Manufacturer since 2009 · Tongling, Anhui ISO certified Licensed for hazardous & precursor chemicals
[email protected] · +86 186 5620 1888
Eapearl Chemical

Sodium cyanide

NaCN

CAS 143-33-9 NaCN Precursor CLP Danger
MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v2 · 22.09.2026

Specification

Product NameSodium cyanide
Other NamesNaCN
CAS No.143-33-9
MFNaCN
Molecular weight49.007
Purity99.5%
AppearanceWhite crystalline powder
Density1.595g/cm 3
Melting point550 °C
Boiling point23.5 °C (at 760mmHg)
Solubility110 g/L (20 ºC)

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 GHS06 — Acute toxicity GHS pictogram GHS08 — Health hazard GHS pictogram GHS09 — Hazardous to the environment

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.

  • H330 Fatal if inhaled
  • H300 Fatal if swallowed
  • H310 Fatal in contact with skin
  • H372 Causes damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure
  • H400 Very toxic to aquatic life
  • H410 Very toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects
Precautionary statements (3)
  • P234 Keep only in original packaging
  • P203 Obtain, read and follow all safety instructions before use
  • P260 Do not breathe dust/fume/gas/mist/vapours/spray

Packaging and shipping

Drum180 kg
IBC Drum1127 kg
ISO tank (20ft)24–26 m³
ISO tank (40ft)48–50 m³
Sodium cyanide
Sodium cyanide
Sodium cyanide
Sodium cyanide

Sodium cyanide (NaCN), commonly known as kyanite or kyanite powder, is a white crystalline powder or blocky solid that readily deliquesces and has a faint bitter almond odor. It is a highly toxic inorganic compound. Even a small amount of skin contact, inhalation, or ingestion can lead to poisoning and death. At the same time, it is also an indispensable and important basic chemical raw material. Due to its extremely strong complexation ability and reactivity, it plays an irreplaceable core role in key industrial fields such as gold smelting, electroplating, and organic synthesis.

Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.

Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.

Product Description

Anhui Eapearl Chemical Co., Ltd., as a professional domestic supplier of fine chemicals, is well aware of the special nature and high risks associated with sodium cyanide, which is a strictly regulated highly toxic chemical substance by the state. We always prioritize safety, compliance, and responsibility. We strictly abide by all laws and regulations, including the “Regulations on the Safety Management of Hazardous Chemicals”, the “Measures for the Purchase and Road Transportation Permit of Highly Toxic Chemicals”, and the mandatory national standard “Safety Management Specifications for Cyanide Production” (GB 45189-2025), which came into effect on September 1, 2025. We only provide high-purity and high-quality sodium cyanide products to end-users with legal qualifications and are committed to providing customers with a fully traceable, professional and safe supply chain service and technical support. 

Product Introduction 

We are well aware that only by respecting the law, valuing science and upholding responsibility can we establish a long-term, stable and mutually trusting partnership with our clients. If you need to obtain detailed product technical materials, undergo qualification verification or inquire about the procurement process, please feel free to contact us at any time.

Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.

Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.

Delivery&Payment method

Compliant industrial supplier of sodium cyanide (NaCN),providing applications such as electroplating, synthesis, and heat treatment. With strict quality control, safety compliance, and stable supply.

Frequently asked

In what packaging is Sodium cyanide shipped?

Standard formats are Drum (180 kg), IBC Drum (1127 kg), 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 Sodium cyanide?

Yes, on request. Safety data sheets are issued per grade and destination market; state the country of import in your inquiry.

What purity do you supply?

The standard grade is 99.5%. Tighter specifications are confirmed against the production batch before shipment.

Related products

🧬 3D-Molekül-Visualisierer
Molekül wird geladen...
3D-Modell Sodium Cyanide, CAS 143-33-9, Summenformel CNNa, molare Masse 49.007 g/mol

Daten transkribiert aus regulatorischen Registern und Fachliteratur, unter Angabe von Quelle und Ausgabe. Sie ersetzen nicht das Sicherheitsdatenblatt des Lieferanten. Felder ohne hinterlegte Quelle sind als solche gekennzeichnet.

📊 Physikochemische Daten — CAS 143-33-9MolGod_PROPHUB_MAIN
📊 Physikochemische Eigenschaften

Kurzübersicht

Formel: CNNa
MW: 49.007 g/mol
CAS: 143-33-9
🔬 Erweiterte Eigenschaften

Chemische Kennungen

SMILES: [C-]#N.[Na+]

Zuletzt aktualisiert: unbestätigt

Chemische Übersicht: Sodium CyanideMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
SummenformelCNNa[1]
Molekulargewicht49.007 g/mol[1]
Schmelzpunkt563.89 °C[1]
Siedepunkt1496 °C[1]
Dichte1.6 g/cm³[1]
IUPAC-Namesodium cyanide[1]
SMILES[C-]#N.[Na+][1]
InChIKeyMNWBNISUBARLIT-UHFFFAOYSA-N[1]

