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

Sorbitol

Sorbitol, D-Sorbitol, Glucitol

CAS 50-70-4 EC 200-061-5 C6H14O6 Alcohol
MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v1 · 22.09.2026

Specification

Product NameSorbitol
Other NamesSorbitol, D-Sorbitol, Glucitol
CAS No.50-70-4
EINECS No.200-061-5
MFC6H14O6
Molecular weight182.17
Purity99.0% (crystalline) / 70% (liquid solution)
AppearanceWhite crystalline powder / Colorless viscous liquid
Density1.49 g/cm³ (solid) / 1.28 g/mL (70% solution, 25°C)
Melting point95–105°C (crystalline)
Boiling pointDecomposes at ~296°C
Flashing point>150°C (closed cup)

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

Packaging and shipping

Drum250 kg
IBC Drum1127 kg
ISO tank (20ft)20–24 m³
ISO tank (40ft)40–50 m³
Sorbitol
Sorbitol
Sorbitol
Sorbitol
Sorbitol

Sorbitol is a naturally derived polyol widely used in food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and industrial applications, serving as a versatile basic raw material. With a sweet taste approximately 60% that of sucrose, it offers lower calories and non-cariogenic properties, making it an ideal sweetener and humectant for sugar-free foods, functional candies, and solid beverages.

In the cosmetics and personal care industry, sorbitol’s excellent moisturizing properties make it a key ingredient in toothpaste, skin care products, and cosmetics, effectively preventing product cracking while improving texture and stability. In the pharmaceutical field, it acts as a pharmaceutical excipient, commonly used as a tablet filler, oral liquid sweetener, and osmotic laxative, meeting pharmacopoeia standards with high safety.

Industrially, sorbitol is utilized in the synthesis of resins, surfactants, and antifreeze agents, playing a crucial role in chemical manufacturing. Our company provides various specifications including crystalline sorbitol and liquid sorbitol (70% content), featuring high purity, stable quality, complete compliance documents, and reliable supply chain guarantees, to meet the customized demands of food, cosmetics, pharmaceutical, and other industries.

Sorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guaranteeSorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guaranteeSorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guarantee

Sorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guarantee

Product Description

Sorbitol, a naturally occurring polyol derived from glucose, is a highly versatile raw material widely used across food, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and industrial sectors.

 With a sweet taste approximately 60% that of sucrose, it delivers only 2.6 kcal per gram—less than half the calories of sugar—while being non-cariogenic, making it a preferred choice for sugar-free and low-calorie formulations.

Applications

• Food Industry: As a sugar substitute and humectant, sorbitol is extensively used in sugar-free candies, chewing gum, baked goods, and beverages.

 It prevents crystallization, retains moisture to extend shelf life, and enhances texture without raising blood glucose levels, making it suitable for diabetic-friendly products.

• Cosmetics & Personal Care: Its exceptional moisturizing properties make it a key ingredient in toothpaste, skin creams, lotions, and hair care products.

 It helps maintain skin hydration, prevents product drying, and improves the smoothness and stability of formulations.

• Pharmaceuticals: Sorbitol serves as an excipient in tablets, capsules, and oral liquids, acting as a binder, filler, and sweetener.

 It also functions as an osmotic laxative in oral solutions, providing gentle relief from constipation while meeting strict pharmacopoeial standards.

• Industrial Applications: It is used in the production of polyethers, surfactants, and alkyd resins, as well as a humectant in tobacco and a stabilizer in concrete admixtures.

Usage Guidelines

• Food & Beverages: Typically added at 2–15% depending on the product. For chewing gum and hard candies, higher concentrations (10–30%) are used to achieve sweetness and texture.

• Cosmetics: Incorporated at 1–10% in formulations to provide moisturization, with higher levels (5–15%) in toothpaste and leave-on skincare products.

• Pharmaceuticals: As a laxative, oral solutions are usually administered at 15–30 mL per dose for adults, following medical guidance. As an excipient, it is used at 5–50% in solid dosage forms.

Our company offers both crystalline sorbitol (99% purity) and liquid sorbitol (70% aqueous solution), with stable supply chains and full compliance documentation to meet the rigorous demands of global industries.

Sorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guarantee

Sorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guarantee

Delivery&Payment method

Sorbitol Multi-functional Solution | Covers multiple industries such as food, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals | Customizable parameters, supply chain guarantee

Frequently asked

In what packaging is Sorbitol shipped?

Standard formats are Drum (250 kg), IBC Drum (1127 kg), ISO tank (20ft) (20–24 m³), ISO tank (40ft) (40–50 m³). Other packaging can be arranged for full-container orders.

Is a safety data sheet available for Sorbitol?

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 99.0% (crystalline) / 70% (liquid solution). Tighter specifications are confirmed against the production batch before shipment.

Technical reading on Sorbitol

Related products

🧬 3D Molecule Visualizer
Loading molecule...
3D model Sorbitol, CAS 50-70-4, molecular formula C6H14O6, molar mass 182.17 g/mol

Data transcribed from regulatory registers and technical literature, with the source and edition stated. It does not replace the supplier's safety data sheet. Fields without a recorded source are marked as such.

