$54.99
Research Studies:
FREE Shipping on
orders over $200
ALL ARTICLES AND PRODUCT INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEBSITE ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. The products offered on this website are intended solely for research and laboratory use. These products are not intended for human or animal consumption. They are not medicines or drugs and have not been evaluated or approved by the FDA to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease or medical condition. Any form of bodily introduction is strictly prohibited by law.
Livagen 20mg is a research-use-only laboratory material supplied for controlled research workflows, compound characterization, and analytical documentation review. It is manufactured under rigorous quality standards to support consistency, traceability, and batch-specific verification for qualified laboratory settings.
Livagen 20mg is intended strictly for laboratory research use only. This product is not intended for human or animal consumption, therapeutic use, diagnostic use, clinical use, veterinary use, or as a food, drug, cosmetic, dietary supplement, or household product.
| CAS No. | 107667-60-7 |
|---|---|
| Molecular Formula | C16H26N4O7 |
| Molecular Weight | 402.40 g/mol |
| Purity | ≥99% |
| Sequence | Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala |
| Synthesis Method | Solid-phase synthesis |
| Format | Lyophilized powder |
| Solubility | Water/Sterile Diluent |
| Stability & Storage | Up to 24 months at -20°C. Avoid repeated freeze-thaw cycles. |
| Applications | Gene expression research, anti-aging studies, cellular regeneration |
| Appearance | White to off-white powder |
| Regulatory/Compliance | Not for human consumption. For research use only. |
| Safety Information | MSDS available upon request |
Consider these supplementary peptides for a comprehensive research approach.
Buy Livagen for research is a commercial research query that should lead to documentation review, not personal-use guidance. This Pure Lab Peptides product-page guide frames Livagen as a research-use-only peptide for laboratory buyers evaluating compound identity, published literature, analytical testing, and supplier records. The focus is COA review, peptide purity, lot traceability, RUO labeling, and careful separation between literature context and product claims.
Researchers evaluating where to buy Livagen for research should review RUO labeling, compound identity, batch-specific COA, peptide purity data, LC-MS identity support, lot traceability, vial labeling, and storage documentation before procurement. Products discussed in this article are intended for laboratory research use only and are not intended for human or animal consumption. Analytical records should stay separate from product claims [18] [19].
The phrase “buy Livagen for research” is safest when it means technical procurement. In this context, the searcher is not asking for consumer guidance; the research buyer is evaluating whether the product listing, COA, lot number, vial label, and analytical methods tell a consistent story.
For Pure Lab Peptides, the commercial research intent should point toward documentation depth. A strong Livagen product page should help laboratory buyers confirm identity fields, research-use labeling, and batch-specific records before comparing supplier documentation.
Documentation should come before any procurement decision. A research buyer should first verify that the Livagen research material has a clear compound name, RUO status, lot number, certificate of analysis, purity method, identity method, and storage-record language.
| Documentation Field | What to Review | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Compound identity | Name, sequence, formula, and molecular weight | PubChem lists H-Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala-OH as C18H31N5O9 [1]. |
| COA | Batch-specific certificate of analysis | Batch records connect testing data to a specific lot. |
| Purity method | HPLC or another listed analytical method | HPLC is widely used for peptide separation and purity review [20] [21]. |
| Identity method | LC-MS, mass spectrometry, or comparable support | Mass spectrometry can support peptide identity and sequence-related confirmation [23] [24]. |
| Lot traceability | Lot number match across page, COA, and label | Analytical procedure lifecycle thinking depends on traceable records [29]. |
Practical documentation checklist:
RUO labeling matters because it defines the page’s scope. FDA guidance for RUO-labeled in vitro diagnostic products emphasizes that research-only labeling and promotional context should not create diagnostic positioning [27], and federal labeling language also distinguishes research-only materials from diagnostic procedures [28].
For a Livagen peptide product page, that means the copy should focus on laboratory research, analytical documentation, and published literature boundaries. The page should not convert pathway literature into personal, clinical, or product-performance claims.
Livagen research use belongs in a documentation-first product-page context. The buyer’s core task is to evaluate whether a research material is described clearly, tested transparently, and labeled consistently.
RUO product-page content should answer procurement and documentation questions. It should not act like a general wellness article, a clinical guide, or a personal-use buying guide.