Synonyme: SODIUM CYANIDE · 143-33-9 · Cymag · Cyanogran · Cyanide of sodium

Datenquellen: PubChem (NLM/NIH)
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-09-21

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (1 Quellen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. dotyczy: Summenformel · Molekulargewicht · Schmelzpunkt · Siedepunkt · Dichte · IUPAC-Name · SMILES · InChIKey

WISSENSCHAFTLICHE FORSCHUNG

[1]Europe PMC2021
et al.. (2021). "Effect of Sodium Cyanide-induced Tissue Hypoxia on Reproductive Capability of Male Mice and the Protective Effect of Ethyl Pyruvate.". https://doi.org/10.22092/ari.2020.126806.1362
[2]PubMed2021
Kim M, Jee SC, Kim S et al.. (2021). "Identification and Characterization of mRNA Biomarkers for Sodium Cyanide Exposure.". Toxics. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics9110288
[3]Europe PMC2019
et al.. (2019). "Behavioural and physiological assessments of dimethyl trisulfide treatment for acute oral sodium cyanide poisoning.". https://doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.13220
[4]Europe PMC2018
et al.. (2018). "Behavioral toxicity of sodium cyanide following oral ingestion in rats: Dose-dependent onset, severity, survival, and recovery.". https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.02.033
[5]Europe PMC2016
(2016). "In vivo studies on hepato-renal impairments in freshwater fish Cyprinus carpio following exposure to sublethal concentrations of sodium cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5286-9
[6]Europe PMC2015
(2015). "Histopathological alterations in spleen of freshwater fish Cyprinus carpio exposed to sublethal concentration of sodium cyanide.".
[7]Doaj2014
John A. Shivik, Lauren Mastro, Julie K. Young. (2014). "Animal attendance at M‐44 sodium cyanide ejector sites for coyotes". Wildlife Society Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.361
[8]Europe PMC2012
et al.. (2012). "Homicide due to intravenous metallic mercury injection followed by sodium cyanide injection.". https://doi.org/10.1097/paf.0b013e318221b693
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) 18 refs · 4 baz

MOLECULE Bibliografie pro CAS (live aus 13+ Datenbanken)

Quellen: db:Europe PMC (14) · db:pubmed (1) · db:doaj (1) · db:crossref (2)

  1. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2021). "Effect of Sodium Cyanide-induced Tissue Hypoxia on Reproductive Capability of Male Mice and the Protective Effect of Ethyl Pyruvate.". https://doi.org/10.22092/ari.2020.126806.1362
  2. db:pubmed Kim M, Jee SC, Kim S et al.. (2021). "Identification and Characterization of mRNA Biomarkers for Sodium Cyanide Exposure.". Toxics. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics9110288
  3. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2019). "Behavioural and physiological assessments of dimethyl trisulfide treatment for acute oral sodium cyanide poisoning.". https://doi.org/10.1111/bcpt.13220
  4. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2018). "Behavioral toxicity of sodium cyanide following oral ingestion in rats: Dose-dependent onset, severity, survival, and recovery.". https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.02.033
  5. db:Europe PMC (2016). "In vivo studies on hepato-renal impairments in freshwater fish Cyprinus carpio following exposure to sublethal concentrations of sodium cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-015-5286-9
  6. db:Europe PMC (2015). "Histopathological alterations in spleen of freshwater fish Cyprinus carpio exposed to sublethal concentration of sodium cyanide.".
  7. db:doaj John A. Shivik, Lauren Mastro, Julie K. Young. (2014). "Animal attendance at M‐44 sodium cyanide ejector sites for coyotes". Wildlife Society Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.361
  8. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2012). "Homicide due to intravenous metallic mercury injection followed by sodium cyanide injection.". https://doi.org/10.1097/paf.0b013e318221b693
  9. db:Europe PMC (2012). "Acute toxicity, behavioral and nitrogen metabolism changes of sodium cyanide affected on tissues of Tilapia mossambica (Perters).". https://doi.org/10.3109/01480545.2011.589608
  10. db:crossref (2012). "Hydrogen cyanide, potassium cyanide and sodium cyanide [MAK Value Documentation, 2003]". The MAK‐Collection for Occupational Health and Safety. https://doi.org/10.1002/3527600418.mb7490vere0019
  11. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2009). "Respiratory distress and behavioral changes induced by sodium cyanide in the fresh water TELEOST, Cyprinus carpio (Linnaeus).". https://doi.org/10.1515/jbcpp.2009.20.1.55
  12. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2008). "Ruthenium-catalyzed oxidative cyanation of tertiary amines with molecular oxygen or hydrogen peroxide and sodium cyanide: sp3 C-H bond activation and carbon-carbon bond formation.". https://doi.org/10.1021/ja8017362
  13. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2004). "[Two suicide fatalities from sodium cyanide ingestion: differences in blood biochemistry].".
  14. db:Europe PMC et al.. (2003). "Pulsatilloside A and anemoside A3 protect PC12 cells from apoptosis induced by sodium cyanide and glucose deprivation.". https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2003-37705
  15. db:Europe PMC (2002). "Ion pair recognition by Zn-porphyrin/crown ether conjugates: visible sensing of sodium cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1039/b109596j
  16. db:Europe PMC (1993). "NTP Toxicity Studies of Sodium Cyanide (CAS No. 143-33-9) Administered by Dosed Water to F344/N Rats and B6C3F1 Mice.".
  17. db:Europe PMC et al.. (1986). "Acute oral toxicity of sodium cyanide in birds.". https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-22.4.538
  18. db:crossref R. Garth Pews, Fred P. Corson. (1971). "Reactions of p-toluenesulfonyl chloride and p-toluenesulfonyl cyanide with sodium cyanide and with sodium p-toluenesulfinate". The Journal of Organic Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1021/jo00811a018
Regulatorischer Status der Substanz
Diese Substanz unterliegt regulatorischen Anforderungen: Bewirtschaftung gefährlicher Abfälle (BDO-Register). Details im Abschnitt "Regulatorischer Status (REACH/ECHA/CLP)" und im SDS. Regulatorische Information — schränkt den Kauf in diesem Shop nicht ein.
🧮 Stöchiometrie-RechnerMolGod_STOICH_1
🧪 Chemische DatenMolGod_CHEMDATA_1
CAS-Nummer
143-33-9
Summenformel
CNNa
Molmasse
49.007 g/mol
IUPAC-Name (EN)
sodium cyanide
SMILES
[C-]#N.[Na+]
InChIKey
MNWBNISUBARLIT-UHFFFAOYSA-N
📚 Literatura naukowa (18 Artikel)MolGod_LITSCI_1
John A. Shivik, Lauren Mastro, Julie K. Young · (2014) · Wildlife Society Bulletin
Filtern:
Sortieren:
📈 Zeitachse der Publikationen
1986
1993
2002
2003
2004
2008
2009
2012
2014
2015
2016
2018
2019
2021
2024
📡 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
1.6

