help me understand integration, I have read the wiki twice
help me understand integration, I have read the wiki twice, and I want the answer with the reasoning attached rather than just the conclusion.
System suitability — repeat injections, tailing factor, plate count, RSD on area — is what tells you the instrument was fit for the measurement that day. Without it, the purity figure is unanchored.
Area percent is the integrated area of your peak over the total integrated area at one wavelength on one gradient. Change any of those and the number changes without the sample changing.
Resolution between two peaks depends on retention, selectivity and efficiency. A shallower gradient buys retention and usually resolution, at the cost of peak width and run time.
Please do not ask me what dose you should be on. I genuinely do not know and neither does anyone else here.
best — the order this archive was captured in
A shoulder that does not baseline-resolve cannot be quantified honestly. You can report it as an unresolved shoulder, which is useful information, or you can develop the method until it resolves.
214nm sees the peptide bond, 280nm sees the aromatics
report the method or do not report the number
the column has a history and it shows in the peak shape
That figure cannot be quoted to two decimals off that baseline. The precision is not in the data.
Bought a second-hand instrument and learned more in six months of fixing it than in three years of reading traces.
[deleted]
Chased a ghost peak for three weeks. It was the plumbing. It is always the plumbing.
Do you have the mass, or only the UV trace?
Can you post the trace with the axes labelled?
Can you post the trace with the axes labelled?
Agreed. And the corollary is that the method line on a certificate is not decoration, it is the number’s provenance.
Can you post the trace with the axes labelled?
Adding one practical thing — run the blank. It answers this before anyone has to argue about it.
axis labels or the trace is decoration