Manufacturer since 2009 · Tongling, Anhui ISO certified Licensed for hazardous & precursor chemicals
[email protected] · +86 186 5620 1888
Eapearl Chemical
L (+)-Tartaric acid, CAS 87-69-4 — chemical product label

L (+)-Tartaric acid

L (+)-Tartaric acid

CAS 87-69-4 EC 201-766-0 C4H6O6 Powder SDS published CLP Danger

⚠️ Note: This safety data sheet is provided in English; a localized version is being prepared.

MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v2 · 08.09.2026

Specification

Product NameL (+)-Tartaric acid
Other NamesL (+)-Tartaric acid
CAS No.87-69-4
EINECS No.201-766-0
MFC4H6O6
Molecular weight150.09
Purity99%
AppearanceColorless or white crystalline powder
Density1.76
Melting point170-172°C
Boiling point191.59°C
flash (ing) point210 °C

Values are typical for the standard grade. Tighter specifications are available — state the target in your inquiry and we confirm against the production batch.

Hazard classification

GHS pictogram GHS05 — Corrosive GHS pictogram GHS07 — Irritant / harmful

Danger

Classification source — PubChem C&L (consensus filter, not harmonised)

No harmonised entry exists for this substance; the classification shown is the supplier consensus reported to ECHA and should be confirmed for your intended use.

  • H315 Causes skin irritation
  • H318 Causes serious eye damage
  • H319 Causes serious eye irritation
  • H335 May cause respiratory irritation
Precautionary statements (1)
  • P261 Avoid breathing dust/fume/gas/mist/vapours/spray
Full safety data sheet CLP label (EN)

Substance identity verified against the registry entry on 2026-09-02.

Packaging and shipping

Bag25kg
IBC Dag25kg
ISO tank (20ft)24–26 m³
ISO tank (40ft)48–50 m³
L (+)-Tartaric acid
L (+)-Tartaric acid
L (+)-Tartaric acid
L (+)-Tartaric acid
L (+)-Tartaric acid

L(+)-citric acid is a naturally occurring organic acid widely found in fruits such as grapes and bananas. It is one of the two optical isomers of citric acid. With its unique refreshing sour taste, high optical purity, excellent chelating ability and chiral characteristics, L(+)-citric acid has become a multi-functional platform molecule connecting various fields such as food and beverage, pharmaceutical manufacturing, chiral synthesis, green electroplating and high-end research. We, with a profound understanding of natural raw materials and strict control over quality, meet the strict demands of different industries for safety, compliance and high performance.

L+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applicationsL+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applicationsL+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applications

L+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applications

Product Description

Anhui Eapearl Chemical Co., Ltd., As a professional source factory of fine chemicals and natural product derivatives, we are dedicated to providing customers with L(+)-citric acid products that are derived from nature and of high optical purity, as well as professional application solutions. L(+)-citric acid is a natural organic acid widely present in fruits such as grapes and bananas, and is one of the two optical isomers of citric acid. With its unique refreshing sour taste, high optical purity, excellent chelating ability and chiral characteristics, L(+)-citric acid has become a multi-functional platform molecule connecting multiple fields such as food and beverage, pharmaceutical manufacturing, chiral synthesis, green electroplating and high-end research. We meet the strict demands of different industries for safety, compliance and high performance through our profound understanding of natural raw materials and strict quality control.L+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applications

L+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applications

Delivery&Payment method

L+)- Tartaric acid, food grade / pharmaceutical grade / reagent grade factory, providing support for food, medicine, chiral synthesis, electroplating, and laboratory applications

Frequently asked

In what packaging is L (+)-Tartaric acid shipped?

Standard formats are Bag (25kg), IBC Dag (25kg), ISO tank (20ft) (24–26 m³), ISO tank (40ft) (48–50 m³). Other packaging can be arranged for full-container orders.

Is a safety data sheet available for L (+)-Tartaric acid?

Yes. A full safety data sheet for CAS 87-69-4 is published and linked from this page; a signed copy is issued with the shipping documents.

What purity do you supply?

The standard grade is 99%. Tighter specifications are confirmed against the production batch before shipment.

Related products

Iron oxide black

Iron oxide black

Iron oxide black

CAS 12227-89-3 96% Powder SDS Warning
Sodium carbonate

Sodium carbonate

SC

CAS 497-19-8 99.2% Powder Warning
Iron oxide red

Iron oxide red

Iron oxide red

CAS 1309-37-1 95% Powder SDS Danger
🧬 Wizualizator molekuły 3D
Ładowanie molekuły...
Model 3D L-Tartaric acid, CAS 87-69-4, wzór sumaryczny C4H6O6, masa molowa 150.09 g/mol

Dane transkrybowane z rejestrów regulacyjnych i literatury fachowej, z podaniem źródła i wydania. Nie zastępują karty charakterystyki dostawcy. Pola bez zapisanego źródła oznaczone jako takie.

📊 Dane fizykochemiczne — CAS 87-69-4MolGod_PROPHUB_MAIN
📊 Właściwości fizykochemiczne

Szybki przegląd

Wzór: C4H6O6
MW: 150.09 g/mol
CAS: 87-69-4
🔬 Właściwości zaawansowane

Identyfikatory chemiczne

SMILES: [C@@H]([C@H](C(=O)O)O)(C(=O)O)O

Ostatnia aktualizacja: niepotwierdzona

Przegląd chemiczny: L-Tartaric acidMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
Wzór sumarycznyC4H6O6[1]
Masa cząsteczkowa150.09 g/mol[1]
Temperatura topnienia169 °C[1]
Density1.79 g/cm³
LogP (lipofilowość)-1.9[1]
Nazwa IUPAC(2R,3R)-2,3-dihydroxybutanedioic acid[1]
SMILES[C@@H]([C@H](C(=O)O)O)(C(=O)O)O[1]
InChIKeyFEWJPZIEWOKRBE-JCYAYHJZSA-N[1]

Synonimy: L-tartaric acid · 87-69-4 · L-(+)-Tartaric acid · L(+)-Tartaric acid · tartaric acid

Data sources: PubChem (NLM/NIH)
Last updated: 2026-09-21

📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date) (1 źródeł)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Wzór sumaryczny · Masa cząsteczkowa · Temperatura topnienia · LogP (lipofilowość) · Nazwa IUPAC · SMILES · InChIKey

BADANIA NAUKOWE

[1]PubMed2026
Surface-Engineered Selenium Nanoparticles with L-Asparagine and Tartaric Acid: Therapeutic Efficacy Against Breast Cancer and Bacterial Infections.
Marzban A, Salari Nejad K, Zand M et al.. (2026). "Surface-Engineered Selenium Nanoparticles with L-Asparagine and Tartaric Acid: Therapeutic Efficacy Against Breast Cancer and Bacterial Infections.".
Przejdź do pełnego badania ↗
[2]PubMed2025
Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial.
Domínguez-López I, Lamuela-Raventós RM, Razquin C et al.. (2025). "Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial.". European heart journal. https
Przejdź do pełnego badania ↗
[3]PubMed2024
Deciphering the stereo-specific catalytic mechanisms of cis-epoxysuccinate hydrolases producing L(+)-tartaric acid.
Dong S, Xuan J, Feng Y et al.. (2024). "Deciphering the stereo-specific catalytic mechanisms of cis-epoxysuccinate hydrolases producing L(+)-tartaric acid.". The Journal of biological chemistry. https
Przejdź do pełnego badania ↗
[4]PubMed2022
Acute kidney injury in dogs following ingestion of cream of tartar and tamarinds and the connection to tartaric…
Wegenast CA, Meadows ID, Anderson RE et al.. (2022). "Acute kidney injury in dogs following ingestion of cream of tartar and tamarinds and the connection to tartaric acid as the proposed toxic princip
Przejdź do pełnego badania ↗
[5]PubMed2019
Enantiomeric Tartaric Acid Production Using cis-Epoxysuccinate Hydrolase: History and Perspectives.
Xuan J, Feng Y. (2019). "Enantiomeric Tartaric Acid Production Using cis-Epoxysuccinate Hydrolase: History and Perspectives.". Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24050903
Przejdź do pełnego badania ↗
📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date) 5 refs · 1 baz

MOLECULE Bibliografia per-CAS (live z 13+ baz)

Źródła: db:pubmed (5)

  1. db:pubmed Marzban A, Salari Nejad K, Zand M et al.. (2026). "Surface-Engineered Selenium Nanoparticles with L-Asparagine and Tartaric Acid: Therapeutic Efficacy Against Breast Cancer and Bacterial Infections.". Iranian journal of medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.30476/ijms.2026.108826.4394 →
  2. db:pubmed Domínguez-López I, Lamuela-Raventós RM, Razquin C et al.. (2025). "Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial.". European heart journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae804 →
  3. db:pubmed Dong S, Xuan J, Feng Y et al.. (2024). "Deciphering the stereo-specific catalytic mechanisms of cis-epoxysuccinate hydrolases producing L(+)-tartaric acid.". The Journal of biological chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2024.105635 →
  4. db:pubmed Wegenast CA, Meadows ID, Anderson RE et al.. (2022). "Acute kidney injury in dogs following ingestion of cream of tartar and tamarinds and the connection to tartaric acid as the proposed toxic principle in grapes and raisins.". Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001). https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.13234 →
  5. db:pubmed Xuan J, Feng Y. (2019). "Enantiomeric Tartaric Acid Production Using cis-Epoxysuccinate Hydrolase: History and Perspectives.". Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24050903 →
Status regulacyjny substancji
Ta substancja podlega wymogom regulacyjnym: gospodarka odpadami niebezpiecznymi (BDO). Szczegoly w sekcji "Status regulacyjny (REACH/ECHA/CLP)" oraz na karcie SDS. Informacja regulacyjna — nie ogranicza zakupu w sklepie.
🧮 Kalkulator stechiometrycznyMolGod_STOICH_1
🧪 Dane chemiczneMolGod_CHEMDATA_1
Numer CAS
87-69-4
Wzór sumaryczny
C4H6O6
Masa molowa
150.09 g/mol
Nazwa IUPAC (EN)
(2R,3R)-2,3-dihydroxybutanedioic acid
SMILES
[C@@H]([C@H](C(=O)O)O)(C(=O)O)O
InChIKey
FEWJPZIEWOKRBE-JCYAYHJZSA-N
📡 Data sourcesMolGod_SOURCES_1

The data in this widget comes from the following verified scientific sources:

  • PubChem — National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI/NIH), USA
  • ChEMBL — European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), UK
  • NIST WebBook — National Institute of Standards and Technology, USA

Data is cached locally for speed — the widget also works offline.

⚗️ Physicochemical propertiesMolGod_PHYSTAB_2
Density
1.7900 g/cm³ @ 20°C

Source: PubChem, NIST WebBook. Last updated: date not confirmed

🔍 Identyfikatory zewnętrzneMolGod_EXTID_1
4 z 16 systemów ID25%
BazaIdentyfikatorAkcje
CAS Registry Number87-69-4Otwórz →
PubChem CID444305[1]Otwórz →
InChIKeyFEWJPZIEWOKRBE-JCYAYHJZSA-N[1]Otwórz →
SMILES[C@@H]([C@H](C(=O)O)O)(C(=O)O)O[1]

Źródła: PubChem (NIH), Wikidata SPARQL, KEGG, ChEMBL (EBI), CompTox CTX (EPA).

📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date) (1 źródeł)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: PubChem CID · InChIKey · SMILES

Dalsza literatura

Publications thematically related to this CAS. They are not the source of any value given on this card.

Bibliografia (rozszerzona) (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "A Most Enantioselective Chiral Surface: Tartaric Acid on All Surfaces Vicinal to Cu(110).". https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b02476.s001. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100617_03_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r1526_01_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric acid." AccessScience. https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.678400. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m80530_04_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
📡 Spektroskopia — CAS 87-69-4MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Bazy widm spektroskopowych — dane inline 9 źródeł MolGod_SPECDB_2

Widma pobierane na żądanie z 9 źródeł. Każde widmo jest zapisywane w naszej bazie — kolejne otwarcie = zero zapytania do zewnętrznego API. Pobierz JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG przy każdym widmie bez szukania.