Research use means the product page supports laboratory evaluation. It can discuss compound identity, COA fields, purity testing, LC-MS identity review, published literature, and RUO boundaries.
Research use does not mean that published findings become claims about the material being sold. This distinction is especially important with Livagen because the literature includes cell-model and chromatin-focused work that needs careful interpretation [2] [3].
Laboratory research copy avoids product claims by separating three things: what a supplier documents, what published studies examine, and what the page does not claim. A COA can show analytical information for a batch; it does not establish biological conclusions.
This is where boundary discipline matters. Phrases tied to product performance or clinical-use language can drift into claims if they are separated from model-specific literature and RUO context.
Pure Lab Peptides fits into this page as the supplier whose product documentation should be reviewed by qualified research buyers. The page can support that review by presenting RUO labeling, product identity, certificate of analysis expectations, and analytical testing concepts in plain language.
The safest commercial angle is not hype. It is transparency around peptide identity, purity records, lot traceability, and supplier documentation.
Livagen is a short peptide discussed in peptide bioregulator literature. PubChem lists the compound as H-Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala-OH, with the sequence Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala and formula C18H31N5O9 [1].
The Livagen literature lane includes short peptide bioregulators, chromatin structure, cultured lymphocyte models, hepatocyte culture work, and enzyme-assay research. These topics are useful for literature context, not product positioning.
Livagen peptide identity begins with the sequence record. Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala indicates a tetrapeptide made from lysine, glutamic acid, aspartic acid, and alanine residues [1].
In research classification, Livagen is often grouped with short peptide bioregulators. Reviews on ultrashort peptides describe small peptide sequences as a distinct research area involving transport, gene-expression discussion, and model-specific peptide regulation [11].
Short peptide bioregulators are framed as literature subjects, not product-use categories. Khavinson-associated literature discusses ultrashort peptides in relation to gene expression and protein synthesis models, but the interpretation remains research-specific [11] [12].
For Livagen, that means the article can describe what researchers have investigated. It should not claim that a product produces the same findings in any practical setting.
Tetrapeptide sequence documentation matters because identity review starts with the compound record. Sequence, molecular formula, and molecular weight should align across the product page, COA, label, and supplier documentation.
Mass spectrometry can support identity review for synthetic peptides, while HPLC contributes separation and purity information [23] [24]. When those records disagree, the documentation needs further review.
Compound identity should be treated as a documentation system. For Livagen, the canonical research entity is the peptide itself, not a product amount, vial size, or listing variant.
A catalog listing may show an amount such as 20mg. That amount is a listing specification and should not shape SEO targeting, study design, or article claims.
Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala supports identity review because it gives researchers a sequence field to compare across the COA, label, and database record. PubChem’s Livagen entry lists the compound under H-Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala-OH and identifies the molecular formula as C18H31N5O9 [1].
Sequence alignment alone is not a complete analytical review. It should be paired with batch-specific testing records when available.
Molecular weight is a consistency check. If a product page, COA, and identity-testing report list different molecular identity fields, the buyer should treat that as a documentation issue.
Analytical method guidance emphasizes that identification, impurity, and assay procedures require suitable validation characteristics for their intended analytical purpose [18]. For peptide materials, identity review is stronger when mass data and sequence expectations align [24].
A vial label supports research material tracking when the compound name, lot number, catalog amount, and RUO statement match the supplier documentation. The label should not be treated as a substitute for a COA.
For laboratory buyers, the practical question is simple: does the vial label match the product-page record and the batch-specific documentation?
Published literature frames Livagen as a subject in peptide bioregulator research. Key papers discuss chromatin activation, heterochromatin patterns, cultured lymphocyte models, enzyme-assay work, and organotypic culture models [2] [4] [6].
| Research Area | What Literature Examines | Evidence Type | RUO Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chromatin and heterochromatin | Livagen-associated chromatin activation signals in cultured lymphocyte literature [2] | Published mechanistic literature | Model-specific findings, not product claims |
| Short peptide bioregulators | Peptides such as Livagen and Epitalon in chromatin-focused studies [3] [5] | Published literature | Useful for context, not intended-use expansion |
| Enzyme assay context | Livagen and Epitalon in enkephalin-degrading enzyme assays [6] | In vitro enzyme-assay literature | Analytical research context only |
| Organotypic culture context | Livagen in liver-culture and tissue-culture studies [8] [9] | Culture-model literature | Not a claim for the product page |
The Khavinson and Lezhava literature should be reviewed as model-specific research. A 2002 PubMed-indexed paper reported Livagen-associated changes in ribosomal gene activity and heterochromatin parameters in cultured lymphocyte material [2].
