[Question] is 98.1% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error
is 98.1% actually fine or am I being sold a rounding error, and before anyone asks: same batch throughout, single submission, no cherry-picking between services. The numbers the title promised, since a headline without them is worthless: 98.1%. Everything below is context for those. Sent the same vial to Janoshik and…
UV response is not uniform across species. At 214nm you are looking at the peptide bond, which is why it is the working wavelength for this class; at 280nm you only see tryptophan, tyrosine and phenylalanine.
That figure cannot be quoted to two decimals off that baseline. The precision is not in the data.
Gave the same trace to two people I trust and got two integrations about a point apart. That was the most educational afternoon I have had here.
retention time alone is not identity
Correction: that is a tailing factor, not a plate count. Different diagnostics for different problems.
Started reporting my own integrations with the baseline choice stated. Arguments in my threads dropped by about half.