IR IR (Infrared) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Kliknij aby załadować widmo
🔗 Źródło
— punktów
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (NIST) Mass Spectrum (EI) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Kliknij aby załadować widmo
🔗 Źródło
— punktów
📚 NIST Standard Reference Database 1A
UV-Vis UV/Visible Absorption — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Kliknij aby załadować widmo
🔗 Źródło
— punktów
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
¹H NMR NMR (¹H, ¹³C) — NMRShiftDB
CC-BY-SA 4.0
▶ Kliknij aby załadować widmo
🔗 Źródło
— punktów
📚 Steinbeck C et al. (2003) J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43(1):10–16 DOI: 10.1021/ci025588g
MS (MoNA) MoNA — MassBank of North America
CC-BY 4.0
▶ Kliknij aby załadować widmo
🔗 Źródło
— punktów
📚 MassBank of North America (UC Davis) DOI: 10.1002/jms.1777
IR/NMR/MS (SDBS) SDBS — Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (Japan AIST)
Free for non-commercial

Źródło referencyjne — brak publicznego API. Otwórz w zewnętrznej bazie:

🔗 IR/NMR/MS (SDBS) →
📚 SDBSWeb: https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp (AIST, Japan)
JP Monograph Japanese Pharmacopoeia — Monographs
Reference only

Źródło referencyjne — brak publicznego API. Otwórz w zewnętrznej bazie:

🔗 JP Monograph →
📚 Japanese Pharmacopoeia 18th Edition (2021)
WHO INN WHO — International Nonproprietary Names
WHO Model Lists (free)

Źródło referencyjne — brak publicznego API. Otwórz w zewnętrznej bazie:

🔗 WHO INN →
📚 WHO INN Programme
DOAJ DOAJ — Directory of Open Access Journals
OA journal index (mixed)

Źródło referencyjne — brak publicznego API. Otwórz w zewnętrznej bazie:

🔗 DOAJ →
📚 DOAJ — doaj.org

Dane pobierane są jednorazowo (parser JCAMP-DX) i zapisywane w lokalnej bazie wtyczki. Zero duplikatów pobrań, zero zapytań do NIST przy kolejnych otwarciach. Licencje przestrzegane (publikowany tylko deep-link + własna wizualizacja).

🔬 Interaktywne widma (live — NIST / MoNA / NMRShiftDB / SDBS) (2)

Dane pobierane na żywo z wielu źródeł (priority-chain). JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG dostępne do pobrania pod każdym widmem. ⓘ Jedno źródło ★★☆☆☆ ⓘ Jedno źródło ★★☆☆☆

IR — Fourier-transform infrared

Ładowanie IR — Fourier-transform infrared…

MS — Mass spectrometry (EI 70eV)

Ładowanie MS — Mass spectrometry (EI 70eV)…

Wlasciwosci strukturalneMolGod_STRUCT3D_1

Ladowanie danych strukturalnych...

❓ Najczęstsze pytania (3)MolGod_FAQ_1
What is the CAS number of 87-69-4?
The CAS number for 87-69-4 is 87-69-4. A CAS Registry Number is the standard identifier for a chemical substance in scientific literature and in trade.
Pomocne?
What is 87-69-4?
87-69-4 (CAS 87-69-4) is a chemical compound. The chemical data comes from PubChem (National Institutes of Health, USA).
Pomocne?
How should 87-69-4 be stored?
87-69-4 should be stored as its safety data sheet directs \— typically in a dry, cool, well-ventilated place, away from heat and from materials it is incompatible with.
Pomocne?
➕ Zaproponuj pytanie
Pobierz pliki strukturyMolGod_STRDL_1

Pliki struktury molekularnej z bazy PubChem (NIH). Kompatybilne z programami: Avogadro, PyMOL, Jmol, ChemDraw.

Zrodlo: PubChem, National Library of Medicine (NIH). CID: 444305

🔄 Konwerter jednostek stężeń LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

Wpisz stężenie L-Tartaric acid w dowolnej jednostce — reszta obliczy się automatycznie.

MW: 150.09 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Wzory konwersji + cytacje (per formuła)
KonwersjaWzórDokładnośćŹródło
% (w/v) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (% × 10) / MW±0.5% rel. when density ≈ 1.0 g/mLIUPAC (2019)
millimolar ↔ molarc (mol/L) = mM × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
molarity (mol/L)c = n/V = (m/MW)/V±0.1% (depends on MW precision)IUPAC (2019)
parts per million (mg/L) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = ppm / (1000 × MW); equivalently ppm = mg/L for dilute aqueous±1% (density-independent for dilute solutions)IUPAC (2019)
mg/mL ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (mg/mL × 1000) / MW / 1000 = mg/mL / MW × 1±0.2%Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
g/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (g/L) / MW±0.1% (depends on MW precision)Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
mmol/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = mmol/L × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
Celsius ↔ KelvinT(K) = t(°C) + 273.15±0.01 K (ITS-90 scale)BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019)
Celsius ↔ FahrenheitT(°F) = T(°C) × 9/5 + 32±0.1 °FThompson A, Taylor BN (2008)
density-corrected % ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (%w/w × ρ × 10) / MW, ρ in g/mL±0.1% when ρ known to 3 decimalsCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
📚 Bibliografia (8 źródeł autorytatywnych)
  1. Thompson A, Taylor BN (2008). Guide for the Use of the International System of Units (SI). NIST Special Publication 811 · DOI: 10.6028/NIST.SP.811-2008
    → Primary SI standard for US scientific usage
  2. Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry — The IUPAC Green Book. RSC Publishing, 3rd ed. · DOI: 10.1039/9781847557889 · ISBN: 978-0-85404-433-7
    → Canonical IUPAC guide for chemistry quantities/units
  3. BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019). The International System of Units (SI), 9th edition. BIPM · ↗
    → International SI definitions (incl. redefined kilogram 2019)
  4. ISO/IEC (2022). Quantities and units — Part 1: General. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-1:2022 · ↗
    → General rules for physical quantities and units
  5. ISO/IEC (2019). Quantities and units — Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-9:2019 · ↗
    → Concentration / molality / amount-of-substance conventions
  6. Tiesinga E, Mohr PJ, Newell DB, Taylor BN (2021). CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018. Rev. Mod. Phys. 93(2):025010 · DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010
    → Avogadro, gas constant, molar volume (2019 SI revision)
  7. IUPAC (2019). Compendium of Chemical Terminology — the IUPAC Gold Book (online). IUPAC · DOI: 10.1351/goldbook
    → Definitions of mass fraction, molality, normality, ppm, activity
  8. Mills IM, Cvitaš T, Homann K, Kallay N, Kuchitsu K (1988). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1st ed. · ISBN: 0-632-01773-5
    → Historical predecessor of IUPAC Green Book
Podobne struktury molekularneMolGod_SIMSTR_1

Ladowanie podobnych struktur...

Wyjasnienia naukoweMolGod_EDU3D_1

Automatycznie wygenerowane wyjasnienia na podstawie wlasciwosci molekularnych i oznaczen GHS. Zrodlo: dane PubChem + klasyfikacja CLP/GHS.

Cząsteczka silnie polarna

Ta czasteczka ma LogP = -1.90, co oznacza silna preferencje do fazy wodnej. Wynika to z obecnosci grup funkcyjnych zdolnych do tworzenia wiazan wodorowych (np. -OH, -NH2, -COOH). Substancja dobrze rozpuszcza sie w wodzie i rozpuszczalnikach polarnych.

Interpretacja na podstawie XLogP3 (PubChem)
Substancja o duzej gestosci

Gestosc 1.790 g/mL jest znacznie wieksza od wody. Wynika to z duzej masy atomowej skladnikow (np. halogenki, metale ciezkie) lub gesto upakowanej struktury krystalicznej.

Dane fizykochemiczne (PubChem/NIST)
🧪 Kreator przygotowania roztworu WIZARD MolGod_PREP_1
① Wybierz stężenie
② Objętość docelowa
③ Rozpuszczalnik

Obliczenia wg: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, Merck ↗

Chemia obliczeniowaMolGod_COMPCHEM_1

Ladowanie danych obliczeniowych...

🛡️ Bezpieczeństwo — CAS 87-69-4MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Informacja o ograniczeniach danych. Informacje dotyczące bezpieczeństwa zawarte na tej stronie mają charakter informacyjny i nie zastępują pełnej karty charakterystyki (SDS). Przed użyciem produktu zapoznaj się z aktualną kartą charakterystyki producenta oraz wytycznymi GHS/CLP. Klasyfikacja CLP dotyczy czystej substancji bulk, nie preparatów handlowych.

Klasyfikacja GHS/CLP — Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1272/2008 + UN GHS Rev. 9 (2021).

⚠️ Niebezpieczeństwo (Danger)
GHS05 — Żrące
GHS05 Żrące
GHS07 — Drażniące / szkodliwe
GHS07 Drażniące / szkodliwe

🚨 Zwroty wskazujące rodzaj zagrożenia (H)

  • H302 — Działa szkodliwie po połknięciu
  • H315 — Działa drażniąco na skórę
  • H317 — Może powodować reakcję alergiczną skóry
  • H318 — Powoduje poważne uszkodzenie oczu
  • H319 — Działa drażniąco na oczy
  • H335 — Może powodować podrażnienie dróg oddechowych

🛡 Zwroty określające środki ostrożności (P)

  • P261 — Unikać wdychania pyłu/dymu/gazu/mgły/par/rozpylonej cieczy

⚠ Klasyfikacja na podstawie konsensusu źródeł (PubChem / zgłoszenia dostawców) — nie zweryfikowano względem zharmonizowanej klasyfikacji w załączniku VI (CLP). Zakres zagrożeń może być szerszy niż klasyfikacja urzędowa; przed zastosowaniem zweryfikować z aktualną kartą charakterystyki dostawcy.

Tłumaczenia: Rozporządzenie CLP (WE) 1272/2008, Załącznik III i IV. Dane: PubChem/NLM.

📚 Skonsolidowane referencje naukowe — Chicago Author-Date 10 źródeł

Referencje zebrane ze wszystkich zakładek Safety Hub. CAS: 87-69-4 · PubChem ↗

  1. Parlament Europejski i Rada UE. 2008. "Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1272/2008 w sprawie klasyfikacji, oznakowania i pakowania substancji (CLP)." Dz.Urz. UE L 353. [↗] GHS, Regulacje
  2. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2021. "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), Ninth Revised Edition." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] GHS
  3. Goldfrank, Lewis R., Robert S. Hoffman, Mary Ann Howland, et al.. 2019. "Goldfrank's Toxicologic Emergencies, 11th ed.." McGraw-Hill Education, New York. ISBN 978-1-25-985961-8. Pierwsza pomoc, Toksykologia
  4. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2023. "NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards (DHHS Publ. 2005-149)." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services / CDC, Cincinnati, OH. [↗] Pierwsza pomoc, PPE, Toksykologia
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms." CEN, Brussels. [↗] PPE
  6. UNECE. 2023. "European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." United Nations, Geneva. [↗] Utylizacja, Regulacje
  7. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2022. "NFPA 400 — Hazardous Materials Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. [↗] Magazynowanie
  8. Urben, P.G. (ed.). 2017. "Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th ed.." Butterworth-Heinemann / Elsevier, Oxford. [↗] Magazynowanie
  9. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska RP. 2023. "Baza danych o produktach i opakowaniach oraz o gospodarce odpadami (BDO)." Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska, Warszawa. [↗] Utylizacja
  10. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC / WHO). 2024. "IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans — List of Classifications." WHO, Lyon. [↗] Toksykologia

Zakładki z własnymi referencjami (Emergency, PPE, Storage, Waste) zawierają dodatkowe pozycje bibliograficzne wewnątrz swoich sekcji.

📈 Statystyka analityczna (t-test · RSD · Grubbs · Q-Dixon) ICH Q2

Wklej serię powtórzeń pomiarów (CSV lub po jednej liczbie w linii). Kalkulator policzy średnią, odchylenie, 95% CI, wykryje outliery (Grubbs + Dixon Q).