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

🔍 Externe IdentifikatorenMolGod_EXTID_1
1 von 16 ID-Systemen6%
DatenbankIdentifikatorAktionen
CAS Registry Number143-33-9Öffnen →

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

Dalsza literatura

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

Bibliografie (erweitert) (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. 2017. "sodium cyanide poisoning." CABI Compendium. https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.96451. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Asplund, J. 1978. "Titration of cyanide and hexacyanoferrate(II) with silver nitrate—II Determination of sodium cyanide and sodium hexacyanoferrate(II) in a complexing agent." Talanta 25 (3): 143-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-9140(78)80102-7. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Wakefield, B. J.. 1967. "The displacement of all six fluorine atoms from hexafluorobenzene by sodium cyanide in methanol." Journal of the Chemical Society C: Organic: 72. https://doi.org/10.1039/j39670000072. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r2454_01_01. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Aerobic Ruthenium-Catalyzed Oxidative Cyanation of Tertiary Amines with Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1021/ja0390303.s001. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
📡 Spektroskopie — CAS 143-33-9MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Spektroskopische Spektrendatenbanken — Inline-Daten 8 Quellen MolGod_SPECDB_2

Spektren werden bei Bedarf aus 9 Quellen abgerufen. Jedes Spektrum wird in unserer Datenbank gespeichert — beim nächsten Öffnen erfolgt keine Anfrage an die externe API. Laden Sie JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG zu jedem Spektrum herunter, ohne zu suchen.

IR IR (Infrared) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
Punkte
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (NIST) Mass Spectrum (EI) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
Punkte
📚 NIST Standard Reference Database 1A
UV-Vis UV/Visible Absorption — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
Punkte
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (MoNA) MoNA — MassBank of North America
CC-BY 4.0
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
Punkte
📚 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

Referenzquelle — keine öffentliche API. In einer externen Datenbank öffnen:

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

Referenzquelle — keine öffentliche API. In einer externen Datenbank öffnen:

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

Referenzquelle — keine öffentliche API. In einer externen Datenbank öffnen:

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

Referenzquelle — keine öffentliche API. In einer externen Datenbank öffnen:

🔗 DOAJ →
📚 DOAJ — doaj.org
🔬 Interaktive Spektren (live — NIST / MoNA / NMRShiftDB / SDBS) (2)

Daten werden live aus mehreren Quellen abgerufen (Priority-Chain). JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG stehen unter jedem Spektrum zum Download bereit.

IR — Fourier-Transform-Infrarot

IR — Fourier-Transform-Infrarot wird geladen…

MS — Massenspektrometrie (EI 70eV)

MS — Massenspektrometrie (EI 70eV) wird geladen…

Strukturelle EigenschaftenMolGod_STRUCT3D_1

Strukturdaten werden geladen...

