%

A recorded constituent reference, not a recommended oil dilution. Product category, source applicability and all contributing oils must be checked before use.

unverified reference · No source provenance attached
PubChem's search result exposes an LCSS summary of primary hazards as not classified.
reference dataRoute not recorded

This reference does not establish a therapeutic result or a safe use level for a custom oil blend.

The Good Scents Company entry reports no GHS classification found and notes that oral, dermal, and inhalation toxicity were not determined in that listing.
reference dataRoute not recorded

This reference does not establish a therapeutic result or a safe use level for a custom oil blend.

Constituents it may interact with

No constituent-pair interaction is recorded for this identity. The report does not assume either amplification or incompatibility.

What this report cannot establish

  • A reported constituent percentage does not establish an effective human therapeutic dose or the amount absorbed into the body.
  • The presence of a constituent does not guarantee a clinical benefit, rash treatment or sleep improvement from a custom blend.
  • An unflagged concern or missing use limit does not establish safety for ingestion, inhalation, skin exposure or a particular person.
  • A candidate constituent interaction does not establish that two oils amplify one another at the selected proportions.
  • Constituent descriptors alone do not establish a precise top, heart or base lifetime in a finished blend.
Known data gaps (5)
  • No direct constituent-specific human, animal, or mechanistic bioactivity study was verified in this pass.
  • No constituent-specific dermal maximum or robust toxicology dossier suitable for archive safety limits was verified in this pass.
  • Current safety coverage is mostly database and industry-reference level, not a dedicated toxicological monograph.
  • The numeric dermal reference lacks source provenance; a verified flag alone is insufficient.
  • Some findings do not record an explicit exposure route; consult the linked study before applying them to a use.
All public references (4)