Melanotan II 10mg

For research teams deciding where to buy Melanotan II for research, the practical question is whether the documentation supports compound identity, analytical testing, and lot-level review. Melanotan II is cataloged in PubChem as a cyclic peptide with molecular formula C50H69N15O9 and molecular weight 1024.2 g/mol, and the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology lists MT-II as a peptide ligand with Melanotan II and MTII as synonyms [1] [2]. This guide covers research-use-only documentation, melanocortin receptor literature, COA review, and supplier records.

• Melanotan II is a synthetic peptide and alpha-MSH analog discussed in melanocortin receptor literature, including MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R research contexts [2] [3].
• Research buyers should review RUO labeling, compound name consistency, catalog listing details, lot traceability, and batch-specific documentation before procurement.
• COA review should focus on identity, purity, analytical method, lot number, test date, and document source; analytical validation principles emphasize method fitness and documented data quality [19] [20].
• HPLC can support peptide purity review, while LC-MS and mass spectrometry can support molecular identity review when paired with batch-specific records [24] [25].
• Published literature can inform receptor and pathway context, but it should not become a claim about a research-use-only material.

Fast Answer: What Should Researchers Check Before They Buy Melanotan II for Research?

Researchers looking to buy Melanotan II for research should first review RUO labeling, batch-specific COA availability, peptide identity records, HPLC purity data, LC-MS or mass spectrometry confirmation, lot traceability, and supplier documentation consistency. Products discussed in this article are intended for laboratory research use only and are not intended for human or animal consumption. Published melanocortin literature supports receptor-context review, not product claims [3] [4].

What Documentation Should Come First?

A strong first-pass review should begin with the product label, batch-specific COA, identity method, purity method, lot number, test date, and supplier documentation. FDA analytical-method guidance describes analytical documentation as supporting identity, quality, purity, and related method-validation data in regulated contexts, which is useful as a general documentation model for research buyers reviewing laboratory materials [20].

Quality and documentation checklist:

• Verify that the compound is labeled for research-use-only context.
• Review the batch-specific certificate of analysis.
• Confirm that purity data are supported by a named analytical method.
• Check that the lot number on the COA matches the product documentation.
• Compare compound name, synonyms, molecular weight, and catalog details across documents.
• Assess whether the product page avoids outcome claims and instruction-oriented language.
• Document storage and handling conditions in a laboratory record.

Why Should RUO Labeling Come Before Procurement?

RUO labeling sets the research boundary for the product page. FDA guidance for RUO and investigational labeling in the IVD context stresses that RUO labeling is tied to laboratory research positioning and should not be used to imply broader product status [17] [18].

What Is Melanotan II in Research Literature?

Melanotan II is a cyclic peptide listed in official and curated chemical databases under the synonym MT-II, with PubChem CID 92432 and IUPHAR/BPS GtoPdb Ligand ID 1323 [1] [2]. The FDA Global Substance Registration System also lists Melanotan II as a defined substance record with molecular formula C50H69N15O9 and molecular weight 1,024.18 [5].

Compound Identity and Research Classification

Researchers should treat this classification as a documentation anchor. The compound name, synonym set, molecular formula, and molecular weight should be consistent across the product page, COA, and any supplier documentation.

Melanotan II Peptide and Alpha-MSH Analog Context

Published structure-activity literature describes Melanotan II as a cyclic analog of alpha-melanocyte-stimulating hormone, often abbreviated alpha-MSH or α-MSH [6]. Alpha-MSH belongs to the melanocortin peptide hormone family, and naturally occurring melanocortin ligands are discussed as POMC-derived signaling molecules in receptor literature [7].

How Does Published Literature Frame MT-II?

Published MT-II literature often frames the compound through cyclic peptide structure, melanocortin receptor activity, and analog design [6] [13]. Structure-function studies have examined how MT-II side chains and cyclic structure relate to interaction with human melanocortin receptor models [13].

Melanocortin Receptor Research Context for Melanotan II

The melanocortin receptor system includes five closely related G protein-coupled receptors: MC1R, MC2R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R [3] [4]. Melanotan II is discussed in alpha-MSH analog and melanocortin receptor signaling literature [6] [7].

MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R Mapping

MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R appear in Melanotan II research literature. IUPHAR/BPS receptor-family data and published reviews distinguish these receptor subtypes by nomenclature, genes, transduction pathways, and endogenous ligand relationships [3] [8].