❓ Häufig gestellte Fragen (3)MolGod_FAQ_1
What is 143-33-9?
143-33-9 (CAS 143-33-9) is a chemical compound. The chemical data comes from PubChem (National Institutes of Health, USA).
Hilfreich?
What is the CAS number of 143-33-9?
The CAS number for 143-33-9 is 143-33-9. A CAS Registry Number is the standard identifier for a chemical substance in scientific literature and in trade.
Hilfreich?
How should 143-33-9 be stored?
143-33-9 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.
Hilfreich?
➕ Frage vorschlagen
Strukturdateien herunterladenMolGod_STRDL_1

Molekülstrukturdateien aus der PubChem-Datenbank (NIH). Kompatibel mit Avogadro, PyMOL, Jmol und ChemDraw.

Quelle: PubChem, National Library of Medicine (NIH). CID: 8929

🔄 Umrechner für Konzentrationseinheiten LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

Geben Sie die Konzentration Sodium Cyanide in einer beliebigen Einheit ein — der Rest wird automatisch berechnet.

MW: 49.007 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Umrechnungsformeln + Zitate (pro Formel)
UmrechnungFormelGenauigkeitQuelle
% (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)
📚 Bibliographie (8 autoritative Quellen)
  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
Ähnliche MolekülstrukturenMolGod_SIMSTR_1

Ähnliche Strukturen werden geladen...

🧪 Assistent zur Lösungsvorbereitung WIZARD MolGod_PREP_1
① Konzentration auswählen
② Zielvolumen
③ Lösungsmittel

Berechnungen nach: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, Merck ↗

ComputerchemieMolGod_COMPCHEM_1

Berechnungsdaten werden geladen...

🛡️ Sicherheit — CAS 143-33-9MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Hinweis zu Datenbeschränkungen. Die Sicherheitsinformationen auf dieser Seite dienen nur zur Information und ersetzen kein vollständiges Sicherheitsdatenblatt (SDS). Konsultieren Sie vor der Verwendung des Produkts das aktuelle Sicherheitsdatenblatt des Herstellers sowie die GHS/CLP-Leitlinien. Die CLP-Einstufung bezieht sich auf die reine Bulk-Substanz, nicht auf handelsübliche Zubereitungen.

GHS/CLP-Einstufung — Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1272/2008 + UN GHS Rev. 9 (2021).

⚠️ Gefahr (Danger)
GHS06 — Giftig
GHS06 Giftig
GHS07 — Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich
GHS07 Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich
GHS09 — Umweltgefahr
GHS09 Umweltgefahr

🚨 Gefahrenhinweise (H)

  • H300 — Lebensgefahr bei Verschlucken.
  • H310 — Lebensgefahr bei Hautkontakt.
  • H330 — Lebensgefahr bei Einatmen.
  • H400 — Sehr giftig für Wasserorganismen.
  • H410 — Sehr giftig für Wasserorganismen mit langfristiger Wirkung.
  • H316 — Verursacht leichte Hautreizungen.
  • H319 — Verursacht schwere Augenreizung.

🛡 Sicherheitshinweise (P)

  • P234 — Nur in Originalverpackung aufbewahren.
  • P203 — Vor Gebrauch alle Sicherheitshinweise einholen, lesen und befolgen.
  • P260 — Staub/Rauch/Gas/Nebel/Dampf/Aerosol nicht einatmen.

⚠ Einstufung basierend auf einem Konsens der Quellen (PubChem / Meldungen der Lieferanten) — nicht gegen die harmonisierte Einstufung in Anhang VI (CLP) verifiziert. Der Gefahrenumfang kann breiter sein als die amtliche Einstufung; vor der Verwendung mit dem aktuellen Sicherheitsdatenblatt des Lieferanten verifizieren.

Übersetzungen: CLP-Verordnung (EG) 1272/2008, Anhang III und IV. Daten: PubChem/NLM.

📚 Konsolidierte wissenschaftliche Referenzen — Chicago Author-Date 10 Quellen

Referenzen aus allen Safety-Hub-Registerkarten gesammelt. CAS: 143-33-9 · 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, Vorschriften
  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

Registerkarten mit eigenen Referenzen (Emergency, PPE, Storage, Waste) enthalten zusätzliche bibliografische Einträge in ihren jeweiligen Abschnitten.

📈 Analytische Statistik (t-Test · RSD · Grubbs · Q-Dixon) ICH Q2

Fügen Sie eine Serie von Messwiederholungen ein (CSV oder eine Zahl pro Zeile). Der Rechner berechnet Mittelwert, Standardabweichung und 95% CI und erkennt Ausreißer (Grubbs + Dixon Q).