Separator: przecinek, spacja, tab, nowa linia. Min 3 pomiary.
📐 Formuły statystyczne
  • x̄ = Σxᵢ / n — średnia arytmetyczna
  • s² = Σ(xᵢ - x̄)² / (n-1) — wariancja próby
  • s = √s² — odchylenie standardowe
  • RSD% = (s / x̄) × 100% — względne odchylenie
  • CI₉₅ = x̄ ± t(0.05, n-1) × s / √n — Student's t
  • G = |xᵢ - x̄| / s — test Grubbsa
  • Q = |xsuspect - xnearest| / |xmax - xmin| — Dixon Q-test

Źródło: ICH Q2(R2) Validation of Analytical Procedures · ICH PDF ↗

🧪 Kalkulator receptur buforów UNIKALNE
References: Wartości pKa z Goldberg NIST 81 · CRC Handbook 100th ed. · Stoll & Blanchard 1990 (DOI)

Wybierz bufor z listy 20 popularnych systemów → wprowadź docelowe pH → otrzymasz dokładny przepis z masami do odważenia.

Krok 1: Wybierz system buforowy

📜 Historia przepisów (ostatnie 10)
📅 Project Planner — Lab experiment manager NOWOŚĆ

Zaplanuj cały projekt laboratoryjny: dodaj eksperymenty z reagentami, powtórzeniami i czasem trwania. Otrzymasz wykres Gantta, listę zakupów (linki do sklepu!), budżet z 10% marginesem i macierz ryzyka GHS.

🧪 Rozpuszczalność i kompatybilność z solwentami MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molekuła
L-Tartaric acid
Wzór
C4H6O6
logP (XLogP3)
-1.90
Masa (g/mol)
150.09
Polarność
Hydrofilowa (polarna)

⚠️ Estymacja HSP (literatura / group contribution). Dane orientacyjne — nie zastępują badań eksperymentalnych.

Ra < R₀ = good miscibility · Ra < 1,5×R₀ = borderline · above = poor (R₀ — radius of the Hansen sphere of this molecule) For this molecule R₀ = 14..

Solwent Kompat. Ra Wizual GC-MS HPLC Zastosowania Referencje
Water (H₂O)miscible13.7
✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
buffercell cultureanalyticalextraction (hydrophilic)
Ethanol (EtOH)+ Dobra11.5
✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
extractionspectroscopy (UV-Vis)synthesisHPLC modifier
Methanol (MeOH)+ Dobra9.3
✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent to 205 nm
Acetone− Słaba23.5
✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspacecrystallisationdegreasingsynthesis
Acetonitrile (ACN)− Słaba25.5
✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC eluent (gold standard)LC-MS (low UV cut-off, 190 nm)peptide analysis
DMSO~ Śr.20.8
✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)cell biology (cryopreservation)drug deliverysynthesis
THF− Słaba22.9
✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (polymer analysis)Grignard synthesisorganometallics
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)− Słaba24.6
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
extractionNP-HPLCGC-MScrystallisation (anti-solvent)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)− Słaba25.7
✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)lipid extraction (Folch method)NP-TLC
Hexane− Słaba32.6
✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLCoil extraction (lipids)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluene− Słaba29.8
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)synthesisazeotropic drying (Dean-Stark)
📚 Naukowe referencje dla solwentów (Chicago Author-Date) — kliknij aby rozwinąć

11 solvents · 54 full citations (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/Wypych/Armarego/Snyder/GESTIS) — below.

Water (H₂O)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Water (CAS 7732-18-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 104th ed., Sec. 8 (Properties of Water)
  3. IAPWS — IAPWS Release on Static Dielectric Constant of Water
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Water
Ethanol (EtOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Ethanol (CAS 64-17-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Ethanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — Ethanol eluotropic
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Ethanol
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Ethanol
Methanol (MeOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Methanol (CAS 67-56-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Methanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — MeOH eluotropic, eo=0.95
  4. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Methanol
Acetone
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetone (CAS 67-64-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetone physical & thermodynamic constants
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Acetone (dD=15.5, dP=10.4, dH=7.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Acetone
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetone
Acetonitrile (ACN)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetonitrile (CAS 75-05-8)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetonitrile constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — ACN gold-standard HPLC eluent
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — ACN dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetonitrile
DMSO
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — DMSO (CAS 67-68-5)
  2. Wypych 2019 — Handbook of Solvents Vol. 1 — DMSO comprehensive properties
  3. Hansen 2007 — HSP — DMSO (dD=18.4, dP=16.4, dH=10.2)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DMSO E_T(30)=45.1, dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — DMSO
THF
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — THF (CAS 109-99-9)
  2. Armarego 2009 — Purification of Laboratory Chemicals — THF drying & peroxide test
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — THF (dD=16.8, dP=5.7, dH=8.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — THF
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Tetrahydrofuran
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Dichloromethane (CAS 75-09-2)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — DCM (Group 2A carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — DCM (dD=18.2, dP=6.3, dH=6.1)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DCM polarity index
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Dichloromethane
Chloroform (CHCl₃)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Chloroform (CAS 67-66-3)
  2. IARC 73 — IARC Monograph 73 — Chloroform (Group 2B carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — CHCl3 (dD=17.8, dP=3.1, dH=5.7)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — CHCl3 H-bond donor strength
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Chloroform
n-Hexane
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — n-Hexane (CAS 110-54-3)
  2. ATSDR n-Hexane — ATSDR Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane — neuropatia obwodowa (n-Heksan NIE jest kancerogenem IARC)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — n-Hexane (dD=14.9, dP=0, dH=0)
  4. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — n-Hexane NP standard, eo=0.00
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — n-Hexane
Toluene
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Toluene (CAS 108-88-3)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — Toluene
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Toluene (dD=18.0, dP=1.4, dH=2.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Toluene
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Toluene
Teoria rozpuszczalności (zastosowane w przewidywaniu kompatybilności):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — HSP triplet (dD, dP, dH) + wzór Ra.
  3. Stefanis, E., and C. Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." Int J Thermophys 29: 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220 — E_T(30) polarity scale, solwatochromia.
  5. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 — Eluotropic series, polarity index.
  6. Van Krevelen, D. W., and K. Te Nijenhuis. 2009. Properties of Polymers. 4th ed. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-054819-7.X0001-5 — Hoftyzer–Van Krevelen group contribution dla dD/dP/dH z SMILES.
  7. Marcus, Yizhak. 1998. The Properties of Solvents. Wiley Series in Solution Chemistry, Vol. 4. ISBN 9780471983699 — Kompletny tabularny zestaw 250+ rozpuszczalników (ε, μ, donicity, acceptor numbers).
  8. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 87-69-4 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

Kompletna bibliografia w akordeonie REFERENCJE (na dole strony) — Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date.

⚗️ Sprawdź kompatybilność reakcji MolGod_RXNCOMP_1
2 0 0
Zdrowie: 2/4
Palność: 0/4
Reaktywność: 0/4
Wg NFPA 704 / obliczone z H-codes

Sprawdź czy L-Tartaric acid jest kompatybilny z innym odczynnikiem

📦 Matryca kompatybilności przechowywania
Kwasy Zasady Utleniacze Łatwopalne Toksyczne Gazy
Kwasy ✓ ✗ ✗ ✗ ⚠ ✗
Zasady ✗ ✓ ⚠ ⚠ ⚠ ⚠
Utleniacze ✗ ⚠ ✓ ✗ ⚠ ✗
Łatwopalne ✗ ⚠ ✗ ✓ ⚠ ✗
Toksyczne ⚠ ⚠ ⚠ ⚠ ✓ ⚠
Gazy ✗ ⚠ ✗ ✗ ⚠ ✓
✓ Można razem · ⚠ Ostrożnie · ✗ NIE przechowywać razem · OSHA Chemical Segregation ↗

Dane kompatybilności z: Bretherick's Handbook (7th ed.) ↗, GESTIS ↗, ECHA REACH ↗, NFPA 704 ↗

🧮 Kalkulatory laboratoryjne (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Rozcieńczenie (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molarność (M=n/V)
pH Bufor (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Masa → Mole
Stężenie % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperatura C↔F↔K

Formuły zweryfikowane: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Bazy widm spektroskopowych MolGod_SPECDB_3
📋 Generator protokołu laboratoryjnego MolGod_PROTOCOL_1

Protokół wygenerowany na podstawie: GHS SDS, Aldrich Lab Guide ↗

🏷️ Generator etykiety (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
Kwas L-(+)-winowy• L-tartaric acid / L-(+)-Tartaric acid• IUPAC: (2R,3R)-2,3-dihydroxybutanedioic acid• CAS: 87-69-4• EC: 201-766-0• Wzór: C4H6O6• Masa: 150.09 g/molNIEBEZPIECZEŃSTWOZwroty wskazujące rodzaj zagrożenia (H):(zgłoszenia dostawców — samoklasyfikacja, niewiążące)H315 H318 H319 H335P261WYŁĄCZNIE DO CELÓW LABORATORYJNYCH!Anhui Eapearl Chemical Co., Ltd.12th Floor, Tongguan Number Valley, Tongling, Anhui, China+86 186 5620 1888[email protected]epchems.com
Deskryptory Lipinskiego (struktura)

Wykres radarowy drug-likeness (Lipinski Ro5 / Veber). Strefa zielona = zgodność z kryteriami.

Dane predykcyjne — właściwości obliczone in silico (SMILES/RDKit). Nie zastępują badań klinicznych. Nie używaj do oceny leków bez weryfikacji eksperymentalnej.