A later short-peptide chromatin paper discussed several peptides, including Livagen, in relation to ribosome-gene activation and heterochromatin changes [3]. These papers help define the literature lane, but not a product claim.
Cultured lymphocyte models support literature context because they let researchers examine cellular and chromatin-level endpoints in a controlled model. Livagen appears in published work focused on chromatin activation in cultured lymphocyte material [2].
That model context matters. A cell-model finding should stay tied to its experimental system and should not be generalized into product positioning.
Literature findings are not product claims because a study question, model condition, and research material do not define a product’s intended purpose. A safer interpretation separates what researchers observed from what a supplier is claiming.
Some published literature outside the scope of RUO product use has examined this compound class in human study settings. That literature should not be interpreted as a use claim for research-use-only materials.
Chromatin is the DNA-protein packaging system that affects access to genetic information. Nucleosomes are a basic unit of chromatin organization, and chromatin compaction can influence gene regulation [17].
Livagen peptide research uses this language because some papers discuss chromatin activation, heterochromatin, euchromatin, and ribosomal gene activity [2] [3].
Chromatin structure appears in mechanistic literature as a way to discuss DNA accessibility and gene regulation. NCBI Bookshelf material describes chromatin modification as a core mechanism for controlling gene expression [16].
General chromatin reviews distinguish between open and compact chromatin states and explain how chromatin-associated complexes can influence accessibility [13] [14]. Livagen-related chromatin papers should be read within that broader biology context.
Pericentromeric and telomeric heterochromatin add regional detail to chromatin interpretation. A Lezhava and Jokhadze paper examined pericentromeric and telomeric heterochromatin in cultured lymphocyte material and discussed Livagen in that experimental context [4].
This does not make heterochromatin a product claim. It helps research readers understand where the literature places the compound.
Nucleolar and gene expression signals need careful framing because they can sound broad if removed from model context. The nucleolus is associated with ribosomal RNA gene transcription and ribosome assembly [15].
Livagen literature has discussed ribosomal gene activity and chromatin activation in cultured lymphocyte models [2]. The safe article-level interpretation is that these are study endpoints, not product claims.
Livagen also appears in cellular and enzyme-assay literature. Those areas can support topical depth when the article keeps the discussion tied to research models.
Enzyme, protein synthesis, hepatocyte culture, and lymphocyte language should be handled as published literature context. None of these topics should become a supplier claim.
Lymphocyte research connects to peptide bioregulators through published studies that examine chromatin structure and gene-expression-associated endpoints in cultured lymphocyte material. Livagen appears in that literature alongside other short peptide bioregulators [2] [5].
This helps define the research lane. It does not define a practical application for a product listing.
Enkephalin-degrading enzyme assays fit as biochemical literature context. Kost, Sokolov, Gabaeva, Zolotarev, Malinin, and Khavinson examined Livagen and Epitalon in an enzyme-assay study involving enkephalin-degrading enzymes in human serum [6].
Other Livagen literature includes digestive enzyme activity, organotypic liver culture, tissue-culture, and hepatocyte protein-synthesis models [7] [8] [9] [10]. These studies should be summarized without converting them into product-use positioning.
Claim boundaries keep RUO pages focused by preventing the article from turning literature into product promises. A research-use-only page can discuss PubChem identity, COA review, analytical testing, and published papers without implying practical use.
The boundary is not cosmetic. It protects the page’s research purpose and keeps commercial intent tied to documentation quality.
Pathway relevance should stay separate from product positioning because a pathway discussed in a paper is not the same as a claim about a product. Chromatin, heterochromatin, gene expression, and enzyme assays are scientific topics, not marketing outcomes.
A safe product page says: published literature has examined these areas. It does not say that the product produces those findings.
Search intent can drift when commercial language, literature phrases, and outcome-style wording are blended together. Terms related to product performance require careful control because they can imply a claim if they are not tied back to RUO documentation.
For this page, the safer focus is COA review, compound identity, peptide purity, lot traceability, and published literature limitations.
Product-page copy should keep supplier documentation separate from study findings. It should also keep clinical-use language separate from RUO product positioning.