Trennzeichen: Komma, Leerzeichen, Tab, Zeilenumbruch. Min. 3 Messungen.
📐 Statistische Formeln
  • x̄ = Σxᵢ / n — arithmetisches Mittel
  • s² = Σ(xᵢ - x̄)² / (n-1) — Stichprobenvarianz
  • s = √s² — Standardabweichung
  • RSD% = (s / x̄) × 100% — relative Standardabweichung
  • CI₉₅ = x̄ ± t(0.05, n-1) × s / √n — Student's t
  • G = |xᵢ - x̄| / s — Grubbs-Test
  • Q = |xsuspect - xnearest| / |xmax - xmin| — Dixon Q-test

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

🧪 Puffer-Rezept-Rechner EINZIGARTIG

Wählen Sie einen Puffer aus der Liste von 20 gängigen Systemen → geben Sie den Ziel-pH-Wert ein → Sie erhalten ein exaktes Rezept mit den einzuwiegenden Massen.

Schritt 1: Puffersystem wählen

📜 Rezeptverlauf (letzte 10)
Pharmakologischer Status

Prekliniczny

Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Zugelassen

Präklinisch — keine Daten aus Studien am Menschen.

ChEMBL CHEMBL1644697 ↗

Bibliografie (erweitert) (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. 2017. "sodium cyanide poisoning." CABI Compendium. https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.96451. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Asplund, J. 1978. "Titration of cyanide and hexacyanoferrate(II) with silver nitrate—II Determination of sodium cyanide and sodium hexacyanoferrate(II) in a complexing agent." Talanta 25 (3): 143-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-9140(78)80102-7. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Wakefield, B. J.. 1967. "The displacement of all six fluorine atoms from hexafluorobenzene by sodium cyanide in methanol." Journal of the Chemical Society C: Organic: 72. https://doi.org/10.1039/j39670000072. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r2454_01_01. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Aerobic Ruthenium-Catalyzed Oxidative Cyanation of Tertiary Amines with Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1021/ja0390303.s001. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
📅 Project Planner — Manager für Laborexperimente NEU

Planen Sie Ihr gesamtes Laborprojekt: Fügen Sie Experimente mit Reagenzien, Wiederholungen und Dauer hinzu. Sie erhalten ein Gantt-Diagramm, eine Einkaufsliste (mit Links zum Shop!), ein Budget mit 10% Reserve und eine GHS-Risikomatrix.

🧪 Löslichkeit und Lösungsmittelkompatibilität MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molekül
Sodium Cyanide
Formel
CNNa
logP (XLogP3)
Masse (g/mol)
49.007
Polarität

⚠️ Ionische / anorganische Verbindung — die Hansen-Parameter (δD/δP/δH) sind nicht anwendbar: Das Auflösen wird durch die Kristallgitterenergie und die Ionensolvatation gesteuert, nicht durch molekulare Kohäsion. Der HSP-Block und die Hansen-Kugel entfallen. HSP-abhängige Spalten (Kompat./Ra/Visuell) sind mit „n/v“ gekennzeichnet — stützen Sie die Lösungsmittelauswahl auf experimentelle Daten.

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

Lösungsmittel Compat. Ra Visuell GC-MS HPLC Anwendungen Referenzen
Water (H₂O)n/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
buffercell cultureanalyticalextraction (hydrophilic)
Ethanol (EtOH)n/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
extractionspectroscopy (UV-Vis)synthesisHPLC modifier
Methanol (MeOH)n/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent to 205 nm
Acetonen/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspacecrystallisationdegreasingsynthesis
Acetonitrile (ACN)n/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC eluent (gold standard)LC-MS (low UV cut-off, 190 nm)peptide analysis
DMSOn/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)cell biology (cryopreservation)drug deliverysynthesis
THFn/dnicht zutreffend✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (polymer analysis)Grignard synthesisorganometallics
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)n/dnicht zutreffend✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
extractionNP-HPLCGC-MScrystallisation (anti-solvent)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)n/dnicht zutreffend✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)lipid extraction (Folch method)NP-TLC
Hexanen/dnicht zutreffend✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLCoil extraction (lipids)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluenen/dnicht zutreffend✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)synthesisazeotropic drying (Dean-Stark)
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen für Lösungsmittel (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken

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
Löslichkeitstheorie (angewendet in der Verträglichkeitsvorhersage):
  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-Triplett (dD, dP, dH) + Ra-Formel.
  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 — Vollständige tabellarische Sammlung von 250+ Lösungsmitteln (ε, μ, Donizität, Akzeptorzahlen).
  8. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 143-33-9 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

Vollständige Bibliografie im Akkordeon REFERENZEN (am Ende der Seite) — Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date.