MW150.1LogP-1.9HBD4HBA6RotB3TPSA115 Ų
✓ Lipinski Ro5✓ Veber✓ Egan✗ Ghose (MW=150, LogP=-1.9)✗ REOS (MW=150)✗ Lead-like Ro3 (HBD=4, HBA=6)
WłaściwośćWartośćOcena
Wchłanianie (GI)wysokie✓
Przepuszczalność BBBnie
Biodostępność (Daina 2017)
55%
Profil CYP450CYP1A2 non-inhibitorCYP2C9 non-inhibitorCYP2C19 non-inhibitorCYP2D6 non-inhibitorCYP3A4 non-inhibitor
Alerty PAINS0✓
Alerty Brenka0✓
pKa (pH 7.4)2.98 (curated)
⚠ Toksykologia (pkCSM): nieprawidłowa odpowiedź pkCSM
hERG (kardiotoks.)—
P-gp substrat—
Ames mutagenność—
DILI (wątrobok.)—
LogS (rozp. wod.)—
Źródła (metodologia ADMET)
  1. Lipinski, Christopher A., Franco Lombardo, Beryl W. Dominy, and Paul J. Feeney. 1997. "Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 23 (1-3): 3-25.
  2. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, et al. 2002. "Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  3. Daina, Antoine, Olivier Michielin, and Vincent Zoete. 2017. "SwissADME: a free web tool to evaluate pharmacokinetics, drug-likeness and medicinal chemistry friendliness." Scientific Reports 7: 42717.
  4. Egan, William J., and Gregory Lauri. 2002. "Prediction of intestinal permeability." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 273-289.
  5. Baell, Jonathan B., and Georgina A. Holloway. 2010. "New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 53 (7): 2719-2740.
  6. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, et al. 2008. "Lessons learnt from assembling screening libraries for drug discovery for neglected diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  7. Ertl, Peter, and Ansgar Schuffenhauer. 2009. "Estimation of synthetic accessibility score of drug-like molecules based on molecular complexity and fragment contributions." Journal of Cheminformatics 1: 8.
  8. Bickerton, G. Richard, Gaia V. Paolini, Jérémy Besnard, Sorel Muresan, and Andrew L. Hopkins. 2012. "Quantifying the Chemical Beauty of Drugs." Nature Chemistry 4 (2): 90-98.
  9. Hopkins, Andrew L., and Colin R. Groom. 2002. "The Druggable Genome." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 1 (9): 727-730.
  10. Ghose, Arup K., Vellarkad N. Viswanadhan, and John J. Wendoloski. 1999. "A Knowledge-Based Approach in Designing Combinatorial or Medicinal Chemistry Libraries for Drug Discovery." Journal of Combinatorial Chemistry 1 (1): 55-68.
  11. Tice, Raymond R., Christopher P. Austin, Robert J. Kavlock, and John R. Bucher. 2013. "Improving the Human Hazard Characterization of Chemicals: A Tox21 Update." Environmental Health Perspectives 121 (7): 756-765.
  12. Leeson, Paul D., and Brian Springthorpe. 2007. "The Influence of Drug-Like Concepts on Decision-Making in Medicinal Chemistry." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 6 (11): 881-890.
  13. Hann, Michael M. 2011. "Molecular Obesity, Potency and Other Addictions in Drug Discovery." MedChemComm 2 (5): 349-355.
  14. Davies, Mark, Michał Nowotka, George Papadatos, et al. 2015. "ChEMBL Web Services: Streamlining Access to Drug Discovery Data and Utilities." Nucleic Acids Research 43 (W1): W612-W620.
  15. Walters, W. Patrick, and Mark A. Murcko. 2002. "Prediction of 'Drug-Likeness.'". Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(02)00003-0.
  16. Congreve, Miles, Robin Carr, Christopher Murray, and Harren Jhoti. 2003. "A 'Rule of Three' for Fragment-Based Lead Discovery?" Drug Discovery Today 8 (19): 876–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6446(03)02831-9.
  17. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, Agata Krasowski, Iain Hugh Gilbert, Julie Frearson, and Paul Graham Wyatt. 2008. "Lessons Learnt from Assembling Screening Libraries for Drug Discovery for Neglected Diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  18. Schomburg, Karen T., Sascha Bietz, Hans Briem, Andrea M. Henzler, Stefan Urbaczek, and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "Facing the Challenges of Structure-Based Target Prediction by Inverse Virtual Screening." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (6): 1676-1686.
  19. Bemis, Guy W., and Mark A. Murcko. 1996. "The Properties of Known Drugs. 1. Molecular Frameworks." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 39 (15): 2887-2893.
  20. Schomburg, Karen T., and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "What Is the Potential of Structure-Based Target Prediction Methods?" Future Medicinal Chemistry 6 (17): 1987-1989.
  21. Marzban A, Salari Nejad K, Zand M et al.. (2026). "Surface-Engineered Selenium Nanoparticles with L-Asparagine and Tartaric Acid: Therapeutic Efficacy Against Breast Cancer and Bacterial Infections.". Iranian journal of medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.30476/ijms.2026.108826.4394
  22. Domínguez-López I, Lamuela-Raventós RM, Razquin C et al.. (2025). "Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial.". European heart journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae804
  23. Dong S, Xuan J, Feng Y et al.. (2024). "Deciphering the stereo-specific catalytic mechanisms of cis-epoxysuccinate hydrolases producing L(+)-tartaric acid.". The Journal of biological chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2024.105635
  24. Wegenast CA, Meadows ID, Anderson RE et al.. (2022). "Acute kidney injury in dogs following ingestion of cream of tartar and tamarinds and the connection to tartaric acid as the proposed toxic principle in grapes and raisins.". Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001). https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.13234
  25. Xuan J, Feng Y. (2019). "Enantiomeric Tartaric Acid Production Using cis-Epoxysuccinate Hydrolase: History and Perspectives.". Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24050903
  26. Katalin Nemák, Mária Acs, Zsuzsa M. Jászay et al. 1996. "Study of the diastereoisomers formed between (N-alkyl)-pipecolic acid-anilides and 2R,3R-tartaric acid or O,O′-dibenzoyl-2R,3R-tartaric acid. Do the tartaric acids form molecular-complexes, instead of salts during optical resolutions?." Tetrahedron. DOI: 10.1016/0040-4020(95)00992-2. [DOI ↗]
  27. Dávid Kozma, Zsolt Böcskei, Csaba Kassai et al. 1996. "Optical resolution of racemic alcohols by diastereoisomeric complex formation with O,O′-dibenzoyl-(2R,3R)-tartaric acid; the crystal structure of the (–)-(1R,2S,5R)-menthol·O,O′-dibenzoyl-(2R,3R)-tartaric acid complex." Chem. Commun.. DOI: 10.1039/cc9960000753. [DOI ↗]
  28. 2023. "AOAC Official Method 940.05Cream of Tartar and Free Tartaric Acid in Tartrate Powders." Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC INTERNATIONAL. DOI: 10.1093/9780197610145.003.2655. [DOI ↗]
  29. Zhang, Qi; Ren, Siru; Gu, Chenming; et al. 2021. "Enhanced enantioselectivity of tartaric acid in capillary electrophoresis: From tartaric acid to tartaric acid-based ionic liquid." Journal of Molecular Liquids. DOI: 10.1016/j.molliq.2020.114840. [DOI ↗]
  30. Holleman, A. F. 2003. "<i>dl</i> ‐Tartaric Acid." Organic Syntheses. DOI: 10.1002/0471264180.os006.25. [DOI ↗]
  31. "Tartaric Acid." DOI: 10.31003/fcc_f100617_03_01. [DOI ↗]
  32. "Tartaric Acid." DOI: 10.31003/uspnf_r1526_01_01. [DOI ↗]
  33. "Tartaric acid." AccessScience. DOI: 10.1036/1097-8542.678400. [DOI ↗]
  34. "Tartaric Acid." DOI: 10.31003/uspnf_m80530_04_01. [DOI ↗]
  35. "Tartaric Acid TS." DOI: 10.31003/uspnf_r3332_01_01. [DOI ↗]
  36. Anonymous. "A Most Enantioselective Chiral Surface: Tartaric Acid on All Surfaces Vicinal to Cu(110).". https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b02476.s001. [DOI ↗]
  37. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100617_03_01. [DOI ↗]
  38. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r1526_01_01. [DOI ↗]
  39. Anonymous. "Tartaric acid." AccessScience. https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.678400. [DOI ↗]
  40. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m80530_04_01. [DOI ↗]
  41. K. NEMAK, M. ACS, Z. M. JASZAY et al. 1996. "ChemInform Abstract: Study of the Diastereoisomers Formed Between (N‐Alkyl)‐pipecolic Acid Anilides and 2R,3R‐Tartaric Acid of O,O′‐Dibenzoyl‐2R,3R‐tartaric Acid. Do the Tartaric Acid Form Molecular Complexes Instead of Salts During Optical Resolutions?." ChemInform. DOI: 10.1002/chin.199620126. [DOI ↗]
  42. L. DUHAMEL, J. C. PLAQUEVENT. 1983. "ChemInform Abstract: SYNTHESIS OF (2R,3R)‐O,O‐DIPIVALOYLTARTARIC ACID (DPTA) AND OF (2R,3R)‐O,O‐BIS(ADAMANTANE‐1‐CARBONYL)TARTARIC ACID (DATA), USEFUL CHIRAL REAGENTS FOR ASYMMETRIC PROTONATIONS." Chemischer Informationsdienst. DOI: 10.1002/chin.198310162. [DOI ↗]
  43. L. Duhamel, J. C. Plaquevent. 1982. "SYNTHESIS OF (2R,3R) 0,0-DIPIVALOYLTARTARIC ACID (<i>DPTA</i>) AND OF (2R,3R) 0,0-DI(ADAMANTANE-1 CARBONYL) TARTARIC ACID (<i>DATA</i>), USEFUL CHIRAL REAGENTS FOR ASYMMETRIC PROTONATIONS." Organic Preparations and Procedures International. DOI: 10.1080/00304948209354928. [DOI ↗]
  44. Bolton, Evan E., Yanli Wang, Paul A. Thiessen, and Stephen H. Bryant. 2008. "PubChem: Integrated Platform of Small Molecules and Biological Activities." Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry 4: 217-241. [DOI ↗]
  45. Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. [DOI ↗]
  46. Kim, Sunghwan, Tiejun Cheng, Jianyong He, Chen Cheng, et al. 2021. "PubChem Protein, Pathway, Reaction, and Disease Specifications." Journal of Cheminformatics 13: 16. [DOI ↗]
  47. Hähnke, Volker D., Sunghwan Kim, and Evan E. Bolton. 2018. "PubChem chemical structure standardization." Journal of Cheminformatics 10: 36. [DOI ↗]
  48. Wang, Yanli, Stephen H. Bryant, Tiejun Cheng, Jiyao Wang, et al. 2017. "PubChem BioAssay: 2017 update." Nucleic Acids Research 45 (D1): D955-D963. [DOI ↗]
  49. Cheng, Tiejun, et al. 2014. "Computation of Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients by Guiding an Additive Model with Knowledge." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (3): 793-805. [DOI ↗]
  50. PubMed PMID nchembio.145-comp24. (Metadata fetch failed.) ↗
  51. PubMed PMID PubChem. (Metadata fetch failed.) ↗
  52. Wilkinson, Mark D., et al. 2016. "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship." Scientific Data 3: 160018. [DOI ↗]
  53. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, Brian R. Smith, Keith W. Ward, and Kenneth D. Kopple. 2002. "Molecular Properties That Influence the Oral Bioavailability of Drug Candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  54. ECHA. 2024. "REACH Guidance." European Chemicals Agency. ↗
  55. Groom, Colin R., Ian J. Bruno, Matthew P. Lightfoot, and Suzanna C. Ward. 2016. "The Cambridge Structural Database." Acta Crystallographica Section B 72 (2): 171-179. ↗
  56. Mohsen A. Hedaya. 2003. "Basic Pharmacokinetics." mohsen A. hedaya. ↗
🧪 Asystent przygotowania roztworu (Smart Prep) MolGod_PREP_2

Wpisz co chcesz przygotować — wygeneruję SOP

Przykłady poniżej — kliknij żeby wstawić:
Gotowe przepisy:
📚 Przegląd literatury naukowej — CAS 87-69-4MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Najważniejsze odkrycia (literatura naukowa) 5 publikacji
🏆 CAS 87-69-4 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% cytowania · 20% recency · 20% topic · 15% historical · 15% open access.
  1. #1
    Dávid Kozma, Zsolt Böcskei, Csaba Kassai et al. (1996) · Chem. Commun.
    Dlaczego ważne: Wybrane przez multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 4.94 Mechanizm Citations: 12 DOI ↗
  2. #2
    Katalin Nemák, Mária Acs, Zsuzsa M. Jászay et al. (1996) · Tetrahedron
    Dlaczego ważne: Wybrane przez multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 4.56 Mechanizm Citations: 32 DOI ↗
  3. #3
    L. Duhamel, J. C. Plaquevent (1982) · Organic Preparations and Procedures International
    Dlaczego ważne: Wybrane przez multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 3.8 Mechanizm Citations: 9 DOI ↗
  4. #4
    L. DUHAMEL, J. C. PLAQUEVENT (1983) · Chemischer Informationsdienst
    Dlaczego ważne: Wybrane przez multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 0.8 Mechanizm DOI ↗
  5. #5
    K. NEMAK, M. ACS, Z. M. JASZAY et al. (1996) · ChemInform
    Dlaczego ważne: Wybrane przez multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 0 Mechanizm DOI ↗
🔬 HPLC — metody i parametry — CAS 87-69-4MolGod_HPLCHUB_MAIN
📈 Gradient HPLC — optymalizator (LSS) SZABLON

Gradient oparty na PubChem XLogP3 + LSS (Snyder et al. 2010, ch. 9).

  • Kolumna: C18
  • Bufor: phosphate
  • Przepływ: 1 mL/min
  • logP: -1.9 (PubChem XLogP3)
  • Rampa: 5% → 95% B, 10 min
  • Całkowity czas analizy: 23 min
t (min) %A %B flow (mL/min) Komentarz
0 95 5 1 start (równowaga)
2 95 5 1 koniec hold init
12 5 95 1 koniec rampy LSS
17 5 95 1 mycie kolumny
18 95 5 1 powrót do init
23 95 5 1 reekwilibracja
📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 9 — gradient elution, LSS theory (cited as Snyder et al. 2010 in tool description).
  2. Schoenmakers, Peter J. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier. — Numerical optimization of gradient programs.
  3. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley. — Foundational LSS reference for the %B_init = 5 + 8·logP heuristic implemented here.
  4. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. [DOI ↗] — Modern review of gradient retention models — basis for non-LSS extensions.
  5. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  6. Dong, Michael W. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793. — Modern UHPLC gradient programming, sub-2 µm scaling rules.
  7. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  8. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗] — Reference for orthogonal gradient design (2D-LC second dimension).
  9. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199.
  10. Meyer, Veronika R. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 7 — practical gradient design with isokratyczny scouting.

