Mitragynine pseudoindoxyl is a rearranged oxidation product of mitragynine, the principal alkaloid in kratom (Mitragyna speciosa). It is one of three compounds named in FR Doc 2026-13581, the DEA Notice of Intent published in the Federal Register on 2026-07-06, alongside MGM-15 and MGM-16. The listing carries no threshold: any detectable amount is captured, together with isomers, esters, ethers and salts.
It is a compound most buyers had never heard of until it appeared in a scheduling notice, and it behaves differently from 7-OH in ways that matter for both testing and compliance. Here is what it is and why it ended up where it did.
Quick Reference
| Common name | Mitragynine pseudoindoxyl (often abbreviated MP) |
| Relationship to kratom | Oxidative rearrangement product of mitragynine |
| Core structure | Spiro-fused oxindole, rearranged from the indole parent |
| Named in | FR Doc 2026-13581, published 2026-07-06 |
| Threshold | None — any detectable amount, plus isomers, esters, ethers, salts |
| Effective | On or after 2026-08-05, on the date the order publishes |
What the Molecule Actually Is
Mitragynine is an indole alkaloid. Its core is an indole ring system fused into a larger structure — the shape that defines most of the alkaloids in the kratom leaf.
Mitragynine pseudoindoxyl is what you get when that indole core undergoes oxidation and rearranges into a spiro-oxindole. In plain terms, an oxygen is introduced and the ring system reorganises: two rings that were fused along an edge become joined at a single shared atom, and the nitrogen-bearing ring is converted to an oxindole. The atoms are largely the same. The three-dimensional architecture is not.
That rearrangement is why the compound needs its own name, its own reference standard and its own place in a scheduling notice. It is not mitragynine with a decoration attached; it is a structurally distinct molecule that happens to be reachable from mitragynine. The pseudoindoxyl rearrangement is a known transformation in this alkaloid family, and it was described in chemistry well before the compound appeared in any commercial product.
It is a separate compound from 7-hydroxymitragynine, and separate again from MGM-15 and MGM-16, which are built on the 7-OH scaffold rather than by this rearrangement. We cover those two in the companion piece on MGM-15 and MGM-16.
How It Ends Up in a Product
There are two routes, and they carry different implications.
Deliberate semi-synthesis. The pseudoindoxyl can be produced by controlled oxidation of mitragynine in a laboratory. This is the route that matters commercially: it converts an abundant starting material into a specific target compound in quantity.
Oxidative degradation. The same transformation can occur, slowly and incidentally, in stored plant material and extracts exposed to oxygen, heat and light over time. This route generally produces trace quantities rather than meaningful ones.
Under a threshold-based standard, that second route would usually be irrelevant — trace amounts would fall below the line. Under a no-threshold standard it is not irrelevant at all, because the standard is any detectable amount. That is the pivot point of this entire notice, and it deserves its own section.
Why the No-Threshold Standard Changes the Analysis
DEA's two July 2026 notices are drafted differently on purpose.
FR Doc 2026-13580 covers 7-hydroxymitragynine above a specified threshold: 0.050% by weight, or 1.00 milligram per article. That structure exists because 7-OH occurs naturally in kratom leaf at trace levels. A flat prohibition would have captured every leaf in existence, so the agency drew a line intended to sit above natural trace occurrence and below deliberately concentrated material. The arithmetic is worked through in our threshold explainer.
FR Doc 2026-13581 draws no such line. For mitragynine pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15 and MGM-16, the standard is presence, not quantity. The practical effects:
- There is no compliant concentration. No amount is small enough to fall outside the listing.
- The detection limit becomes the operative line. Whether a sample is "clean" depends on the sensitivity of the method used, not on a number written into the notice. A more sensitive lab finds more.
- Dilution does not help. Blending affected material into a larger mass lowers concentration, but concentration is not the test.
- Incidental presence still counts. Degradation over time, or carryover on shared production equipment, can put a detectable amount into a product nobody intended to contain any.
The listing also reaches isomers, esters, ethers and salts — standard drafting that forecloses the workaround of shipping a salt form and calling it a different substance.
Why Most Lab Panels Never Look for It
This is the practical heart of the matter, and it is where a lot of category marketing quietly overstates what its paperwork shows.