⚗️ Reaktionskompatibilität prüfen MolGod_RXNCOMP_1
4 0 0
Gesundheit: 4/4
Entflammbarkeit: 0/4
Reaktivität: 0/4
Gemäß NFPA 704 / berechnet aus H-Sätzen

Prüfen Sie, ob Sodium Cyanide mit einem anderen Reagenz verträglich ist

📦 Lagerverträglichkeitsmatrix
Acids Regeln Oxidationsmittel Entzündbar Giftig Gazy
Acids
Regeln
Oxidationsmittel
Entzündbar
Giftig
Gazy
✓ Gemeinsame Lagerung möglich · ⚠ Vorsicht · ✗ NICHT zusammen lagern · OSHA Chemical Segregation ↗

Verträglichkeitsdaten aus: Bretherick's Handbook (7th ed.) ↗, GESTIS ↗, ECHA REACH ↗, NFPA 704 ↗

🧮 Laborrechner (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Verdünnung (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molarität (M=n/V)
pH-Puffer (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Masse → Mol
Konzentration % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperatur C↔F↔K

Verifizierte Formeln: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Spektroskopische Spektrendatenbanken MolGod_SPECDB_3
📋 Laborprotokoll-Generator MolGod_PROTOCOL_1

Protokoll erstellt auf Grundlage von: GHS SDS, Aldrich Lab Guide ↗

🏷️ Etiketten-Generator (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
Sodium Cyanide• Cymag / Cyanogran• IUPAC: sodium cyanide• CAS: 143-33-9• Formel: CNNa• Masse: 49.007 g/molGEFAHRGHS-GEFAHRENHINWEISE:(Selbsteinstufung der Lieferanten — unverbindlich)H330 H300 H310 H372 H400 H410P203 P234 P260Nur für Laborzwecke!Anhui Eapearl Chemical Co., Ltd.12th Floor, Tongguan Number Valley, Tongling, Anhui, China+86 186 5620 1888[email protected]epchems.com
Deskryptory Lipinskiego (struktura)
ADMET-Vorhersagen werden geladen…
🧪 Assistent zur Lösungsherstellung (Smart Prep) MolGod_PREP_2

Geben Sie ein, was Sie zubereiten möchten — ich erstelle eine SOP

Beispiele unten — zum Einfügen anklicken:
Fertige Rezepte:
📚 Überblick über die wissenschaftliche Literatur — CAS 143-33-9MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse (wissenschaftliche Literatur) 18 Publikationen
🏆 CAS 143-33-9 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% Zitierungen · 20% Aktualität · 20% Thema · 15% historisch · 15% Open Access.
  1. #1
    Kim M, Jee SC, Kim S et al. (2021) · Toxics
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 8.41 Mechanismus Citations: 8 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  2. #2
    et al. (2018) · Food and Chemical Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 8.31 Pharmakologie Citations: 8 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  3. #3
    et al. (2019) · Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 8.29 Pharmakologie Citations: 6 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  4. #4
    (2012) · The MAK‐Collection for Occupational Health and Safety
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 7.58 Mechanismus Citations: 5 Open Access DOI ↗
  5. #5
    et al. (2008) · Journal of the American Chemical Society
    Warum es wichtig ist: 174 citations
    SCORE 7.53 Mechanismus Citations: 174 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  6. #6
    Yeon-Hwan Kim; Jong-In Hong (2002) · Chemical Communications
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 6.77 Mechanismus Citations: 97 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  7. #7
    (2015)
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 6.46 Mechanismus Citations: 7 Open Access PubMed ↗
  8. #8
    et al. (1986) · Journal of Wildlife Diseases
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 6.09 Pharmakologie Citations: 18 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  9. #9
    John A. Shivik, Lauren Mastro, Julie K. Young (2014) · Wildlife Society Bulletin
    Warum es wichtig ist: Open access
    SCORE 5.99 Mechanismus Citations: 6 Open Access DOI ↗
  10. #10
    et al. (2021)
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 5.11 Pharmakologie Citations: 3 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  11. #11
    M. David; R. M. Kartheek (2016) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 4.92 Mechanismus Citations: 10 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  12. #12
    R. Garth Pews, Fred P. Corson (1971) · The Journal of Organic Chemistry
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 3.53 Mechanismus Citations: 14 DOI ↗
  13. #13
    et al. (2012) · The American Journal of Forensic Medicine and Pathology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 3.14 Mechanismus Citations: 6 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  14. #14
    et al. (2003) · Planta Medica
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 3.12 Mechanismus Citations: 10 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  15. #15
    M.S. Prashanth (2012) · Drug and Chemical Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 3.1 Analytik Citations: 1 DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  16. #16
    et al. (2004)
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 2.9 Mechanismus Citations: 4 PubMed ↗
  17. #17
    (1993)
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 2.23 Pharmakologie Citations: 2 PubMed ↗
  18. #18
    et al. (2009) · Journal of Basic and Clinical Physiology and Pharmacology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Ausgewählt nach einem Multikriterien-Score (Zitierungen + Aktualität + Thema + historisch + OA).
    SCORE 0.8 Analytik DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
🔬 HPLC — Methoden und Parameter — CAS 143-33-9MolGod_HPLCHUB_MAIN
🧪 Systemeignung — Live-Rechner (USP <621>)

Geben Sie Daten aus 5-6 Injektionen ein (Flächen, tR, Tailing, Böden) — der Rechner berechnet %RSD, Mittelwerte und prüft die Konformität mit USP <621>. Sie können CSV (kommagetrennt) einfügen oder einzelne Werte bearbeiten.