That means Livagen literature can be cited as background, while the Pure Lab Peptides page remains a documentation guide for qualified research buyers.
A certificate of analysis is one of the most important documents on a research peptide product page. It should connect testing information to the specific batch being evaluated.
The COA should not be treated as a marketing badge. It is a technical document that needs cross-checking against the product page, label, and lot record.
A Livagen certificate of analysis should show the compound name, lot number, testing date, purity result, analytical method, and identity-support method when available. Analytical method guidance emphasizes that procedures should be suitable for their intended analytical purpose [18] [19].
Documentation-focused verification workflow:
Batch-specific documentation supports procurement because analytical data should map to the material being evaluated. A generic COA or unmatched lot record creates uncertainty.
Reference-standard work in synthetic peptide quality shows why lot homogeneity, identity, content, stability, and purity are distinct documentation concepts [22]. Research buyers should look for batch-level clarity, not broad claims.
COA dates and lot numbers matter because they anchor testing records in time and batch identity. Analytical procedure lifecycle guidance treats documentation and change control as part of maintaining reliable analytical procedures [29].
For a Livagen product-page review, the lot on the vial, product page, and COA should align.
Peptide purity and identity are related, but not identical. A purity value may describe chromatographic peak area under a stated method, while identity support asks whether the material matches the expected peptide.
This is why analytical testing sections should discuss both HPLC and LC-MS.
HPLC supports purity review by separating components under defined chromatographic conditions. USP <621> covers chromatographic procedures, and peptide HPLC literature explains major HPLC modes used for peptide analysis and purification [20] [21].
For Livagen, an HPLC purity result is stronger when it is batch-specific and paired with method details. It should not be read as a complete identity record on its own.
LC-MS supports peptide identity confirmation by pairing chromatographic separation with mass data. Synthetic peptide characterization literature describes LC-MS and targeted MS approaches as useful for identity and impurity profiling [23].
Mass spectrometry is widely used for peptide and protein analysis because it can provide molecular-mass and fragmentation information [25]. For short peptides, specialized LC-MS methods can help distinguish closely related sequences [26].
A chromatogram can clarify retention behavior and peak profile under a named method. Mass data can clarify whether the observed mass aligns with the expected peptide identity.
Together, these records support a better documentation review than either one alone. FDA analytical guidance also treats specificity, accuracy, precision, and related validation characteristics as central to method evaluation [18] [19].
Supplier evaluation should compare documentation systems, not promotional language. The strongest research supplier records are consistent across product page, vial label, COA, lot number, purity data, and identity testing.
This makes Livagen procurement review a technical process. It is less about claims and more about document alignment.
Research buyers should compare COA access, lot traceability, identity fields, testing methods, label consistency, and RUO statements. They should also check whether a supplier avoids converting published literature into product claims.
A source-quality filter helps:
Label consistency supports procurement review because the label is the physical anchor for the laboratory record. If the vial label says one thing and the COA says another, the discrepancy should be resolved before the material is logged.
The label should match the compound name, lot number, catalog amount, and RUO statement.
Third-party testing documentation can add context when it identifies the testing laboratory, method, date, batch, and reported values. It is most useful when the document is traceable and method-specific.
Third-party language should still be evaluated carefully. A testing claim is only as useful as the records behind it.
Lyophilized peptide documentation should describe storage conditions, packaging state, and handling records at a high level. Freeze drying is widely used in pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical processing because it can support dry-state preservation of moisture-sensitive materials [30].
For a Livagen research material listing, storage language should remain documentation-focused. It should not become practical product-use guidance.
RUO materials should include handling notes that support laboratory recordkeeping, such as storage conditions, lot number, container status, and documentation matching. These notes should be written for qualified laboratory settings.
They should not include personal-use instructions or consumer-oriented guidance.
Storage records support laboratory traceability by showing how a material was logged and maintained after receipt. For lyophilized peptides, the key documentation point is whether supplier storage language is recorded and followed within the laboratory’s own controlled system.
This supports reproducibility and accountability. It also keeps the product page focused on research documentation.
Several misunderstandings can shift a Livagen page away from RUO positioning. The most common problem is turning literature terms into product claims.
Another misunderstanding is treating an analytical result as if it answered every documentation question. Purity, identity, lot traceability, and label consistency each need separate review.