Targeted analytical methods find what they are built to find. An LC-MS/MS panel identifies each analyte using specific precursor and product ion transitions, and each analyte requires a certified reference standard to be identified and quantified with confidence. Add an analyte and you add cost, method development time, and a standard that has to be sourced. Labs do not include compounds speculatively.
The consequence is that a standard kratom-alkaloid panel returns results for exactly the compounds on it and says nothing about mitragynine pseudoindoxyl. A total-alkaloid figure is even less informative: it is a summed measurement that does not itemise anything.
So a certificate reading non-detect across a kratom panel is a real result about the compounds on that panel. It is not evidence about MP. There is no way around this. A test that does not include an analyte cannot clear that analyte, no matter how clean the rest of the report looks.
Where We Stand, Stated Plainly
Botanical Blends is a distributor and retailer of third-party botanical brands. We do not manufacture, formulate or blend anything — we carry other companies' products, and the lab documentation we can point to is what those brands' suppliers commissioned. Composition is whatever the brand states on its own product listing; we do not characterise it for them. We think being candid about the edges of that documentation is more useful than the vague "lab tested" badge most of this category settles for.
The supplier certificates we hold report non-detect for 7-hydroxymitragynine and mitragynine. That is what supports the no kratom, no mitragynine, no 7-OH framing we use, and it is as far as the paperwork goes. Those documents are published on our certificate of analysis page and you are welcome to read them yourself.
Those panels do not test for mitragynine pseudoindoxyl, MGM-15, MGM-16 or corynoxine B. We therefore do not describe anything we carry as free of those compounds, and we do not use blanket wording implying our panels covered every substance named in the scheduling notices. It is a gap, we know it is a gap, and we would rather name it than paper over it. If you see a competitor making the broader claim, the fair question is which analytes their lab actually ran. More on reading the document itself is in our COA guide.
Cat's Claw Is a Different Plant
Worth restating, because the two get confused constantly in search results and on marketplace listings. Cat's Claw is Uncaria tomentosa, a woody vine from the Amazon basin. Kratom is Mitragyna speciosa, a tree native to Southeast Asia. Different genus, different continent of origin, different plant entirely. Neither Uncaria tomentosa nor any of its constituents is named in FR Doc 2026-13580 or FR Doc 2026-13581.
That is a statement about the scope of the DEA notices, and it is worth keeping it to exactly that. It does not tell you what any particular finished product contains — only a batch-specific certificate with a named analyte list can speak to that. Background on the botanical is at our Cat's Claw primer, and the side-by-side comparison is in Cat's Claw vs kratom vs 7-OH.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is mitragynine pseudoindoxyl natural or synthetic?
Both routes exist. It can form slowly by oxidation of mitragynine in stored material, and it can be produced deliberately by controlled oxidation in a laboratory. Commercially relevant quantities come from the second route. Because the listing has no threshold, the distinction does not change the legal analysis.
Why is there no threshold when 7-OH has one?
7-OH occurs naturally in kratom leaf at trace levels, so a flat prohibition would have captured ordinary botanical material. A threshold let DEA separate trace natural occurrence from deliberate concentration. That problem does not arise for mitragynine pseudoindoxyl in the same way, so no carve-out was built.
Will a standard kratom panel detect it?
Generally no. Typical panels target mitragynine, 7-OH and the common leaf alkaloids. Detecting mitragynine pseudoindoxyl requires it to be included as a named analyte with its own reference standard. Check the itemised analyte list on any certificate rather than the summary heading — our COA guide walks through where to look.
When does the scheduling take effect?
On or after 2026-08-05, on the date the order publishes in the Federal Register. It runs two years, extendable by one, and under the temporary scheduling statute it is not subject to judicial review. There is no grace period. See how DEA temporary scheduling works.
Does this mean products labelled kratom-free are affected?
A label is a claim, not a test result. The only way to answer that question for a specific product is a batch-specific certificate whose analyte list includes the compound in question. That is the standard we hold ourselves to, including where our own documentation falls short of it.
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. For adults 21+. Legality depends on the specific formulation and applicable state law — check the rules where you live. Nothing here is legal advice.