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/gradient/87-69-4

📐 Wymiary kolumny — kalkulator van Deemter N=12,466

Wzór: H = A + B/u + C·u (Van Deemter et al. 1956), N = L/H, ΔP ≈ η·L·u / (K_p·dp²) (Knox 1977). u_opt = √(B/C) (Giddings 1965).

Wymiary150 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm
Płyty teoretyczne (N)12,466
N przy u_opt12,500
HETP (obecna)12.032 µm
HETP min12 µm
Prędkość liniowa (u)0.1003 cm/s
u_opt (van Deemter)0.12 cm/s
Ciśnienie wsteczne (ΔP)42.1 bar
Czas analizy (mart-vol)2.49 min
📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." Chemical Engineering Science 5: 271-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1 — Original van Deemter equation paper — basis of H = A + B/u + C·u in this calculator.
  2. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory.". Marcel Dekker. — Theoretical underpinning of HETP minimum and u_opt = sqrt(B/C).
  3. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." Journal of Chromatography A 778: 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2 — Speed-efficiency Pareto plot — context for sub-2 µm UHPLC scaling.
  4. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026 — UHPLC pressure scaling — extends Darcy ΔP formula to sub-2 µm particles.
  5. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 — Modern reinterpretation of A, B, C terms (eddy diffusion vs. b-term).
  6. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." Journal of Chromatographic Science 15: 352-364. https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352 — Reduced plate height equation h = a·v^(1/3) + b/v + c·v.
  7. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists.". Wiley (2nd ed.). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 — Practical N targets vs particle size table (UHPLC method scaling).
  8. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development.". Wiley (2nd ed.). — Column dimensioning rules of thumb (L, dp, dc) for given α and N.
  9. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography.". Wiley-VCH (2nd ed.).
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography.". Wiley (5th ed.).

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/column/87-69-4

🧪 Faza ruchoma — macierz kompatybilności MISCIBLE
Składnik Nazwa UV cutoff (nm) P' Detektory
Rozp. Acetonitrile (MeCN) 190 5.8 UV, MS, ELSD, RID, FLD
Rozp. Water 190 10.2 UV, MS, ELSD, RID, FLD
Bufor Phosphate (KH2PO4 / K2HPO4) 195 pH 2.0-3.0 / 6.5-8.0 / 11.0-12.5 MS ✗

Detektor: UV — kompatybilny z oboma rozpuszczalnikami.

📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide.". Wiley-Interscience (2nd ed.).
  2. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." Journal of Chromatographic Science 16: 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223
  3. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry.". Wiley-VCH (4th ed.).
  4. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 37: 4040-4055. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h
  5. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography.". Wiley.
  6. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development.". Wiley (2nd ed.).
  7. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094
  8. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." Journal of Chromatographic Science 47: 645-654. https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists.". Wiley (2nd ed.). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography.". Wiley (5th ed.).

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/mobile-phase?solvent_a=...&solvent_b=...

Kompletny przewodnik po metodzie HPLC Recenzowane

Scenariusze specyficzne dla cząsteczki, rozwiązywanie problemów i odniesienia literaturowe

Molecular Predictor

Predicted parameters for this molecule (CAS 87-69-4) are based on literature-backed models (Snyder-Dolan LSS, Neue pore-size rules).

Retention Time
-3.55 min
Range: 0.5 – -4.62
confidence: medium
Model: Snyder-Dolan LSS na kolumnie C18 150×4.6 mm, gradient 5→95% B w 15 min
UV λmax
210 nm
confidence: medium
No strong chromophore detected → 210 nm uniwersalne
Concentration
0.5 mg/mL
= 3.331 mM
confidence: high
Safe linear range detektora UV (nie przekroczy 1.5 AU)
Buffer pH
2
Range: 1.5 – 2.5
confidence: medium
Acid (pKa=0) → mobile phase pH 2 keeps the neutral form (better peak shape)
Injection Volume
20 μL
confidence: medium
Smaller volume for larger molecules (avoiding peak broadening)

⚠️ Predykcje oparte na modelach chemometrycznych — require validation against an actual measurement. Confidence: low/medium/high depending on the available descriptors.

Prawdziwy problem chemika

Your First HPLC Analysis Ever

Jesteś na 2. roku chemii. Professor powiedział: "Przeanalizuj tę próbkę kwasu benzoesowego". Nigdy nie używałaś HPLC. W labie stoi Agilent 1260, ale nikt nie wie jak go włączyć.

Jak to rozwiązujemy

1

Exact Solvent List

Name + CAS + Grade + Role in method

2

Grade Explanations

HPLC vs LC-MS vs Far UV — when to use which

3

Consumption Calculator

4

Shopping List

One-click add to cart

Kalkulator interaktywny

Deep Education

Zrozumieć chemię fazy ruchomej

Why Acetonitrile vs Methanol?
PropertyAcetonitrile (ACN)Methanol (MeOH)
Viscosity (20°C)0.37 cP0.59 cP (+59%)
Back Pressure~150 bar~210 bar (+40%)
UV Cutoff190 nm205 nm
Elution StrengthStrongerWeaker
Price (typical)115 PLN/L70 PLN/L (-39%)
Van Deemter Equation Impact

H = A + B/u + Cu

Higher viscosity (MeOH) → lower optimal flow rate → longer runtime.

Buffer Selection: Why NH₄HCO₃?
  • Volatile: MS-compatible (evaporates without residue)
  • pH range: 6.5–8.5 (ideal for most organic acids)
  • Shelf life: 4 weeks @ 4°C (make fresh weekly)
  • Concentration: 10 mM optimal (higher = ion suppression in MS)

Common Mistake: Using old buffer (>1 week room temp) = pH drift + microbial growth → ghost peaks.

Cost Savings Calculator

How much you save by using naszej metody zamiast alternatyw? Kwartalne koszty labu HPLC.

1. Solwenty — ACN vs MeOH

—
Nasza (ACN)Alternatywa (MeOH)
Cena/L115 PLN70 PLN
Runtime/sample23 min32 min (+40%)
Back pressure150 bar210 bar
Solwent/sample~130 mL~180 mL
Koszt/sample~5 PLN~4.5 PLN
Czas/sample23 min32 min
Czas pracy chemika——
Total/quarter——

2. Kolumna — z guard vs bez

—
Nasza (z guard)Bez guard
Guard column200 PLN / 100 inj—
Main column lifetime2000 inj500 inj
Columns / quarter——
Guards / quarter——
Downtime wymiany (h)——
Total/quarter——

3. Method development — SOP vs scratch

—
Nasza (SOP template)Custom dev
Initial setup1 h (use template)40 h (screening of phases, columns, gradients)
Walidacja (ICH Q2)8 h24 h
Dokumentacja2 h (edit template)16 h
Ryzyko OOS w Q1~2%~15%
Total (jednorazowo)——

4. Fast gradient (high-throughput) — ROI

—
Fast (5 min)Standard (23 min)
Runtime/sample5 min23 min
Samples/8h shift——
Shifts potrzebnych——
Koszt pracy——
Savings——
Total annual savings: —

Najczęściej zadawane pytania

Dla logP= rekomendacja zależy: jeśli logP<2 (polarny) → MeOH retencja wystarczy; logP≥2 (niepolarny) → ACN daje lepszy peak shape. Dla tej molekuły (MW=150.09, CAS 87-69-4) zaczynaj od ACN w gradiencie 5→95% B.

Source: Snyder LSS Model

ACN: niższa lepkość (mniejsze ciśnienie), UV cutoff 190 nm. MeOH: 40% tańszy, ale wyższe ciśnienie +50 bar i UV cutoff 205 nm. Dla gradientu: ACN preferowany.

Source: Chromatography Forum

NIE dla LC-MS (sole w wodzie dest. → piki duchów). OK dla UV-HPLC tylko jeśli filtrujesz 0.22 μm. Bezpiecznie: HPLC grade 9 zł/L.

Source: ResearchGate

0.79 g NH₄HCO₃ (MW 79.06). Dissolve in 900 mL, make up to 1000 mL, check pH = 7.0±0.2.

Source: r/chemistry

Gradient Problem From The Lab

MS/MS for trace impurities

You need an LOQ of 0.01%. UV cannot manage it. Triple quad — which MRM transitions to choose without an impurity standard?

Our Gradient Strategy

  • Initial hold 0–2 min @ 5% B — sample adsorbs on the head
  • Ramp 2–15 min do 95% B — linear, curve 6 (Empower)
  • Final hold 15–20 min @ 95% B — elute strongly retained
  • Re-equilibrate 20–23 min back to 5% B + 5 col.volumes

Gradient Visualizer

Gradient Timeline

#Time%B start%B endDurationSlope (Δ%B/min)Step

Slope & Dwell Volume Test

—
Slope (Δ%B/min)
—
Gradient volume (mL)
—
Dwell vol estimate (mL)
—
k*·t0 (dla Rs)

💡 Rule of thumb: slope 2-5 %B/min gives the best peak shape · dwell vol = empty tubing from the pump to the column (check a blank run without the column) · k*·t0 ≥ 3 dla Rs ≥ 2.0.

Snyder-Dolan LSS Model

Log k = log kw − S·φ, gdzie φ = fraction B. Optymalny gradient: Δφ ≈ 0.6–0.8 per 5 t0. Dla kolumny 250×4.6mm @ 1 mL/min → t0 ≈ 2 min → gradient 10–12 min.

Najczęściej zadawane pytania

Heurystyka Snyder: Rt ≈ 2.5·logP + 1.2 min. Dla (2R,3R)-2,3-dihydroxybutanedioic acid (logP=) → szacunkowe Rt=— min. ±30% wariancja zależnie od dead volume i gradient slope. Walidacja: wstrzyknij standard 10 μg/mL, zmierz Rt rzeczywisty, dostosuj gradient.

Source: Predictive modeling

Linear = płynne odklejanie związku od kolumny = lepszy peak shape (Tf < 1.3). Step gradient daje shock waves = artifacts.

Source: Snyder Seminar

Heurystyka Snydera: start%B = (logP - 1) × 10. Dla logP=2 → start 10% B. Zawsze z 2 min isocratic hold aby pozwolić próbce zaadsorbować.

Source: LCGC

Column Choice Dilemma

48 godzin stracone na niewidoczne piki

Day 1 — I prepared the sample, injected it, baseline flat. Day 2 — I repeated it 6× with different samples. Nothing. Wave check? Professor: "Take a look at the DAD scan". λ_max = 214 nm, and I had 254 nm set.
Lesson learned (Anna K., studentka 2. rok, PW, 2024-11-15):
ALWAYS run a UV scan of an unknown compound BEFORE the method. 254 nm = aromatics only. 210 nm = universal. Time saved: 2 days of work.

Recommended Columns

A

Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18

150×4.6 mm · 3.5 μm · pH 2–9

B

Waters XBridge C18

150×4.6 mm · 3.5 μm · pH 1–12 (high pH)

C

Phenomenex Kinetex C18

100×4.6 mm · 2.6 μm core-shell · fast

Column Lifetime Rules

  • Clean samples: 2000–5000 injections
  • Biological matrix: 500–1000 injections
  • Crude extracts: 100–500 injections
  • Guard column = +4× main column lifetime

Najczęściej zadawane pytania

Rule of thumb: analytes MW10000 (proteins) → pore 1000 Å. For MW=150.09 (CAS 87-69-4) use a standard C18 100 Å column.

Source: Phenomenex Guide

Mała kolumnka (2cm) PRZED główną. Łapie zanieczyszczenia. Koszt 200 PLN, wymiana co 100 wstrzyknięć. Oszczędność: 1600 PLN na lifetime głównej kolumny.

Source: Agilent App Notes

C18 (18 węgli, bardziej lipofilowa) dla logP 0-5. C8 (8 węgli) dla bardzo polarnych (logP <0). C4 dla białek. Twój związek logP~2 → C18.

Source: Phenomenex Knowledge

Detection Gotcha

First method — how do you know where to start?

Widzisz HPLC z 5 tabletkami na ekranie: Method · Sequence · Sample · Diagnosis · Service. Klikasz Method — "No method loaded". Co teraz?

