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