MC1R is commonly discussed in melanocyte biology literature, MC4R in central pathway research, and MC5R in broader receptor-function literature [10] [11] [12]. These are research categories, not product outcomes.

Why Does Receptor Selectivity Matter in Study Design?

Receptor selectivity matters because related compounds may interact with more than one melanocortin receptor subtype. MT-II structure-function literature has examined receptor activity at MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R models, while related cyclic lactam analog studies show how structural changes can alter receptor selectivity [13] [14].

For research buyers, this supports a documentation question: does the product page accurately identify the compound and avoid over-narrow receptor claims that the supplier documentation cannot support?

Receptor Signaling Context Without Product Claims

Melanocortin receptors are GPCRs, and signaling literature describes G-protein and downstream pathway mechanisms across the receptor family [3] [8]. Recent structural work has also examined ligand recognition and subtype selectivity in human melanocortin receptor models [16].

Pathway relevance provides research context; it does not establish the effects or performance of the supplied material.

COA Review for Melanotan II Peptide Materials

A COA is one of the core documents for research-grade Melanotan review. It should identify the tested lot and summarize relevant analytical results in a way that can be matched to the product-page listing.

What Should Certificates of Analysis Identify?

Certificates of analysis should identify the compound name, lot number, test date, analytical method, result fields, and source of testing. ISO/IEC 17025 describes laboratory competence and valid-result generation as central to testing and calibration laboratory confidence, which is useful context when evaluating outside analytical records [22].

For Melanotan II, the COA should also align with the synonym set and molecular identity fields shown in authoritative records such as PubChem, FDA GSRS, and IUPHAR/BPS [1] [2] [5].

How Does COA Consistency Support Lot Review?

COA consistency supports lot review by tying the product page, label, and analytical record to the same batch-specific material. Good documentation principles emphasize clear, traceable records, and research procurement teams can apply that same logic when matching a COA to a peptide vial [28].

A mismatch in compound name, lot number, or document date should prompt further documentation review before the material is selected for laboratory research.

Batch-Specific Documentation in Research Procurement

Batch-specific documentation is stronger than generic documentation because it connects analytical results to a defined lot. This matters for peptide supplies because identity and purity records are only useful when the tested material and the listed material can be matched.

For procurement review, the practical question is whether the label, COA, catalog entry, and supplier documentation tell the same story.

Analytical Testing Workflow for Peptide Identity

Analytical testing is where product-page documentation becomes more concrete. HPLC, LC-MS, and mass spectrometry each support different parts of peptide characterization when documented correctly.

How Does HPLC Support Peptide Purity Review?

HPLC is widely used for peptide analysis and purification because it can separate peptide components and related impurities under defined chromatographic conditions [24]. A COA purity entry is more meaningful when the method is named, the chromatogram is available or summarized, and the lot identity is clear.

HPLC purity data should not be read as complete identity proof by itself. It is one analytical layer in a broader documentation review.

How Does LC-MS Support Molecular Identity Verification?

LC-MS combines chromatographic separation with mass-based detection, which can support peptide identity and impurity characterization when the method and data are suitable [25] [26]. Analytical reviews of peptide materials describe mass spectrometry as useful for structural and molecular characterization, especially when paired with orthogonal methods [27].

Lab-test verification workflow:

1. Verify the compound name, synonym set, lot number, and label match across documents.
2. Review the batch-specific COA.
3. Check whether the purity testing method is listed.
4. Confirm whether identity testing is supported by LC-MS, mass spectrometry, or another suitable analytical method.
5. Review chromatogram or mass data when available.
6. Check the COA date and laboratory source.
7. Record storage and handling documentation in a laboratory record.

Mass Spectrometry Data Confidence Points

Mass spectrometry data add confidence when the expected molecular weight, mass-to-charge data, and method documentation align. NIST describes metrological traceability as a documented chain linking measurement results to references, which is a useful quality concept for analytical review [23].

For Melanotan II, mass data should be evaluated against the expected molecular identity documented in official records [1] [5].

Peptide Vial Documentation and Labeling Consistency

A peptide vial label should be treated as a documentation checkpoint. It should not stand alone; it should match the product page, COA, and batch record fields.

What Should a Peptide Vial Label Document?

A peptide vial label should clearly identify the compound name, lot number, catalog field, and RUO context.

