From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Elements (Rated GA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.


Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by maveric149. Elementbox converted 14:20, 1 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 21:48, 21 June 2005).

Information Sources[edit]

Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Bromine. Additional text was taken directly from the Elements database 20001107 (via, Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (via and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via Data for the table was obtained from the sources listed on the main page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements but was reformatted and converted into SI units.


"stench of he-goats" has no justification, most other sources come up with "strong smelling" (OED, and translations of current Greek

There is a bromine cation that is used in electrophilic substitution with benzene (in the presence of FeBr3). What is the shorthand name of this bromine cation? (i think it is bromile or bromite, not really sure)

I got redirected from bromide to the article. So, I was hoping to see something about it being put in soldier's tea to dampen their ardour. --bodnotbod 00:58, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

I'm not intimately familiar with bromine, but since the melting poing is below 273K, it seems that bromine should not be solid at STP. Zander 19:59, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Doesn't bromine naturaly occur as the diatomic molecule Br2. Might be worth including. Oatzy

Good idea. I added it. Edgar181 12:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, that is what is bothering me. Is the density information for the naturally occurring diatomic molecule or for just Br? I think it's for the former... But I can't tell!! 04:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the density is for Br2. Edgar181 11:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The top of the page says that 730,000,000 kg (730,000 metric tons) were produced in 1993. Under Occurrence and Preparation, worldwide production is listed as 500,000 metric tons (in 2001), no source given. The graph seems to indicate the former figure is incorrect. Could we get a single, authoritative, and recent number for this? Kanhef (talk) 01:07, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Isnt bromine also used in the papermaking industry ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:49, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Question: I read that until 1960 bromine was commonly added to bread by commercial bakeries in the U.S. So I came here to find out why, and found nothing. The author gave no information as to why it was added or why it's use was discontinued. Nor did he specify what bromine compound he was referring to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Question: "At a pressure of 55 GPa bromine converts to a metal." Do you guys mean "converts to a solid"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kittichai (talkcontribs) 11:05, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain that this phrase means that Br enters a metallic phase and electronic delocalisation regime under extreme pressure, thematically similar to metallic hydrogen. Eutactic (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes that is right. It would convert to a solid at some lower pressure but I don't know what that would be. We need a phase diagram to express this. The interesting thing is that the first two metallic phases still have diatomic molecules, and only at the third does the material lose the molecular structure. It seems that most materials turn into a metal at high pressures. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

No essential function? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Ozone Depletion[edit]

The article states that "bromine has been evaluated to have an ozone depletion potential of 60 when compared to chlorine." What does this potential of 60 mean? Is it a factor of 60, 60%? Someone please clarify this. --Vertigo

-- It's just 60: . I turned the "ozone depletion potential" phrase to a link for clarification.Bengisuk 15:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


I am going to delete the recycling section. Recycling appears to be impossible for most of the applictions listed, since it is often found in the product (ie. flame retardants). Also, bromine is not particularily expensive, contrary to the "high cost" claim. In fact, it is often used in organic reactions (ie. alkane addition reactions where selectivity is important) because it is much less expensive than iodine (it also reacts much faster in addition reactions and is a liquid). Polonium 20:25, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


What is the viscosity of Bromine? --Savant13 19:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

1.252 mPa·s (0 °C), 0.944 mPa·s (25 °C), 0.746 mPa·s (50 °C), according to the CRC Handbook, 85th. (It's a bit unclear about accuracy, it's specified for the whole table as ranging "from 1% in the best cases to 5 to 10% in the worst cases".) Femto 10:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Bromine in biology[edit]

Does bromine serve any biological function like chlorine and iodine do? --Seven of Nine 06:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Looks like it plays some role in marine sponges and can screw up the synthesis of thyroid hormones in other animals
Any one fancy doing the reading for this one and writing it up properly? (talk) 22:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
There are natural products of biological origin containing bromine; a famous example is Tyrian purple. --Itub (talk) 11:50, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
Not in people, though. At least not beneficially. Fluoride and bromide appear to compete for iodine receptors in mammals. (talk) 07:50, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Isn't it also used in trace amounts for the formation of an anti-parasitic protein? Samuel P. aka Unknown9876789 (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Apparently Bromine is essential for tissue development in all animals, from primitive sea creatures to humans. <ref></ref>


The density of elemental bromine is 3.12 g/mL, per 88th CRC. Is it wikipedia practice to list the density of the element or of the diatom on the element's page? Christopher 21:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

That density is certainly for diatomic bromine. Monatomic bromine is not stable under normal conditions. --Itub (talk) 09:26, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

bromine synthesis[edit]

Somebody added in good faith:

  • Another method of making bromine is to react an ionic compound containing bromide ions such as potassium bromide with potassium permanganate acidified with sulphuric acid. But this method is rather inefficient and messy since the permanganate, MnO4-, is reduced to dark brown manganese dioxide.