DAD Settings

ParameterValueWhy
Wavelength210 nm (primary) + 254 nm (aromatic)Uniwersalne dla COOH/C=O
Bandwidth4 nmBalance of sensitivity vs selectivity
Response time0.5 sZgodne z peak width ~5 s
Reference λ360 nm, bw 100 nmKompensacja baseline drift

Alternative Detectors

  • RID — for compounds without UV absorbance (sugars, polymers). Sensitivity x1000 lower.
  • ELSD — uniwersalny, ale destroys sample (niezgodny z MS).
  • LC-MS/MS — LOD 1 pg, strukturalna potwierdzenie via MRM.
  • CAD — charged aerosol, lepsze od ELSD dla lipid/polar.

Validation Reality Check

Koszt solwentu per batch — optymalizacja

Release testing 50 batches/month × 23 min × 1 mL/min = 29 L ACN/m. Price 115 PLN/L = 3300 PLN/m. How to cut it by 30% without compromise?

USP <621> + ICH Q2(R1) Criteria

ParameterAcceptanceFormula
Resolution (Rs)≥ 2.02(tR2 − tR1) / (w1 + w2)
Tailing factor (Tf)≤ 1.5W0.05 / (2·f)
Plates (N)≥ 500016·(tR / w)²
RSD (6 injections)≤ 2.0%σ / μ × 100%
Linearity (R²)≥ 0.999080–120% spec, 5 levels

Pre-Flight SST Checklist

  • Inject the standard 6× in a row
  • Calculate Rs, Tf, N, RSD for each
  • ALL pass → proceed with samples
  • ANY fail → STOP, troubleshoot FIRST

Regulatory Compliance

The method was designed in accordance with the regulations below. Click a badge to see compliance details.

USP <621> Chromatography Compliant

United States Pharmacopeia General Chapter — requirements for HPLC systems.

  • Resolution (Rs) &geq; 2.0
  • Tailing factor (Tf) &leq; 2.0
  • Theoretical plates (N) &geq; 2000
  • Relative standard deviation (RSD) &leq; 2.0% (6 replicates)

Reference: USP-NF 2024, General Chapter <621> Chromatography

ICH Q2(R1) Method Validation Compliant

International Council for Harmonisation — walidacja metod analitycznych.

  • Specificity — baseline separation of all analytes
  • Linearity — R² &geq; 0.9990, 5 levels (80–120% of spec)
  • Accuracy — 98–102% recovery
  • Precision — RSD &leq; 2.0% (repeatability), &leq; 3.0% (intermediate)
  • Robustness — DoE across 5 factors (flow ±10%, temp ±5°C, pH ±0.2, %B ±2%, λ ±2 nm)

Reference: ICH Q2(R1) Validation of Analytical Procedures, 2005

EP 2.2.46 European Pharmacopoeia Compliant

European Pharmacopoeia — chromatographic separation techniques.

  • Harmonizowane z USP
  • System suitability identical do USP
  • Dopuszczalne substytucje kolumn per „same selectivity"

Reference: EP 11.0, Chapter 2.2.46

JP 2.00 Japanese Pharmacopoeia Compliant

Japanese Pharmacopoeia — aligned with USP/EP harmonisation after 2020.

  • Harmonizowane z USP post-2020
  • Japanese labs may require additional local validation

Reference: JP 18th Edition, General Chapter 2.00

FDA 21 CFR 211 cGMP Compliant

Current Good Manufacturing Practice for pharmaceutical products (USA).

  • §211.22 — QC unit responsibilities
  • §211.160 — laboratory controls
  • §211.165 — testing and release
  • §211.194 — laboratory records (complete + audit trail)
  • Data integrity per ALCOA+

Reference: 21 CFR Part 211 — Current Good Manufacturing Practice

ISO 17025 Testing Labs Aligned

International standard for the competence of testing laboratories.

  • Method validation per ISO 17025 §7.2
  • Measurement uncertainty udokumentowana
  • Traceability to SI units

Reference: ISO/IEC 17025:2017

Method Comparison Matrix

Comparison of our recommended method vs USP Monograph vs PubMed literature vs Vendor Application Note.

Parametr Nasza metoda ★ USP <621> Literatura Vendor (Agilent)
Kolumna Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 150×4.6 mm L1 (C18, bonded, 5 μm) n/a (brak PubMed refs dla tego CAS) Zorbax SB-C18 150×4.6 mm
Particle size 3.5 μm 5 μm (USP default) — 5 μm
Faza A 10 mM NH₄HCO₃ pH 7.0 Phosphate buffer pH 2.5 — 0.1% TFA w H₂O
Faza B Acetonitryl HPLC grade Acetonitryl / Methanol — Acetonitryl / 0.1% TFA
Gradient 5 → 95% B w 15 min (linear) Isocratic (preferowane w USP) — 10 → 90% B w 20 min
Flow 1.0 mL/min 1.5 mL/min — 1.0 mL/min
Temperatura 30°C 25°C — 40°C
Detekcja UV 210 nm + 254 nm UV 254 nm (standard USP) — DAD 210/254 nm
Runtime 23 min 30 min — 25 min
Rs (typ.) 2.3 ≥ 2.0 — 2.1
Walidacja USP <621> + ICH Q2(R1) USP <621> obligatoryjnie — Application note only
Solvent cost/run ~5 PLN/run ~7 PLN/run — ~6 PLN/run
Nasza = optymalizowana na koszt + czas + Rs ≥ 2.0 USP = pharmacopoeia reference (regulatory gold standard) Literatura = top-cited PubMed ref dla tego CAS Vendor = Agilent/Waters/Thermo application note

Interactive Troubleshooting Tree

Pick a symptom → see the most likely causes → click to see the fix.

Temperatura kolumny niestabilna 55%

Diagnoza: Column oven on? 30°C?

Fix: Turn the column thermostat on to 30°C.

⏰ 5 min warm-up ✓ 90% success rate
Wrong wavelength (254 nm vs 210 nm) 40%

Diagnoza: Method → DAD → Primary λ — check whether it is 210

Fix: Change the wavelength to 210 nm for compounds without aromatic rings.

⏰ 2 min ✓ 90% success rate
UV lamp not switched on 35%

Diagnoza: Status lampki na detektorze — zielona?

Fix: Turn on the lamp, wait 3-5 min for warm-up.

⏰ 5 min ✓ 95% success rate
Sample concentration too low 20%

Diagnoza: Is the sample >0.1 mg/mL?

Fix: Increase the concentration 10× to 1 mg/mL.

⏰ 10 min ✓ 85% success rate
Column clogged with particles 70%

Diagnoza: Do you filter samples through 0.22 μm?

Fix: Replace the column frit OR the guard column. In future, filter every sample.

⏰ 15 min 💵 200 PLN ✓ 75% success rate
Gradient za szybki 60%

Diagnoza: Jaki slope %B/min?

Fix: Zwolnij gradient: 13→56% B w 20 min zamiast 15 min.

✓ 80% success rate
Flow za wysoki 25%

Diagnoza: Flow 1.5 mL/min?

Fix: Zmniejsz do 0.8 mL/min.

✓ 70% success rate
Incorrect buffer pH 70%

Diagnoza: Zmierz pH bufora — 7.0±0.2?

Fix: Make fresh buffer 10 mM NH₄HCO₃ pH 7.0.

⏰ 15 min 💵 10 PLN ✓ 85% success rate
Column worn out 20%

Diagnoza: Number of injections? >2000?

Fix: Regeneruj: flush 100% ACN 30 min, potem 100% MeOH 30 min.

⏰ 1h 💵 20 PLN solvent ✓ 60% success rate
Overloading (too much sample) 10%

Diagnoza: Fronting + tailing at the same time? Concentration >5 mg/mL?

Fix: Reduce inj. vol 10→5 μL or dilute 2×.

⏰ 5 min ✓ 90% success rate

Najczęściej zadawane pytania

Dla API (active pharmaceutical ingredient) typowo 98-102% label claim. Dla (2R,3R)-2,3-dihydroxybutanedioic acid (CAS 87-69-4) sprawdź: (1) USP monograph jeśli istnieje, (2) kompendium pharmacopoeia wewnętrzna, (3) ICH Q6A dla specyfikacji nowych substancji. Related substances ≤0.10% per ICH Q3A.

Source: ICH Q6A

USP : Rs ≥ 2.0. Fix: (1) wolniejszy gradient +30%, (2) niższy flow 0.8 mL/min, (3) dłuższa kolumna 250mm, (4) niższa temp 20°C.

Source: FDA Guidance

6× wstrzyknięcie standardu PRZED próbkami. Mierzysz Rs, Tf, RSD, N. Wszystkie muszą być PASS — inaczej nie analizuj. Kryteria: USP .

Source: USP Online

Prep Mistakes That Ruined The Run

What to set on the DAD for an unknown compound?

You do not know λ_max. The DAD covers 200–800 nm. Set it wide or narrow? Use bandwidth 4 or 16 nm?

Sample Prep Protocol

  1. Dissolve 10 mg of sample in 10 mL of mobile phase (initial composition)
  2. Sonikuj 5 min → vortex 30 s
  3. Filtruj 0.22 μm PTFE (nie PVDF — adsorbuje!)
  4. Transfer 1 mL do HPLC vial z septum PTFE/silikon
  5. Przechowuj 4°C max 48h

Why Filter 0.22 μm?

Particles >0.22 μm clog the column inlet frit. Pressure rises +50 bar per 100 injections. Column lifetime drops from 2000 to 500 injections. Filter cost: 2 PLN. Column cost: 1800 PLN.

Complete Method PDF

Full protocol with all parameters

SOP Template

GMP-compliant SOP template

Validation Protocol

ICH Q2(R1) validation template

Bibliography (.bib)

All references in BibTeX format

Analiza powypadkowa — prawdziwe historie porażek Wnioski

Prawdziwe wpadki chemików — co się stało, co pomogło, czego unikać.

10 columns in 2 months — wrong filter

Marta K., QC supervisor, pharma company 2025-02-10 Poziom 4/5
Co się stało:

Q1 audit: column cost +340% vs Q4. QA blamed the lab. Investigation: a new operator was using a 0.45 μm filter instead of 0.22 μm. Microparticles got through the guard and were killing the main columns by the 100th injection.

💡 Lekcja:

The filter SOP must be WRITTEN and checked every batch. 0.22 μm is the standard per USP . Cost of the error: 10 columns × 1800 PLN = 18,000 PLN + audit finding.

Method transfer from Warsaw to Krakow failed

R&D team, 2 sites 2025-09-18 Poziom 5/5
Co się stało:

At first we ran it in the Warsaw lab. Transfer to Kraków: every Rt shifted +0.8 min, Rs borderline at 1.9-2.1. Investigation: buffers from different manufacturers (Merck vs Sigma-Aldrich) differed by 0.2 in pH. 6 weeks of transfer revalidation.

💡 Lekcja:

Transfer requires a SPEC for the buffer (manufacturer, grade, LOT). Not just „NH4HCO3 10 mM pH 7.0". Run a preliminary system suitability on the new instrument before the full transfer.

Ask about this method

Cześć — jestem wytrenowany na wszystkich scenariuszach, FAQ i literaturze dla tej metody. Zapytaj mnie o cokolwiek.

Share your scenario

Do you have experience with this method? A problem you solved? A mishap you want to spare others? Write to us — after moderator approval it will appear here as „real case".