Research buyers should check that the label identifies the material and its laboratory-research scope without unsupported outcome claims.

Why Must Vial, Lot, and Catalog Details Align?

Vial, lot, and catalog details must align because traceability depends on consistent identifiers. Documentation literature emphasizes that records create a detailed picture of what was done and what material is being represented [28].

When the product page, label, and COA use different identifiers, procurement teams cannot confidently connect analytical data to the listed research material.

Molecular Documentation for Research-Grade Melanotan

Molecular documentation supports compound identity verification. For Melanotan II, relevant fields include compound name, synonym set, molecular formula, molecular weight, and database identifiers.

Sequence, Formula, and Molecular Weight Checks

PubChem lists Melanotan II with molecular formula C50H69N15O9 and molecular weight 1024.2 g/mol, while FDA GSRS lists a molecular weight of 1,024.18 [1] [5]. Minor formatting differences can occur across databases, but the underlying identity fields should remain consistent.

When sequence data are shown in supplier documentation, researchers should compare that sequence against authoritative or literature-backed sources rather than treating a product-page label as the only identity record.

Why Does Synthetic Peptide Identity Need Verification?

Synthetic peptide identity needs verification because a peptide can require both purity review and molecular identity confirmation. HPLC can support component separation, while LC-MS can add mass-based identity evidence [24] [25].

Reference Standard Support for Analytical Review

Reference-standard thinking helps teams evaluate whether analytical results are connected to a known comparator or documented expectation. ICH Q14 describes science- and risk-based approaches for developing analytical procedures, while ICH Q2(R2) describes validation principles for analytical procedures [21] [19].

For research procurement, this supports a simple practice: compare product documentation against stable identity records and batch-specific analytical files.

Literature Interpretation Without Product Claims

Melanotan II literature provides receptor and pathway context. It does not establish what this supplied research-use-only material does.

What Can Published Findings Support?

Published findings can support scientific background, receptor mapping, study-model context, and analytical-documentation standards. They cannot substitute for batch-specific COA data or convert a product listing into a claim.

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.

Why Is Pathway Relevance Not a Product Claim?

Pathway relevance means a compound is discussed in research on a biochemical pathway. It does not establish a non-research use for a catalog product.

Melanocortin receptor literature describes signal transduction, receptor subtype differences, and ligand-recognition features [8] [16].

Stock Solution Records in Laboratory Research

How Do Stock Solution Notes Fit Documentation Review?

Stock solution notes fit documentation review when they are treated as internal laboratory records. Useful fields may include compound name, lot number, responsible laboratory record, date, storage notation, and link to the COA.

Documentation principles support clear, traceable laboratory records that can be reviewed later [28].

Supplier Documentation Matrix for Melanotan II Research Procurement

Prioritize documentation quality when evaluating Melanotan II suppliers for laboratory research.

What Should Research Buyers Compare Across Supplier Documentation?

Research buyers should compare the product listing, COA, label, lot number, test date, analytical method, and storage documentation. ISO/IEC 17025 supports confidence in competent testing laboratories and valid results, while NIST traceability guidance supports the value of documented measurement relationships [22] [23].

A concise supplier documentation matrix should include:

• Product name and synonym consistency
• Lot-specific COA
• Purity method
• Identity method
• COA date
• Laboratory source
• Label and catalog alignment
• RUO statement

How Can Source Quality Filters Reduce Ambiguity?

Source quality filters reduce ambiguity by ranking evidence types. Official databases and peer-reviewed literature should guide compound identity and receptor context, while batch-specific supplier files should guide procurement review.

A safe filter looks like this: official database first, peer-reviewed receptor literature second, analytical method documentation third, supplier COA fourth, and marketing language last.

Grade Language With Documentation Context

Instead of relying on broad grade claims, research buyers should ask what documentation supports the listing.

For Melanotan II, stronger signals include certificates of analysis, HPLC data, LC-MS or mass spectrometry support, lot traceability, and consistent RUO labeling.

Common Misunderstandings About Melanotan II Research Materials

Why Do Melanotan II and Melanotan 2 Need Consistent Naming?

Compare the compound identity and lot records even when a listing uses a spelling or naming variant.

MT2, MT-II, and Related Naming Variants

The IUPHAR/BPS ligand page lists MT-II and MTII in relation to Melanotan II, which supports synonym awareness [2].