What should we do with this?--Stone (talk) 07:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Bromo is a volcano![edit]

Why am i redirected to this article when I search for Bromo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:06, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Mount Bromo would be the right place to search, but right, a disambig would be a better solution.--Stone (talk) 06:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Electron configuration?[edit]

I suppose that that the electron configuration of bromine is [Ar]3d10 4s2 4p5 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

This seems wrong. According to and several other sources, it should be [Ar]4s2 3d10 4p5 . Why is it wrong on the sidebar? I think this should be corrected. Ryvr (talk) 19:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Electron configurations are written in increasing order of principal quantum number, so 3d10 should come before 4s2. In the case of Br, it also makes sense since the 4s and 4p electrons are valence electrons while the 3d electrons are part of the core. Double sharp (talk) 02:09, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

quality scale assessment[edit]

B-Class review

  • The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.
Several sections are unreferenced.
  • Physical — Only one reference for the whole section
  • Chemical characteristics — unreferenced
  • Production: production has increased sixfold since the 1960s needs ref
  • Organic chemistry — unreferenced
  • Inorganic chemistry — unreferenced
  • Laboratory methods of production — unreferenced
  • Medical and veterinary, bromism — needs reference
  • Other uses — only a few are referenced
  • The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
  • Isotopes — are fission products: are they minor ones or major ones?
  • History — Ends with the use as sedative in the early 20th there must be more
  • Safety — the production of tear gas when combined with acetone should be added.
  • The article has a defined structure.
  • The eosinophil use of bromine should not be part of Biological role but moved to the Medical and veterinary
  • The article is reasonably well-written.
  • The article has some bolted lists and some of those should be rewritten to prose
  • The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.
  • OK
  • The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.
  • OK

Conclusion article fails B-Class

--Stone (talk) 11:41, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Agree with all above, save the idea that possible bromine role in eosinophils role should be in med/vet. Only if doctors or vets used this fact in any way. They don't. It's a (possible) role of bromine in normal metabolism that isn't part of any known pathology. Personally I'd like to see experimentation with bromide-supplementation, or bromide-depletion in parasite-worm infections, or in asthma, but to my knowledge, nobody has tried it!

Oh, yes, and bolted lists. You know, despite WP:MoS vague policy, some things just go better in list form, see the embedded list discussion in WP:LIST, which states an opposte policy. If subsets of items in a list can be connected by a common theme (other than the obvious Br one) I agree they could sometimes be written better to paragraph form, since the theme stimulates memory. Otherwise I think lists are sometimes unfairly deprecated. SBHarris 19:36, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Bread and certain processed foods[edit]

What is it used for in food stuffs and breadmaking? I understand that iodine historically was used, which was good for you, but many commercial manufacturers switched to bromine in the last 20-30 years because it was cheaper. For what ingredients or processing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:51, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Bromine Poisoning[edit]

If too much Bromine gets into the body, it will misplace a similar element that is crucial to the body. Such misplacement can cause a series of health problems, including breast cancer. However, I have no citation to back this up so it does not get removed. Can someone please provide me with a citation so I can add this to the article? --Thenewguy34 (talk) 20:10, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

If you don't have a citation, how do you know it is true? --Ben (talk) 20:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Iodine is a very important element to the body, you can entrust that this is true (or very accurate. I am not sure if breast cancer is correct, but breast-related problems can occur if there's low amounts of iodine in the body). --Thenewguy34 (talk) 20:41, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

What I read of that is that bromism is what you get if you have elevated bromine levels and it looks like a form of depression. The replacement of chlorine and not iodine is mentioned in one of the refs.

