PeptideStack
5.2kquestions
20kanswers
220users

Is a 99.1% result from Janoshik comparable to 96.8% from Medutest?

Asked 7 Sept 2024Modified 19 months agoViewed 16k times
26

Details up front: 99.1% · Janoshik · 96.8% · Medutest.

I want to know what the trade-off actually is rather than which option is fashionable.

I would rather have a defensible reason than a marginal improvement.

So which one, and on what grounds?

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…

833 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…

910 questions
reference-standard
reference-standard

Certified reference materials and in-house standards: traceability, the certificate of the standard itself, system suitability, and why every…

185 questions
janoshik
janoshik

Janoshik Analytical, an independent third-party testing laboratory widely used by this community for HPLC purity, identity and quantified content…

139 questions
medutest
medutest

Medutest, one of four independent testing and verification services referenced throughout this site. Use this tag for its methods, its report…

126 questions
shareeditfollowflag
SC
askedstopper_core28k1277 Sept 2024

2 Answers

Accepted answer first, then by votes
102

Accepted answer

99.1 and 96.8 are 2.3 percentage points apart, which sounds small until you restate it as impurity. Janoshik is leaving 0.9 per cent of the detected area unassigned and Medutest 3.2 per cent — a factor of 3.56 between them. The impurity fraction is the quantity that moves when a method changes, and it is the one worth arguing about; the headline is just its complement. Comparable means same column chemistry, same gradient slope, same detection wavelength, same integration convention. Until you have those four from both laboratories, 99.1 and 96.8 are two measurements of slightly different quantities that happen to share a unit.

Worth being precise here: understanding purity requires separating the chemistry from the method from the reporting convention, and the three are not independent.

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.

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.

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
M4
answered · acceptedmz_4113101k35831 Dec 2024
Sponsored

PeptideMeter - Independent Peptide Analytics

Aggregated, published test results and vendor ratings built from submitted batches. Methodology stated, dataset browsable, no listing fees.

Browse results
88

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

Column pore size affects mass transfer — a 100 Angstrom packing on a 5 kDa peptide restricts diffusion, broadening the peak and potentially hiding small impurities in the shoulders.

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

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

shareimprove this answerflag
NN
answerednine_point_nine60k14813 Sept 2024

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.