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines RSD area < 2%, tailing < 2.0, N > 2000 acceptance criteria.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Section 5.4 — system suitability is part of method validation.
  3. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. [link ↗] — CDER reviewer perspective on chromatographic validation expectations.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. Wiley. — Chapter 2 — system suitability fundamentals (RSD, Tf, N).
  5. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." — Robustness vs. system suitability — design-of-experiments framework.
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation."
  7. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. [link ↗] — EMA companion guideline with bioanalytical SS criteria.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. — UHPLC-specific suitability adjustments (n=5 vs. n=6).
  9. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience.
  10. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — Alternative SS thresholds for food/dietary samples.
📐 HPLC-Peaksymmetrie-Rechner (USP Tf / As)

Berechnen Sie den USP-Tailing-Faktor (T) und die Asymmetrie (As) aus den Peak-Halbwertsbreiten. Geben Sie a (linke Halbbreite) und b (rechte Halbbreite) an, gemessen bei 5% oder 10% der Peakhöhe.

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines USP Tailing Factor T = (a+b)/(2a) measured at 5% peak height.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Tailing factor is a system suitability parameter (Section 6).
  3. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Original asymmetry factor As = b/a at 10% height (Foley & Dorsey 1983).
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2.4 — peak shape diagnostics and remedies.
  5. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." LCGC North America 21: 610-614 [link ↗] — How tailing factor degrades effective resolution.
  6. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗] — Modern numerical deconvolution for asymmetric peaks.
  7. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH. — Practical Tf and As thresholds for routine QC.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  10. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." Journal of Chromatography B 877: 2120-2129 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗]
📊 Rechner für Auflösung und Bodenzahl (Rs, N, H)

Berechnen Sie die Auflösung Rs, die theoretische Bodenzahl N und HETP (H) für ein Paar von HPLC-Peaks. Geben Sie die Retentionszeiten, Peakbreiten (bei 50% oder an der Basis) und die Säulenlänge an.

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2 covers resolution, plate count and HETP fundamentals (Snyder et al. 2010).
  2. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines Rs >= 1.5 acceptance criterion and N calculation methods.
  3. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." LCGC North America 21: 350-353 [link ↗] — Practical guidance on Rs targets for routine method development.
  4. 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 [link ↗] — Origin of N = 5.54·(tr/w0.5)² half-height plate count formulation.
  5. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-8247-1357-7. — Resolution equation Rs = (1/4)·√N·(α-1)/α·k/(1+k) (master equation).
  6. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Skewed-peak corrections to apparent N.
  7. 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 [link ↗]
  8. 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 [link ↗]
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.

Vollständiger HPLC-Methodenleitfaden Fachlich begutachtet

Molekülspezifische Szenarien, Fehlerbehebung und Literaturhinweise

Molecular Predictor

Predicted parameters for this molecule (CAS 143-33-9) are based on literature-backed models (Snyder-Dolan LSS, Neue pore-size rules).

Retention Time
1.2 min
Range: 0.84 – 1.56
confidence: low
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
= 10.203 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.

Echtes Chemiker-Problem

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.

So lösen wir das

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

Interaktiver Rechner

Deep Education

Die Chemie der mobilen Phase verstehen

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:

Häufig gestellte Fragen

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

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

Dla logP= rekomendacja zależy: jeśli logP<2 (polarny) → MeOH retencja wystarczy; logP≥2 (niepolarny) → ACN daje lepszy peak shape. Dla tej molekuły (MW=49.007, CAS 143-33-9) zaczynaj od ACN w gradiencie 5→95% B.

Source: Snyder LSS Model

Gradient Problem From The Lab

Optymalizacja nachylenia gradientu (dG)

Your impurities co-elute in a narrow 5-8 min window. The 30 min runtime is too long. How to use Snyder-Dolan LSS for optimisation?

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.

Häufig gestellte Fragen

Heurystyka Snyder: Rt ≈ 2.5·logP + 1.2 min. Dla sodium cyanide (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

Häufig gestellte Fragen

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

Rule of thumb: analyty MW10000 (białka) → pore 1000 Å. Dla MW=49.007 (CAS 143-33-9) użyj standardowej kolumny C18 100 Å.

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

Detection Gotcha

Why am I not seeing any peaks?

You injected the sample, you wait 23 min and... a flat line. Anxiety is rising.
Lesson learned (Student MSc, UW, 2024-10):
Wavelength 254 nm does not work for most carboxylic acids — use 210 nm.

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

Method transfer from Warsaw to Krakow failed

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.
Lesson learned (R&D team, 2 sites, 2025-09-18):
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.

