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.
Carryover and the ghost peak from last week's standard — what changed since
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.
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.
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.
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.
Carryover is a question about a distribution, not about a value, and treating it as a value is what produces the confident wrong answers.
I would be cautious about generalising from the Carryover example above. It is a good example. It is one example.
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.
Read the full topic (115 posts)
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[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,…
|
+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…
|
+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…
|
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…
|
+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…
|
2 | 43k | 16mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags gradient method, data table, HPLC
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
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…
|
+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…
|
+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…
|
+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.…
|
+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…
|
+23 | 27 | 5.9k | 21h |