The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Topic summary

Carryover and the ghost peak from last week's standard — what changed since

This is a generated summary. It shows the 9 most-liked posts from a topic of 115, in their original order, with the accepted answer included where one exists. It is a reading aid and it will miss nuance — the full topic is the record.
ZY
z.yildizTL2 Solution3 Jun 2026#3

My experience of Carryover contradicts the reply above. I am posting it as a data point rather than as a refutation, because one person's experience is exactly that.

7 likes 2mo
NO
n.okwuosaTL25 Jun 2026#7

Peaks that do not elute do not appear in the area percentage. Aggregates and strongly retained species can be entirely invisible to a standard method, which is a ceiling on what any purity figure can claim.

Not disagreeing with anyone above, just adding the bit I keep having to look up.

28 likes 2mo
VM
v.milanoviTL3Regular14 Jun 2026#31

Confirming post #28 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

Mobile-phase preparation is a genuine source of between-laboratory variation. Acid concentration and organic modifier both shift retention, and neither is usually specified to the precision that would matter.

Someone should write this up properly, and it should probably not be me.

31 likes 1mo
SL
s.lundgrenTL218 Jun 2026#45

Answering the question post #44 raises rather than the one it answers.

Since Carryover keeps coming up, it should probably be a maintained page rather than a recurring thread. I am happy to draft it if someone with more direct experience will review it.

31 likes 1mo
DA
d.achebeTL220 Jun 2026#53

The arithmetic in post #50 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.

A relative retention time against a known peak travels much better than an absolute one, and almost nobody reports it.

It cost nothing to check and would have cost something not to.

27 likes 1mo
M
microgramsTL2Regular25 Jun 2026#69
r.marsden, post #63: The honest answer on Carryover is that it depends, and the useful part is the list of what it depends on. Four items, in rough order of how much they matter. Most people get the first two right and then argue about the fourth. Go to post

Carryover is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.

27 likes in reply to #63 1mo
VS
v.szaboTL3Analytical chemist25 Jun 2026#71

Confirming post #68 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.

On Carryover, I would rather understate and be corrected upward than overstate and be quoted. That is a house style here and it is a good one.

29 likes 1mo
LD
l.dziedzicTL227 Jun 2026#80
i.ilunga, post #22: I would rather this thread reach "we do not know" about Carryover than reach a confident answer that nobody can support when asked. Go to post

I would be cautious about generalising from the Carryover example above. It is a good example. It is one example.

30 likes in reply to #22 30d
CB
c.balogunTL229 Jun 2026#85
a.aguirre, post #5: Saving this. It is the version I will quote when the question comes round again. Go to post

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.

I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more.

32 likes in reply to #5 29d

Read the full topic (115 posts)

Suggested topics

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
[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. I would like to disagree carefully with the settled view on Detection wavelength,…
HVKAMCDKR+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…
GHAAJSLCCR+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…
JTSPNS 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…
DBKKKFFLA+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. Column chemistry choices — I have the observation and I do not trust my interpretation of…
MLFPHB 2 43k 16mo

Related topics — sharing the tags gradient method, data table, HPLC

TopicParticipantsRepliesViewsActivity
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. Trying to establish the boundary conditions on…
AWHNFJCOT+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…
OPYMHESTBW+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. Validating a method, and specifically the version of…
AAEFNRRBFE+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. Trying to establish the boundary conditions on repeatability versus intermediate precision.…
LSKAILWNO+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. An honest uncertainty about Waist circumference technique rather than…
RZZACNSKG+23 27 5.9k 21h