PeptideStack
5.2kquestions
20kanswers
220users

How do I reconcile 97.6% from Janoshik with 97.1% from the supplier?

Asked 20 Oct 2025Modified 5 months agoViewed 16k times
14

What I have: 97.6% · Janoshik · 97.1%.

I have a result I cannot explain, and I would rather diagnose it than guess.

I have checked the obvious explanations and eliminated the two easiest ones.

What is the differential here, and which test discriminates between the options?

purity
purity

Purity as chromatographic area per cent - the fraction of detected material that is your target peak. It says nothing about how much material is…

788 questions
batch-testing
batch-testing

Testing at the batch or lot level: sampling plans, how many vials from a lot need testing to say anything about the lot, and the difference…

865 questions
coa
coa

Certificates of analysis: what fields a useful one carries, how to tell a real analytical report from a marketing document, batch and lot…

749 questions
shareeditfollowflag
EH
askedeighty_six_hours16k2720 Oct 2025

4 Answers

Accepted answer first, then by votes
77

Accepted answer

Concretely, purity is a method-dependent figure, and that is not a limitation of the measurement, it is a property of what the measurement actually answers.

Gradient slope controls resolution, and gentler slopes resolve co-eluting impurities into separate peaks — so the better method reports the worse purity number.

In practice, tailing factor measures peak shape, and a badly tailing peak spreads into the region where small impurities live, forcing tangent-skim integration that assigns tail area to the main peak.

Published side-by-side method comparisons show that a two-point difference in purity on the same vial is easily explained by method choice alone.

The practical summary: ask for the chromatogram and the method, and ignore the headline number until you have both.

shareimprove this answerflag
TU
answered · acceptedtenth_of_a_unit40k3827 Jan 2026
3I would gently push back on the second point — the evidence there is thinner than stated. – Dr_Ilse_Vandenberg 6 months ago
2Adding for future readers: the certificate should carry the lot number, not just a batch code. – Dr_Tomas_Kral 4 months ago
add a comment
Sponsored

Janoshik Analytical - Independent Third-Party Testing

HPLC purity, identity confirmation and quantified content on the vial you actually hold. Reports arrive with the chromatogram attached, not just a number.

Submit a sample
Sponsored — paired listing

GL Biochem (Shanghai) Ltd. - Direct Synthesis

Founded 1998. ISO 9001 and cGMP certified, 1,500+ staff and 200+ patents. The synthesis house behind a great many of the vials that get sent out for testing - batch-specific documentation with every order.

Visit GL Biochem
67

The method matters more than the vial, which is why specifying a method buys you far more than changing suppliers does.

The fraction of your main peak that is actually your target versus isomers, fragments or related sequences is invisible without complementary identity testing.

The underlying point is that mobile phase additive choice affects ionisation and peak shape — TFA gives sharp peaks but suppresses mass spectrometry signal, formic acid gives worse peaks but preserves signal.

The Arrhenius relationship for peptide degradation is the basis of accelerated stability testing and also governs how quickly methods drift with temperature.

Compare purity within a single laboratory on the same method, never across laboratories.

edited 27 Feb 2026 by Dr_Hanne_Solberg — removed a claim I could not source

shareimprove this answerflag
DS
answeredDr_Hanne_Solberg40k387 Feb 2026
6Do you have a reference for the last claim? Not disputing it, just want to read it. – Dr_Jonas_Halvorsen 10 months ago
add a comment
35

Start from what the detector sees, because that tells you what the number means.

Mass on column affects detector linearity and peak overlap — overloading broadens peaks and hides neighbours, while underloading improves resolution but loses sensitivity.

Retention time is sequence-specific and method-specific, so comparing your result to a supplier value using a different method is meaningless without method documentation.

Inter-laboratory studies on identical peptide material routinely find half-a-per-cent to a full-per-cent spreads in reported purity on the same sample.

If you are ranking vendors, specify a method and have all samples tested at the same place.

shareimprove this answerflag
MO
answeredmarta_okonkwo87k2581 Nov 2025
-3

Understanding purity requires separating the chemistry from the method from the reporting convention, and the three are not independent.

Sample solvent strength affects peak shape — if you inject in strong solvent on a gradient starting in weak solvent, the solvent peak can distort your main peak or create a false shoulder.

Proline conformer interconversion kinetics are well-characterised and the half-life is of the same order as the chromatographic peak width at room temperature.

The practical summary: ask for the chromatogram and the method, and ignore the headline number until you have both.

shareimprove this answerflag
LT
answeredlane_transit42k3821 Oct 2025

Your answer

Ask PeptideStack is a static archive. Posting is closed, but the norms are worth stating: answer the question that was asked, show your working, cite the trial or the certificate, and say plainly where the evidence runs out.

Not medical advice. Research-use-only compounds are not approved for human use.