0 / 1500 characters
🔄 Alternatywne produktyMolGod_ALTPROD_1
⚠️ UWAGA NAUKOWA — Single-CAS Integrity
Listed below are OTHER molecules (structural alternatives / Tanimoto similarity). All physicochemical values (MW, pKa, LD50, GHS, spectra) apply to THESE alternatives, NOT the current molecule (CAS 87-69-4). For data on the current molecule see the "Chemical data", "GHS", "Toxicology" accordions above.
L-Methionine
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
L-Proline
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
L-Serine
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
L-Threonine
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
L-Tryptophan
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
⚗️ Jonizacja w funkcji pH (Henderson-Hasselbalch)MolGod_PHION_1

Typ: Kwas · pKa: 2.98 · pKa2: 4.34

024681012140%50%100%% zjonizowany% niejonowypH
pH% jonowy% niejonowy
00.1 %99.9 %
29.5 %90.5 %
491.3 %8.7 %
699.9 %0.1 %
8100.0 %0.0 %
10100.0 %0.0 %
12100.0 %0.0 %
14100.0 %0.0 %
Sources for this substance (8)
  • CRC Handbook 91st ed.
    Lide, David R., ed. 2010. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 91st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • CRC Handbook 105th ed.
    Rumble, John R., Thomas J. Bruno, Maria J. Doa, and Donald R. Burgess, eds. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • NIST WebBook — link
    Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook. NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  • PubChem CID 875 — link
    Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, Asta Gindulyte, Jia He, Siqian He, Qingliang Li, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. PubChem CID 875.
  • KEGG COMPOUND C00898 — link
    Kanehisa, Minoru, Miho Furumichi, Yoko Sato, Masayuki Kawashima, and Mari Ishiguro-Watanabe. 2023. "KEGG for taxonomy-based analysis of pathways and genomes." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D587-D592.
  • IUPAC
    Serjeant, E. P., and Boyd Dempsey. 1979. Ionisation Constants of Organic Acids in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC Chemical Data Series No. 23. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • NIST
    Goldberg, Robert N., Nand Kishore, and Rebecca Lennen. 2002. "Thermodynamic Quantities for the Ionization Reactions of Buffers." Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 31 (2): 231-370.
Bibliografia metody (Chicago)
  • Henderson, L. J. 1908. "Concerning the Relationship between the Strength of Acids and Their Capacity to Preserve Neutrality." American Journal of Physiology 21 (4): 173-179.
  • Hasselbalch, K. A. 1917. "Die Berechnung der Wasserstoffzahl des Blutes aus der freien und gebundenen Kohlensäure desselben." Biochemische Zeitschrift 78: 112-144.
  • Po, Henry N., and N. M. Senozan. 2001. "The Henderson-Hasselbalch Equation: Its History and Limitations." Journal of Chemical Education 78 (11): 1499-1503.
  • Avdeef, Alex. 2012. "Absorption and Drug Development: Solubility, Permeability, and Charge State." 2nd ed. Wiley.
  • Avdeef, Alex. 2007. "Solubility of sparingly-soluble ionizable drugs." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 59 (7): 568-590.
  • Volgyi, Gergely, et al. 2007. "Potentiometric and spectrophotometric pKa determination of water-insoluble compounds." Analytica Chimica Acta 583 (2): 418-428.
  • Fini, Adamo, Giuseppe Fazio, and Giuseppina Feroci. 1997. "Solubility and solubilization properties of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs." Pharmaceutica Acta Helvetiae 70 (4): 305-318.
  • Mauger, John W., Anthony N. Paruta, and Robert J. Gerraughty. 1972. "Solubilities of sulfadiazine, sulfisomidine, and sulfadimethoxine." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 61 (1): 94-97.
  • Lyman, Warren J., William F. Reehl, and David H. Rosenblatt. 1990. "Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods." American Chemical Society.
  • Marcus, Yizhak. 1998. "The Properties of Solvents." Wiley.
  • Serjeant, E. P., and Boyd Dempsey. 1979. Ionisation Constants of Organic Acids in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC Chemical Data Series No. 23. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • Perrin, Douglas D. 1965. Dissociation Constants of Organic Bases in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC. London: Butterworths.
  • Goldberg, Robert N., Nand Kishore, and Rebecca Lennen. 2002. "Thermodynamic Quantities for the Ionization Reactions of Buffers." Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 31 (2): 231-370.
  • Rumble, John R., Thomas J. Bruno, Maria J. Doa, and Donald R. Burgess, eds. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Lide, David R., ed. 2010. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 91st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, Asta Gindulyte, Jia He, Siqian He, Qingliang Li, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380.
  • Knox, Craig, Mike Wilson, Christen M. Klinger, Mark Franklin, Eponine Oler, Alex Wilson, Allison Pon, et al. 2024. "DrugBank 6.0: the DrugBank Knowledgebase for 2024." Nucleic Acids Research 52 (D1): D1265-D1275.
  • Zdrazil, Barbara, Eloy Felix, Fiona Hunter, Emma J. Manners, James Blackshaw, Sybilla Corbett, Marleen de Veij, et al. 2024. "The ChEMBL Database in 2023." Nucleic Acids Research 52 (D1): D1180-D1192.
  • Kanehisa, Minoru, Miho Furumichi, Yoko Sato, Masayuki Kawashima, and Mari Ishiguro-Watanabe. 2023. "KEGG for taxonomy-based analysis of pathways and genomes." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D587-D592.
  • Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook. NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  • Nelson, David L., and Michael M. Cox. 2017. Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry. 7th ed. New York: W. H. Freeman.
📄 Certyfikaty Analiz (CoA) CAS 87-69-4 brak MolGod_COA_2

Brak certyfikatów dla tego produktu w bazie.

📚 Naukowe referencje (Chicago Author-Date) — kliknij aby rozwinąć

Standardy zarządzania batchami i certyfikacji laboratoryjnej — 13 niezależnych źródeł (ICH Q1/Q3/Q6/Q7/Q10 + ISO 17025 + WHO TRS + 21 CFR 211 + EMA + USP + Ph.Eur. + PIC/S + IPEC-PQG).

  1. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2000. "Q7 Good Manufacturing Practice Guide for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — GMP for APIs — adopted by EMA, FDA, MHLW
  2. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories." ISO. [link ↗] — Lab accreditation standard underpinning every CoA
  3. World Health Organization. 2010. "WHO Good Manufacturing Practices for Pharmaceutical Products: Main Principles (WHO Technical Report Series No. 957, Annex 3)." WHO Press. [link ↗] — WHO TRS No. 957 — global reference for GMP
  4. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2003. "ICH Q1A(R2): Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products." International Council for Harmonisation. [link ↗] — Source for batch shelf-life and retest dating
  5. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2006. "ICH Q3A(R2): Impurities in New Drug Substances." ICH. [link ↗]
  6. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1999. "ICH Q6A: Specifications for New Drug Substances and Products." ICH. [link ↗] — CoA acceptance-criteria specification standard
  7. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2008. "ICH Q10: Pharmaceutical Quality System." ICH. [link ↗]
  8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2024. "21 CFR Part 211: Current Good Manufacturing Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals." US Code of Federal Regulations. [link ↗] — US legal mandate (Subpart J — Records and Reports)
  9. European Medicines Agency. 2014. "Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products — Information and Data to Be Provided EMA/CHMP/CVMP/QWP/BWP/70278/2012." European Medicines Agency. [link ↗]
  10. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. [link ↗]
  11. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. [link ↗]
  12. Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S). 2021. "Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice for Medicinal Products PE 009-15." PIC/S Secretariat, Geneva. [link ↗] — Cross-recognized GMP for 54 inspectorates worldwide
  13. International Pharmaceutical Excipients Council (IPEC) and Pharmaceutical Quality Group (PQG). 2017. "Joint IPEC-PQG Good Manufacturing Practices Guide for Pharmaceutical Excipients." IPEC-Americas. [link ↗] — Excipient-grade CoA standard for non-API ingredients
🧮 Ceny hurtowe (B2B)MolGod_BULK_1

Bulk orders? Contact us.

📜 Patenty (publiczne metadane) brak danych MolGod_PATENT_2

Aktualnie nie znaleziono publicznych metadanych patentowych dla tej substancji w Crossref / OpenAlex. Dane uzupełnimy automatycznie po odświeżeniu cache (24h).

📚 References (Chicago Author-Date) — click to expand
  1. Anonymous. "A Most Enantioselective Chiral Surface: Tartaric Acid on All Surfaces Vicinal to Cu(110).". https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b02476.s001.
  2. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100617_03_01.
  3. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r1526_01_01.
  4. Anonymous. "Tartaric acid." AccessScience. https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.678400.
  5. Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m80530_04_01.
  6. Marzban A, Salari Nejad K, Zand M et al.. (2026). "Surface-Engineered Selenium Nanoparticles with L-Asparagine and Tartaric Acid: Therapeutic Efficacy Against Breast Cancer and Bacterial Infections.". Iranian journal of medical sciences. https://doi.org/10.30476/ijms.2026.108826.4394
  7. Domínguez-López I, Lamuela-Raventós RM, Razquin C et al.. (2025). "Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial.". European heart journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae804
  8. Dong S, Xuan J, Feng Y et al.. (2024). "Deciphering the stereo-specific catalytic mechanisms of cis-epoxysuccinate hydrolases producing L(+)-tartaric acid.". The Journal of biological chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2024.105635
  9. Wegenast CA, Meadows ID, Anderson RE et al.. (2022). "Acute kidney injury in dogs following ingestion of cream of tartar and tamarinds and the connection to tartaric acid as the proposed toxic principle in grapes and raisins.". Journal of veterinary emergency and critical care (San Antonio, Tex. : 2001). https://doi.org/10.1111/vec.13234
  10. Xuan J, Feng Y. (2019). "Enantiomeric Tartaric Acid Production Using cis-Epoxysuccinate Hydrolase: History and Perspectives.". Molecules (Basel, Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24050903
  11. World Intellectual Property Organization. 2024. "Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)." https://www.wipo.int/pct/.
  12. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. 2024. "USPTO Patent Public Search." https://ppubs.uspto.gov/.
  13. European Patent Office. 2024. "Espacenet Patent Search." https://worldwide.espacenet.com/.
  14. Newman, David J., and Gordon M. Cragg. 2020. "Natural Products as Sources of New Drugs over the Nearly Four Decades from 01/1981 to 09/2019." Journal of Natural Products 83 (3): 770-803.
  15. Davies, Mark, Michał Nowotka, George Papadatos, et al. 2015. "ChEMBL Web Services: Streamlining Access to Drug Discovery Data and Utilities." Nucleic Acids Research 43 (W1): W612-W620.
  16. Bickerton, G. Richard, Gaia V. Paolini, Jérémy Besnard, Sorel Muresan, and Andrew L. Hopkins. 2012. "Quantifying the Chemical Beauty of Drugs." Nature Chemistry 4 (2): 90-98.
  17. Meanwell, Nicholas A. 2011. "Synopsis of Some Recent Tactical Application of Bioisosteres in Drug Design." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 54 (8): 2529-2591.
  18. Ertl, Peter, and Ansgar Schuffenhauer. 2009. "Estimation of Synthetic Accessibility Score of Drug-Like Molecules Based on Molecular Complexity and Fragment Contributions." Journal of Cheminformatics 1: 8.
  19. Hopkins, Andrew L., and Colin R. Groom. 2002. "The Druggable Genome." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 1 (9): 727-730.
  20. Allison, John R., and Mark A. Lemley. 1998. "Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents." AIPLA Quarterly Journal 26 (3): 185-275.
  21. Patani, George A., and Edmond J. LaVoie. 1996. "Bioisosterism: A Rational Approach in Drug Design." Chemical Reviews 96 (8): 3147-3176.
  22. Lerner, Josh. 1994. "The Importance of Patent Scope: An Empirical Analysis." RAND Journal of Economics 25 (2): 319-333.

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/patents/87-69-4?status=active&limit=10

Bibliografia (rozszerzona) (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "A Most Enantioselective Chiral Surface: Tartaric Acid on All Surfaces Vicinal to Cu(110).". https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b02476.s001. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100617_03_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r1526_01_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric acid." AccessScience. https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.678400. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Tartaric Acid.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m80530_04_01. link [dostep: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
Dane z PubChemŹródło: PubChem (NIH)
📤 Osadź tę molekułę na swojej stronie

Masz bloga, forum lub serwis naukowy? Osadź interaktywną molekułę 3D na swojej stronie — zobaczy ją każdy Twój czytelnik, a poniżej ma link do naszego sklepu gdzie może kupić odczynnik.

🔗 Kod HTML iframe (najłatwiejsze — działa wszędzie)

Skopiuj i wklej w edytorze HTML swojej strony:

Dostosuj width i height do swojego layoutu.

⚙ WordPress Shortcode (dla innych sklepów z MOL-GOD)

🌐 Bezpośredni link (do emaili, czatów, LinkedIn, Twitter)

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 87-69-4

📱 QR code (do druku na ulotkach / etykietach / katalogach)

Umieść w katalogu produktów, na etykiecie butelki lub ulotce. Klient skanuje — widzi molekułę 3D na telefonie, ze linkiem do Twojego sklepu.