Misunderstandings to avoid:

• Published literature does not equal product-page guidance.
• A purity percentage does not prove complete compound identity.
• A COA should be batch-specific.
• RUO labeling identifies the material’s laboratory-research scope.
• Catalog specifications are not procedural guidance.

Research-Use-Only Labeling and Evidence Limits

FDA RUO guidance in its own domain shows why labeling and product representation must align with research positioning [17] [18].

Why Are Literature Findings and Product Documentation Different?

Published literature describes specific study materials, models, and methods. Product documentation identifies the supplied lot, its analytical records, and its stated research-use scope.

Next Steps for RUO Documentation Review

For research teams comparing peptide suppliers, prioritize COA availability, transparent labeling, analytical testing, and lot-level documentation. Explore Pure Lab Peptides for RUO peptide compounds with research-focused product information and available documentation.

FAQs

What is Melanotan II in research literature?

Melanotan II is discussed as a synthetic research peptide in melanocortin receptor literature. The article identifies Melanotan II through database records and literature context, including MT-II synonym references and melanocortin receptor mapping [1] [2] [3].

What should researchers consider before they buy Melanotan II for research?

Researchers should consider documentation before they buy Melanotan II for research. The key review points are RUO labeling, batch-specific COA availability, lot traceability, peptide identity records, purity testing, and supplier documentation consistency.

What role does a melanocortin receptor agonist play in Melanotan II research context?

Melanocortin receptor agonism is a receptor-pathway research topic. Research teams can review how Melanotan II is described across MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R literature [3] [4]. Findings remain specific to the models studied and do not establish non-research uses for the supplied material.

How should researchers interpret Melanotan II cell signaling literature?

Melanotan II cell signaling literature provides pathway context [8]. It does not replace compound characterization, COA review, or analytical testing of the supplied material.

What does in vitro research add to Melanotan II documentation review?

In vitro research can add model-specific context for Melanotan II, but it does not replace product documentation. Research buyers should still review COA records, peptide identity confirmation, lot traceability, and supplier documentation. Published methods may inform how researchers read literature, while batch-level documents support evaluation of the specific research material.

Researchers Cited in This Guide

The researchers listed below are cited for relevant published work. Their inclusion does not imply that they wrote, reviewed, or endorsed this guide or Pure Lab Peptides products.

Dr. Victor J. Hruby

Author profile: University of Arizona Profile

Dr. Victor J. Hruby’s published work connects peptide chemistry, alpha-MSH analog design, and melanocortin receptor selectivity. His cited work provides context for MT-II as a cyclic peptide, including structure-focused discussion of MC1R, MC3R, MC4R, and MC5R literature.

Selected publications:

• A J Med Chem study on cyclic alpha-MSH analogs and melanocortin receptor selectivity — Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, 1995. DOI: 10.1021/jm00018a005. PMID: [7658432]
• Design of novel melanocortin receptor ligands — European Journal of Pharmacology, 2011. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2010.10.109. PMID: [21208601]

Dr. Minying Cai

Author profile: University of Arizona Cancer Center Profile

Dr. Minying Cai’s published work is relevant because it synthesizes melanocortin receptor literature and describes ligand-design strategies for receptor selectivity.

Selected publications:

• A review relevant to melanocortin receptor system literature — Current Protein & Peptide Science, 2016. DOI: 10.2174/1389203717666160226145330. PMID: [26916163]
• A Peptides review on melanocortin receptor ligand design — Peptides, 2005. DOI: 10.1016/j.peptides.2005.03.020. PMID: [15876475]

