Reversed-phase separates on hydrophobicity. A peptide is retained on a non-polar stationary phase and eluted by increasing organic solvent. For peptides the mobile phase almost always contains an ion-pairing acid, typically 0.1% TFA, which suppresses secondary interactions and sharpens peaks.
Carryover and the ghost peak from last week's standard — what changed since
On integration: where the baseline is drawn matters more than most people realise. On a clean chromatogram with well-resolved peaks the choice is inconsequential. On a chromatogram with a trailing shoulder or a rising baseline it matters. Differences of one to two percentage points between defensible integrations are ordinary.
This follows post #28 rather than contradicting it.
System suitability testing: injections run before and during the sample run to establish whether the instrument, column and method were performing when the sample was analysed. If suitability did not pass, the sample results from that run are uninterpretable.
I read post #43 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
Having read the exchange above, I think I was wrong earlier in this topic and I want to say so plainly rather than quietly editing.
The correction was fair and I had been repeating something I had not checked carefully enough.
Two things before anyone answers the substance.
First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.
Picking up post #68: that is the part I would want checked first.
System suitability testing: injections run before and during the sample run to establish whether the instrument, column and method were performing when the sample was analysed. If suitability did not pass, the sample results from that run are uninterpretable.
Two things before anyone answers the substance.
First, the context in the first post is clear and specific. Second, the question is framed so that an answer can actually address it. Both are the norm here and both matter more than they sound.
Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.
Read the full topic (115 posts)
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[2026 update] Detection wavelength and why 214 nm and 280 nm disagree
Detection wavelength and why 214 nm and 280 nm disagree — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will…
|
+69 | 76 | 920 | 6h |
|
Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct
Why 99.2% and 97.8% on the same lot can both be correct I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to understand what this number means before I…
|
+16 | 20 | 3.1k | 11h |
|
Second pass at: What a reversed-phase purity number actually is
On the subject in the title: Second pass at: What a reversed-phase purity number actually is Working notes rather than a conclusion. I would like to understand what this number means before I repeat it…
|
2 | 7.4k | 11mo | |
|
Comparing two chromatograms from different laboratories, properly
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Comparing two chromatograms from different laboratories, properly Everything below is what sits behind that. I would like to understand what this number means…
|
+35 | 40 | 22k | 7mo |
|
Coming back to: Column chemistry choices for a 40-residue peptide
On the subject in the title: Column chemistry choices for a 40-residue peptide Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will otherwise be.…
|
2 | 43k | 16mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags gradient method, data table, HPLC
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Coming back to: Specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, range, robustness — with real criteria
On the subject in the title: Specificity, linearity, accuracy, precision, range, robustness — with real criteria Working notes rather than a conclusion. Posting the method first, because I know what the first…
|
+93 | 99 | 1.4k | 6d |
|
Comparing my trajectory with the trial curves, carefully — a second dataset
Comparing my trajectory with the trial curves, carefully — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Maintenance rather than loss, which is the part of this that…
|
+77 | 81 | 16k | 11h |
|
Validating a method you did not develop — does this still hold?
Validating a method you did not develop — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. I would like to understand what this number means…
|
+128 | 148 | 47k | 16mo |
|
Repeatability versus intermediate precision
Repeatability versus intermediate precision — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting the method first, because I know what the first three replies will otherwise be.…
|
+119 | 134 | 34k | 13mo |
|
[2026 update] Waist circumference technique and its repeatability
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Waist circumference technique and its repeatability Everything below is what sits behind that. Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a number without…
|
+23 | 27 | 5.9k | 21h |