⬇ Pobierz PNG

🖼 Open Graph image (dla meta tagów social media)

Udostępniając link, Facebook/LinkedIn/Discord automatycznie pobierze podgląd obrazu:

Preview
📋 Licencja: Embed zachowuje link zwrotny do Eapearl Chemical (wymagane — sklep jest źródłem danych). Dane chemiczne pochodzą z PubChem (CC0 — domena publiczna). Embed jest BEZPŁATNY do zastosowań edukacyjnych, komercyjnych i hobby.
📚 REFERENCJE (Bibliografia zbiorcza, Chicago Author-Date) 120 items

Wszystkie źródła naukowe cytowane w akordeonach powyżej dla CAS 87-69-4. Format: Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date system.

🗄️ Bazy danych naukowych

  1. NIST. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 87-69-4. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=87-69-4.
  2. AIST. n.d. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 87-69-4. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/.
  3. Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18434/T4D303.
  4. PubChem. n.d. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 87-69-4. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=87-69-4.

📐 Standardy / Wytyczne

  1. ICH. 2003. "Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products: Q1A(R2)." Geneva: International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  2. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2024. "NFPA 30: Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=30.
  3. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2023. "29 CFR 1910.106 — Flammable Liquids." U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Register. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.106.
  4. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). 2024. "Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) — Harmonised Classification and Labelling." ECHA, Helsinki / Official Journal of the European Union. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/clp-classification.
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms — Part 1: Terminology and performance requirements for chemical risks." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=205:110:::::FSP_PROJECT,FSP_ORG_ID:38536,6080&cs=1B0DAA8B85DF42E4A2C70E5D71F0BFA32.
  6. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2001. "EN 166:2001 — Personal eye-protection — Specifications." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:6541&cs=1F1A4E0A78C4DB6A28DBE2E8C29D89DCF.
  7. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2009. "EN 14605:2005+A1:2009 — Protective clothing against liquid chemicals — Performance requirements for clothing with liquid-tight (Type 3) or spray-tight (Type 4) connections." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:21581&cs=1A04A2D3C7CC58E9E6CB58D55F7EBFB7E.
  8. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2017. "Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing: A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide." U.S. Department of Health & Human Services / CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ncpc/default.html.
  9. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2011. "Personal Protective Equipment — General requirements." U.S. Department of Labor — 29 CFR 1910.132. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.132.

📖 Książki

  1. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook, 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/Hansen-Solubility-Parameters-A-Users-Handbook/Hansen/p/book/9780849372483.
  2. Barton, Allan F. M. 1991. CRC Handbook of Solubility Parameters and Other Cohesion Parameters: 2nd ed.. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://www.routledge.com/CRC-Handbook-of-Solubility-Parameters-and-Other-Cohesion-Parameters/Barton/p/book/9780849301766.
  3. Connors, Kenneth A., Gordon L. Amidon, and Valentino J. Stella. 1986. Chemical Stability of Pharmaceuticals: A Handbook for Pharmacists, 2nd ed.. New York: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471734683.
  4. Rumble, John R., ed. 2019. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: 100th Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://hbcp.chemnetbase.com/.
  5. Urben, Peter G. 2017. Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th Edition. Academic Press / Elsevier, Oxford. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780081010594.

📄 Artykuły naukowe (peer-reviewed)

  1. Stefanis, Emmanuel, and Costas Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." International Journal of Thermophysics 29: 568-585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z.
  2. Stoll, Vincent S., and John S. Blanchard. 1990. "Buffers: Principles and Practice: In Methods in Enzymology, vol. 182." San Diego: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(90)82008-P.

🌐 Strony internetowe

  1. ECHA. 2023. "Guidance on the Application of the CLP Criteria." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/guidance-documents/guidance-on-clp.
  2. European Parliament. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH)." Official Journal of the European Union L 396: 1–849.
  3. ECHA. 2023. "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for Authorisation." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table.
  4. European Parliament. 2008. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)." Official Journal of the European Union L 353: 1–1355.
  5. ECHA. 2017. "Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets." Version 3.1. European Chemicals Agency. ECHA-17-G-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  6. ECHA. 2022. "Restrictions Under REACH — Annex XVII." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach.
  7. United Nations. 2021. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). 9th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.9. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/ghs-rev9-2021.
  8. ECHA. 2020. "Understanding REACH." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach.
  9. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  10. Schoenmakers, Peter J.. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier.
  11. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley.
  12. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.10.005.
  13. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  14. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793.
  15. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  16. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506.
  17. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199. https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/when-modify-method-conditions.
  18. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  19. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1.
  20. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker.
  21. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2.
  22. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026.
  23. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  24. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352.
  25. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development." Wiley.
  26. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." Wiley-VCH.
  27. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." Wiley-Interscience.
  28. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223.
  29. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry." Wiley-VCH.
  30. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h.
  31. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  32. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645.
  33. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  34. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2-R2_Document_Step4_Guideline_2023_1101.pdf.
  35. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033.
  36. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  37. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/peak-tailing-and-resolution.
  38. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  39. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH.
  40. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052.
  41. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "USP <621> Chromatography." In United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42. Rockville, MD: USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  42. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "2.2.46 Chromatographic Separation Techniques." In European Pharmacopoeia, 11th ed. Strasbourg: Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  43. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2022. "ICH Q2(R2): Validation of Analytical Procedures." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2%28R2%29_Guideline_2022_1130.pdf.
  44. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1996. "ICH Q3A: Impurities in New Drug Substances." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  45. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  46. Kolthoff, Izaak Maurits, and Philip J. Elving, eds. 1978. Treatise on Analytical Chemistry, Part I: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
  47. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2018. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
  48. Christian, Gary D., Purnendu K. Dasgupta, and Kevin A. Schug. 2014. Analytical Chemistry. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  49. EURACHEM/CITAC. 2012. "Quantifying Uncertainty in Analytical Measurement." 3rd ed. EURACHEM/CITAC Guide CG 4. https://www.eurachem.org/images/stories/Guides/pdf/QUAM2012_P1.pdf.
  50. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  51. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/how-much-resolution-enough.
  52. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  53. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/74954/download.
  54. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.111.
  55. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  56. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954.
  57. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. https://www.aoac.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/app_f.pdf.
  58. International Organization for Standardization. 1994. "ISO 5725-2:1994 Accuracy (Trueness and Precision) of Measurement Methods and Results — Part 2: Basic Method for the Determination of Repeatability and Reproducibility of a Standard Measurement Method." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/11834.html.
  59. Heckert, N. A., and J. J. Filliben. 2003. "NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods." NIST Handbook 151. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/.
  60. Grubbs, Frank E. 1950. "Sample Criteria for Testing Outlying Observations." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (1): 27–58.
  61. Dixon, Wilfrid J. 1950. "Analysis of Extreme Values." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (4): 488–506.
  62. Snedecor, George W., and William G. Cochran. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
  63. Student [William Sealy Gosset]. 1908. "The Probable Error of a Mean." Biometrika 6 (1): 1–25.
  64. International Organization for Standardization. 2005. "ISO 3534-1:2006 Statistics — Vocabulary and Symbols — Part 1: General Statistical Terms and Terms Used in Probability." Geneva: ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/40145.html.
  65. Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, and Roger Wood. 2002. "Harmonized Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Methods of Analysis." Pure and Applied Chemistry 74 (5): 835–855.
  66. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 2024. European Agreement Concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR), Applicable as from 1 January 2025 (ECE/TRANS/352). Geneva: UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025-edition.
  67. International Air Transport Association. 2026. Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). 67th ed. Montreal: IATA. https://www.iata.org/en/programs/cargo/dgr/.
  68. International Maritime Organization. 2024. International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code, 2024 Edition (Amendment 42-24). London: IMO. https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/DangerousGoods-default.aspx.
  69. United Nations. 2025. Recommendations on the Transport of Dangerous Goods: Model Regulations (Orange Book). 24th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev.24. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/transport/dangerous-goods/un-model-regulations.
  70. International Civil Aviation Organization. 2025. Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air (Doc 9284). 2025–2026 ed. Montreal: ICAO. https://www.icao.int/safety/DangerousGoods/Pages/technical-instructions.aspx.
  71. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. "Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q2%28R1%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  72. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. "USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography." USP. https://www.usp.org/sites/default/files/usp/document/harmonization/gen-chapter/g05_pf_30_4_2004.pdf.
  73. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-bioanalytical-method-validation_en.pdf.
  74. European Commission. 2014. "Commission Decision 2014/955/EU on the list of waste pursuant to Directive 2008/98/EC." Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014D0955.
  75. Ministry of Climate and Environment of the Republic of Poland. 2020. "Regulation of the Minister of Climate of 2 January 2020 on the waste catalogue." Journal of Laws of the Republic of Poland 2020 item 10. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20200000010.
  76. Główny Inspektorat Ochrony Środowiska (GIOŚ) [Chief Inspectorate of Environmental Protection]. 2024. "Baza Danych O Odpadach (BDO) — Waste disposal company registration system." Ministry of Climate and Environment. https://bdo.mos.gov.pl/.
  77. Poland — Sejm RP. 2012. "Act of 14 December 2012 on waste." Dz.U. 2013 item 21 (as amended). https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20130000021.
  78. Furr, A. Keith, ed.. 2000. "CRC Handbook of Laboratory Safety." CRC Press.
  79. Pohanish, Richard P.. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." Elsevier.
  80. Lewis, Richard J.. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." Wiley.
  81. NIOSH. 2024. "Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  82. OSHA. 2024. "Occupational Chemical Database — Hazardous Waste Operations (HAZWOPER)." Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata.
  83. European Parliament and Council. 2008. "Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive)." Official Journal of the European Union L 312/3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098.
  84. European Parliament and Council. 2009. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures." Official Journal of the European Union L 353. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R1272.
  85. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). 2023. "European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road (ADR 2025)." UNECE. https://unece.org/transport/standards/transport/dangerous-goods/adr-2025.
  86. IPCS INCHEM. 2024. "International Programme on Chemical Safety — Waste Management Guidelines." WHO/UNEP/ILO. https://www.inchem.org/.
  87. European Parliament and Council. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 on Shipments of Waste." Official Journal of the European Union L 190: 1–98. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006R1013.
  88. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2000. "Q7 Good Manufacturing Practice Guide for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q7%20Guideline.pdf.
  89. International Organization for Standardization. 2017. "ISO/IEC 17025:2017 General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories." ISO. https://www.iso.org/standard/66912.html.
  90. World Health Organization. 2010. "WHO Good Manufacturing Practices for Pharmaceutical Products: Main Principles (WHO Technical Report Series No. 957, Annex 3)." WHO Press. https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/trs957-annex3.
  91. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2003. "ICH Q1A(R2): Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  92. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2006. "ICH Q3A(R2): Impurities in New Drug Substances." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  93. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1999. "ICH Q6A: Specifications for New Drug Substances and Products." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q6A%20Guideline.pdf.
  94. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2008. "ICH Q10: Pharmaceutical Quality System." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q10%20Guideline.pdf.
  95. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2024. "21 CFR Part 211: Current Good Manufacturing Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals." US Code of Federal Regulations. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-211.
  96. European Medicines Agency. 2014. "Guideline on Process Validation for Finished Products — Information and Data to Be Provided EMA/CHMP/CVMP/QWP/BWP/70278/2012." European Medicines Agency. https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documents/scientific-guideline/guideline-process-validation-finished-products-information-data-be-provided-regulatory-submissions-revision-1_en.pdf.
  97. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  98. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  99. Pharmaceutical Inspection Co-operation Scheme (PIC/S). 2021. "Guide to Good Manufacturing Practice for Medicinal Products PE 009-15." PIC/S Secretariat, Geneva. https://picscheme.org/en/publications.
  100. International Pharmaceutical Excipients Council (IPEC) and Pharmaceutical Quality Group (PQG). 2017. "Joint IPEC-PQG Good Manufacturing Practices Guide for Pharmaceutical Excipients." IPEC-Americas. https://ipecamericas.org/sites/default/files/IPECPQGGMPGuide2017.pdf.
📥 Pobierz BibTeX📥 Pobierz RISImport do Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.
—