REFERENCES

1. National Center for Biotechnology Information. melanotan-II | C50H69N15O9 | CID 92432. PubChem Compound Database. Accessed 2026.
2. IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY. MT-II ligand page, GtoPdb Ligand ID 1323. IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology. Accessed 2026.
3. IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY. Melanocortin receptors. IUPHAR/BPS Guide to Pharmacology. Accessed 2026.
4. Cai M, Hruby VJ. Melanocortin receptor system review. Current Protein & Peptide Science. 2016;17(5):488-496. doi:10.2174/1389203717666160226145330. PMID:26916163.
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. MELANOTAN II substance record. Global Substance Registration System / FDA Precision. Accessed 2026.
6. Hruby VJ, Lu D, Sharma SD, et al. Cyclic lactam alpha-melanotropin analogues at melanocortin receptors. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 1995;38(18):3454-3461. doi:10.1021/jm00018a005. PMID:7658432.
7. Yuan XC, et al. Ligands for melanocortin receptors. Biomolecules. 2022;12(10):1407. doi:10.3390/biom12101407. PMID:36291616.
8. Rodrigues AR, Almeida H, Gouveia AM. Intracellular signaling mechanisms of the melanocortin receptors. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences. 2015;72(7):1331-1345. doi:10.1007/s00018-014-1800-3. PMID:25504085.
9. Ramachandrappa S, Gorrigan RJ, Clark AJL, Chan LF. The melanocortin receptors and their accessory proteins. Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2013;4:9. doi:10.3389/fendo.2013.00009. PMID:23404466.
10. Horrell EMW, Boulanger MC, D’Orazio JA. Melanocortin 1 Receptor: Structure, Function, and Regulation. Frontiers in Genetics. 2016;7:95. PMID:27303435.
11. Krashes MJ, Lowell BB, Garfield AS. Melanocortin-4 receptor-regulated energy homeostasis. Nature Neuroscience. 2016;19(2):206-219. doi:10.1038/nn.4202. PMID:26814590.
12. Ji LQ, Hong Y, Tao YX. Melanocortin-5 Receptor: Pharmacology and Its Regulation of Energy Metabolism. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022;23(15):8727. doi:10.3390/ijms23158727. PMID:35955857.
13. Bednarek MA, Silva MV, Arison B, et al. Structure-function studies on the cyclic peptide MT-II. Peptides. 1999;20(3):401-409. doi:10.1016/S0196-9781(99)00048-0. PMID:10447101.
14. Mayorov AV, Cai M, Palmer ES, et al. Structure-activity relationships of cyclic lactam analogues targeting melanocortin receptor models. Journal of Medicinal Chemistry. 2008;51(2):187-195. doi:10.1021/jm070461w. PMID:18088090.
15. Zhou Y, Cai M. Melanotropin design review. Expert Opinion on Drug Discovery. 2017;12(10):1023-1030. doi:10.1080/17460441.2017.1351940.
16. Feng W, Zhou Q, Chen X, et al. Structural insights into ligand recognition and subtype selectivity of the human melanocortin-3 and melanocortin-5 receptors. Cell Discovery. 2023;9:81. doi:10.1038/s41421-023-00586-4.
17. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Distribution of In Vitro Diagnostic Products Labeled for Research Use Only or Investigational Use Only. FDA Guidance. 2013 / updated page.
18. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. In Vitro Diagnostic Device Labeling Requirements. FDA. Updated 2023.
19. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures. FDA / ICH Guidance. 2024.
20. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Analytical Procedures and Methods Validation for Drugs and Biologics. FDA Guidance. 2015 / updated page.
21. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Q14 Analytical Procedure Development. FDA / ICH Guidance. 2024.
22. International Organization for Standardization. ISO/IEC 17025 — Testing and calibration laboratories. ISO. Accessed 2026.
23. National Institute of Standards and Technology. Metrological Traceability. NIST. Accessed 2026.
24. Mant CT, Chen Y, Yan Z, et al. HPLC analysis and purification of peptides. Methods in Molecular Biology. 2007;386:3-55. doi:10.1007/978-1-59745-430-8_1. PMID:18604941.
25. Zeng K, Geerlof-Vidavisky I, Gucinski A, Jiang X, Boyne MT II. Liquid Chromatography–High Resolution Mass Spectrometry for Peptide Drug Quality Control. AAPS Journal. 2015;17(3):643-651. PMID:25716148.
26. Lian Z, et al. Characterization of Synthetic Peptide Materials Using Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry. Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry. 2021. PMID:34110145.
27. D’Addio SM, et al. Peptide analytical characterization review. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2016. PMID:27499338.
28. Patel KT, Chotai NP. Documentation and Records: Harmonized GMP Requirements. Journal of Young Pharmacists. 2011;3(2):138-150. doi:10.4103/0975-1483.80303.

---

Research Disclaimer

This material is supplied strictly for in vitro laboratory research and is not for human or veterinary use. Published studies describe specific experimental materials, models, and methods; they do not establish the safety, efficacy, or suitability of this catalog product for non-research use. Review the original publications and the lot-specific analytical documentation independently.