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

Häufig gestellte Fragen

Dla API (active pharmaceutical ingredient) typowo 98-102% label claim. Dla sodium cyanide (CAS 143-33-9) 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

Eksport chromatogramu do raportu

Your boss wants a PNG of the chromatogram for a presentation. You only have ChemStation with a .ch file. How to get from .ch → PNG?

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

Forensische Analyse — echte Fehlschlag-Geschichten Gelernte Lektionen

Echte Pannen von Chemikern — was passiert ist, was geholfen hat und was zu vermeiden ist.

10 columns in 2 months — wrong filter

Marta K., QC supervisor, pharma company 2025-02-10 Poziom 4/5
Was ist passiert:

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.

48 godzin stracone na niewidoczne piki

Anna K., studentka 2. rok, PW 2024-11-15 Poziom 2/5
Was ist passiert:

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.

💡 Lekcja:

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.

Ask about this method

Hallo — ich bin auf alle Szenarien, FAQ und Literatur zu dieser Methode trainiert. Fragen Sie mich alles.

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 143-33-9). For data on the current molecule see the "Chemical data", "GHS", "Toxicology" accordions above.
🧪
Ethyl ether
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
🧪
LABSA 96%
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
Perchloroethylene (PCE)
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
Toluene
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
Phthalic anhydride (MA)
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
📄 Analysenzertifikate (CoA) CAS 143-33-9 keine MolGod_COA_2

Keine Zertifikate für dieses Produkt in der Datenbank.

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken

Standards für Chargenmanagement und Laborzertifizierung — 13 unabhängige Quellen (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.

Bibliografie (erweitert) (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. 2017. "sodium cyanide poisoning." CABI Compendium. https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.96451. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Asplund, J. 1978. "Titration of cyanide and hexacyanoferrate(II) with silver nitrate—II Determination of sodium cyanide and sodium hexacyanoferrate(II) in a complexing agent." Talanta 25 (3): 143-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-9140(78)80102-7. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Wakefield, B. J.. 1967. "The displacement of all six fluorine atoms from hexafluorobenzene by sodium cyanide in methanol." Journal of the Chemical Society C: Organic: 72. https://doi.org/10.1039/j39670000072. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r2454_01_01. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OFFEN ❓ nicht verifiziert Anonymous. "Aerobic Ruthenium-Catalyzed Oxidative Cyanation of Tertiary Amines with Sodium Cyanide.". https://doi.org/10.1021/ja0390303.s001. Link [abgerufen: 2026-09-23] CC0 (metadata)
Daten von PubChemQuelle: PubChem (NIH) · ChEMBL
📤 Betten Sie dieses Molekül auf Ihrer Website ein

Haben Sie einen Blog, ein Forum oder einen wissenschaftlichen Dienst? Betten Sie das interaktive 3D-Molekül auf Ihrer Website ein — jeder Ihrer Leser sieht es, und darunter gibt es einen Link zu unserem Shop, wo er das Reagenz kaufen kann.

🔗 HTML-iframe-Code (am einfachsten — funktioniert überall)

Kopieren Sie ihn und fügen Sie ihn in den HTML-Editor Ihrer Website ein:

Passen Sie width und height an Ihr Layout an.

⚙ WordPress Shortcode (für andere Shops mit MOL-GOD)

🌐 Direktlink (für E-Mails, Chats, LinkedIn, Twitter)

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 143-33-9

📱 QR code (zum Druck auf Flyern / Etiketten / Katalogen)

Platzieren Sie ihn in einem Produktkatalog, auf einem Flaschenetikett oder einem Flyer. Der Kunde scannt ihn — sieht das 3D-Molekül auf seinem Telefon, mit einem Link zu Ihrem Shop.

⬇ PNG herunterladen

🖼 Open Graph image (für Social-Media-Meta-Tags)

Wenn Sie den Link teilen, ruft Facebook/LinkedIn/Discord automatisch die Bildvorschau ab:

Preview
📋 Lizenz: Der Embed behält einen Backlink zu Eapearl Chemical (erforderlich — der Shop ist die Datenquelle). Chemische Daten stammen von PubChem (CC0 — gemeinfrei). Der Embed ist KOSTENLOS für Bildungs-, kommerzielle und Hobbyzwecke.
📚 REFERENZEN (Gesammelte Bibliografie, Chicago Author-Date) 120 Einträge

Alle wissenschaftlichen Quellen, die in den Akkordeons oben für CAS 143-33-9 zitiert werden.Format: Chicago Manual of Style, 17. Aufl., Autor-Datum-System.

🗄️ Wissenschaftliche Datenbanken

  1. PubChem. n.d. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 143-33-9. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine.
  2. NIST. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 143-33-9. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=143-33-9.
  3. AIST. n.d. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 143-33-9. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/.
  4. 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.

📐 Standards / Richtlinien

  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.

📖 Bücher

  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.

📄 Wissenschaftliche Artikel (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.

🌐 Websites

  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.
📥 BibTeX herunterladen📥 RIS herunterladenImport in Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.