--Stone (talk) 20:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Stone, excellent work as ever. Thenewguy34: you simply cannot make up ideas and post them on Wikipedia: see WP:SYN. --Ben (talk) 22:35, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
It's not entirely his fault. There are some doctors who have a hammer and see everything as though it were a nail, and in this case the hammer is iodine supplementation, which they think will cure everything from brain fog to fibrocystic breast disease. [1]. And perhaps it will one day have a role for things we don't think of now. Iodine is actively transported, and shows up in salivary fluid, sweat, and breast milk, and (like vitamin D) one can probably take quite a lot more than the RDA for iodide and have no effect, or perhaps even a good one, if the iodide is excreted and does good antioxidative things. However, the positive claims have included taking elemental iodine as Lugol's (why elemental plus the iodide, I have no idea, except that this Abraham guy has a fixed delusion that elemental iodine is good for you) plus a lot of claims that we're exposed to "goitrogens" of which one is claimed to be bromide. I know of no evidence that enviromentals level of bromide are ever goitrogenic. One must make a distinction between enviromental intakes of bromide of a few 10's of mg a day (even in a high seafood diet) vs. the gigantically larger amounts that caused bromism (multi-grams/day) back in the old days of bromide as medicine. But that hasn't been seen since 1975 in the US, is not a problem anywhere else except in the few epileptics being treated with bromide in Germany. So it seems a bit out of place as big discussion here. It has more place on the iodine supplementation part of the iodine article, or perhaps the potassium iodide article. SBHarris 22:51, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Fair enough. Still, it's always good to critically analyse any facts you want to add to Wikipedia. I often think about adding something I know, check it out in the literature, find it's not quite what I thought it was. If you say where you heard the idea, at least someone else can check it. Without a source, it's very difficult. --Ben (talk) 23:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. Which is why we have WP:V and WP:IRS. The hardest thing is when you know very well something is true, or you have a good idea of how it is used in language, but it's so obvious to the experts that they fail to say it. That leaves you with textbooks, which are often not online, and often are written by people who are teaching what they themselves don't have the very best understanding of. Ouch. SBHarris 23:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. It has been a rather busy couple of weeks for me. --Thenewguy34 (talk) 00:37, 6 June 2012 (UTC)


  • McCall, A. Scott; Cummings, Christopher F.; Bhave, Gautam; Vanacore, Roberto; Page-Mccaw, Andrea; Hudson, Billy G. (2014). "Bromine is an Essential Trace Element for Assembly of Collagen IV Scaffolds in Tissue Development and Architecture". Cell. 157 (6): 1380. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.05.009. PMID 24906154. 

--Stone (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Stable isotopes[edit]

Hi. In section isotopes it's stated: The other two, 79Br and 81Br, are stable or nearly stable, with half lives greater than a quadrillion seconds.. 1015 seconds is only 32 million years. So, it's impossible to be stable isotopes. Is maybe about 1015 years? --C3r4 ((ask me)) 08:41, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK both 79Br and 81Br are expected to be stable to anything except proton decay. Also, as you point out, a half-life of around 1015 s is short enough that it would have been noticed, so while this comparison is technically true, it's misleading. So I removed the words after "are stable" from that sentence. Double sharp (talk) 09:04, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Very well, that's good. Thank you Double sharp, and best regards --C3r4 ((ask me)) 10:08, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome! Double sharp (talk) 11:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bromine/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Right, you know the drill.....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:06, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Bromine was not produced in large quantities until 1860 - needs a cite
Yes check.svg Done Double sharp (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
paras 2 and 3 in the history section are not in chronological order. Is there a reason for this?
I was undecided on which way to go on this one. The reason is that Löwig found Br earlier but Balard published first, so he is the one usually credited (Löwig is not even mentioned in Greenwood and Earnshaw, for example). Double sharp (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
I'd flip them as it reads funny currently.
Okay, Yes check.svg Done Double sharp (talk) 11:31, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
GIven that it is volatile and name means "stench", I was expecting some discussion of the smell in the properties section...
There is not really a good comparison among normally encountered substances to the intensely penetrating and choking smell of Br2, although I suppose one should be thankful for that. I have added a description of the smell, and a more detailed descriptions of the not-very-pretty descriptions of the results of inhaling Br2. (I suppose you could consider this another periodic trend: I2 gas is okay to breathe in small quantities but not recommended, while Cl2 was used as a chemical weapon.) Double sharp (talk) 09:01, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
More important are the four oxoacids: hypobromous acid (HOBr), bromous acid (HOBrO), bromic acid (HOBrO2), and perbromic acid (HOBrO3). - err, why?
Fixed. Double sharp (talk) 11:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Brominated flame retardants represent a commodity of growing importance, and represent the largest commercial use of bromine. - try not to use the same verb twice in the same sentence
Better? Double sharp (talk) 11:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Actually I think this works better. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:52, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! Double sharp (talk) 15:09, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
what happened to ref Greenwood793?
Oops! Fixed. Double sharp (talk) 11:29, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
The last para of Properties section - any possible significance or practical use?
Well, coolness factor aside, I don't think there is one now due to the immense pressures involved. It's also not really unique to Br: of all the nonmetals that can be investigated, only He, C, F, Ne, Ar, and Kr have not yet been metallised (we obviously can't do Rn, and I've seen conflicting reports about N). Still, I do think such phase changes are interesting, since they are an intrinsic part of the phase diagram of the element. Double sharp (talk) 11:40, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok point taken. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:52, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
File:Alkene-bromine-addition-2D-skeletal.png lacks a description or source
Added. Double sharp (talk) 03:45, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:


Pass or Fail: well done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:56, 20 November 2016 (UTC)