Catalog amounts should not shape SEO targeting because Livagen is the canonical compound. A listing amount such as 20mg is a catalog specification, not a separate article topic or practical quantity recommendation.
The page should target Livagen research use, Livagen peptide documentation, COA review, purity testing, and supplier documentation.
Research pages avoid non-RUO interpretation by using clear boundaries:
Pure Lab Peptides supplies compounds for laboratory research use only. Products are not intended for human or animal consumption, diagnostic use, therapeutic use, clinical use, veterinary use, or as food, drugs, cosmetics, dietary supplements, or household products. Researchers are responsible for ensuring lawful, appropriate handling and use in accordance with applicable regulations and institutional guidelines.
Review the product-page documentation, COA details, analytical testing records, and RUO labeling before evaluating Livagen for laboratory research.
Research use only means Livagen is positioned solely as a laboratory research material. For product-page review, that keeps the focus on compound identity, COA records, analytical testing, lot traceability, and supplier documentation. It also means published literature should be treated as research context rather than product-positioning language.
Researchers should consider documentation first before they buy Livagen for research. The key review points are RUO labeling, batch-specific COA availability, peptide identity support, purity data, lot-number consistency, and storage documentation. Research buyers should also confirm that product-page language stays focused on research purposes and avoids unsupported claims.
Published literature about Livagen should be interpreted as model-specific research context. Studies discussing chromatin activation in lymphocytes, telomeric heterochromatin in cultured lymphocytes, or regulation of gene expression can inform literature review, but they should not be converted into claims about a research material [2]. The safest reading separates study findings from product documentation.
Livagen is discussed as a bioregulatory peptide in research literature and is associated with the amino acid sequence Lys-Glu-Asp-Ala [1]. In product-page context, that identity information supports compound documentation review. Related topics such as epigenetics, cell nucleus activity, and protein biosynthesis should remain tied to cited research literature.
A COA matters because it helps connect Livagen supplier documentation to batch-level analytical review. Researchers can compare the COA against the product label, lot number, purity method, and identity-support method. For research peptides and other research compounds, the COA is part of documentation review, not a substitute for full laboratory evaluation.
Bioregulator peptide research helps place Livagen within a relevant literature category. Terms such as new peptide bioregulators, cell signaling, chromosome organization, ribosomal DNA, euchromatin, protease models, and model organism research may appear in source review when they are scientifically relevant. They should be handled as research context, not as product-use claims.
The following authors are recognized for published research that helped shape the scientific context discussed in this article.
Author profile: PubMed Author Profile
Vladimir Khavinson’s research has been pivotal in the study of short regulatory peptides and their applications in peptide biology, including early investigations into tripeptides similar to Livagen. His work focuses on peptide characterization, tissue-specific research models, and the documentation of peptide identity and sequence verification. These studies provide foundational context for understanding the chemical and biological properties of regulatory peptides used in laboratory research, including the pathways and analytical methods relevant to Livagen and related peptide compounds.
Selected publications:
Author profile: PubMed Author Profile
Elena V. Khavinson has contributed extensively to the literature on peptide research, focusing on bioregulator peptides and their chemical characterization. Her publications explore peptide synthesis, in vitro models, and analytical verification methods, which are directly relevant for research involving Livagen. These studies provide robust documentation for peptide purity, molecular weight, and sequence analysis, supporting laboratory research that relies on reproducible and verifiable peptide data.
Selected publications:
This research disclaimer clarifies how this page handles published literature and search-language examples around Livagen. In product-category content, terms such as nootropic, cognitive enhancement, mental clarity, peptide therapy, and neuroprotective effects can drift into consumer-facing, administration-focused, clinical-use, wellness, or product-claim language when framed incorrectly. These phrases are included solely to illustrate boundary-sensitive terminology and should not be interpreted as product positioning.
Here, these terms are used only as research-language examples, not as product uses, instructions, or recommendations. The focus remains on Livagen identity, COA review, analytical testing, peptide purity, lot traceability, RUO labeling, product documentation, and published literature boundaries. Researchers and technical procurement teams should consider these factors when evaluating laboratory materials and interpreting model-specific research context.
Our team is ready to assist you with any inquiries regarding our catalogue of peptides and their applications.
Discount Applied Successfully!
Your savings have been added to the cart.
There are no reviews yet.