📊 Physicochemical data — CAS 50-70-4MolGod_PROPHUB_MAIN
📊 Physicochemical properties

Quick Reference

Formula: C6H14O6
MW: 182.17 g/mol
CAS: 50-70-4
🔬 Advanced Properties

Chemical Identifiers

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

Last updated: unconfirmed

Chemical Overview: SorbitolMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
Molecular formulaC6H14O6[1]
Molecular weight182.17 g/mol[1]
IUPAC name(2R,3R,4R,5S)-hexane-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexol[1]
SMILESC([C@H]([C@H]([C@@H]([C@H](CO)O)O)O)O)O[1]
InChIKeyFBPFZTCFMRRESA-JGWLITMVSA-N[1]

Synonyms: D-Sorbitol · sorbitol · D-Glucitol · 50-70-4 · glucitol

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

📚 Scientific references (Chicago Author-Date) (1 sources)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. dotyczy: Molecular formula · Molecular weight · IUPAC name · SMILES · InChIKey

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

[1]PubMed2025
Torrino S, Oldham WM, Tejedor AR et al.. (2025). "Mechano-dependent sorbitol accumulation supports biomolecular condensate.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.10.048
[2]PubMed2025
Jackstadt MM, Fowle-Grider R, Song MG et al.. (2025). "Intestine-derived sorbitol drives steatotic liver disease in the absence of gut bacteria.". Science signaling. https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.
[3]PubMed2024
Lee JY, Tiffany CR, Mahan SP et al.. (2024). "High fat intake sustains sorbitol intolerance after antibiotic-mediated Clostridia depletion from the gut microbiota.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ce
[4]PubMed2024
Papatriantafyllou M. (2024). "Tackling sorbitol intolerance.". Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-024-00921-4
[5]PubMed2023
Yang Z, Qin J, Zhao L et al.. (2023). "Host Sorbitol and Bacterial Sorbitol Utilization Promote Clostridioides difficile Infection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.". Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10
[6]PubMed2022
Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12
[7]PubMed2022
Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12
[8]PubMed2022
Li Y, Huang H, Zhang X. (2022). "Identification of catabolic pathway for 1-deoxy-D-sorbitol in Bacillus licheniformis.". Biochemical and biophysical research communications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
📚 Scientific references (Chicago Author-Date) 8 refs · 1 baz

MOLECULE Per-CAS bibliography (live from 13+ databases)

Sources: db:pubmed (8)

  1. db:pubmed Torrino S, Oldham WM, Tejedor AR et al.. (2025). "Mechano-dependent sorbitol accumulation supports biomolecular condensate.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.10.048
  2. db:pubmed Jackstadt MM, Fowle-Grider R, Song MG et al.. (2025). "Intestine-derived sorbitol drives steatotic liver disease in the absence of gut bacteria.". Science signaling. https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.adt3549
  3. db:pubmed Lee JY, Tiffany CR, Mahan SP et al.. (2024). "High fat intake sustains sorbitol intolerance after antibiotic-mediated Clostridia depletion from the gut microbiota.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.029
  4. db:pubmed Papatriantafyllou M. (2024). "Tackling sorbitol intolerance.". Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-024-00921-4
  5. db:pubmed Yang Z, Qin J, Zhao L et al.. (2023). "Host Sorbitol and Bacterial Sorbitol Utilization Promote Clostridioides difficile Infection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.". Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2023.02.046
  6. db:pubmed Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2022.31.LatAm_sup_6.27
  7. db:pubmed Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2022.31.LatAm_sup_6a.27
  8. db:pubmed Li Y, Huang H, Zhang X. (2022). "Identification of catabolic pathway for 1-deoxy-D-sorbitol in Bacillus licheniformis.". Biochemical and biophysical research communications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.11.072
Regulatory status of the substance
No entries for this CAS in the restriction lists checked (SVHC candidate list, REACH Annex XVII; datasets incomplete — this is not a confirmation of compliance). CLP classification and transport status (ADR): see the GHS section and the safety data sheet (SDS).
🧮 Stoichiometry CalculatorMolGod_STOICH_1
🧪 Chemical DataMolGod_CHEMDATA_1
CAS Number
50-70-4
Molecular formula
C6H14O6
Molar mass
182.17 g/mol
IUPAC name (EN)
(2R,3R,4R,5S)-hexane-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexol
SMILES
C([C@H]([C@H]([C@@H]([C@H](CO)O)O)O)O)O
InChIKey
FBPFZTCFMRRESA-JGWLITMVSA-N
📡 Data sourcesMolGod_SOURCES_1

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

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

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

⚗️ Physicochemical propertiesMolGod_PHYSTAB_2
Temp. topnienia
93.4

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

🔍 External identifiersMolGod_EXTID_1
15 of 16 ID systems94%
DatabaseIdentifierActions
CAS Registry Number50-70-4Open →
PubChem CID5780[1]Open →
InChIKeyFBPFZTCFMRRESA-JGWLITMVSA-N[1]Open →
InChIInChI=1S/C6H14O6/c7-1-3(9)5(11)6(12)4(10)2-8/h3-…[1]
SMILESC([C@H]([C@H]([C@@H]([C@H](CO)O)O)O)O)O[1]
EC Number200-061-5[2]Open →
ChEMBLCHEMBL1682[3]Open →
DrugBankDB01638Open →
KEGG CompoundD00096Open →
HMDBHMDB0000247Open →
ChemSpider5576[4]Open →
MeSH UID (NLM)D013012Open →
UNII (FDA)506T60A25ROpen →
NSC Number (NCI)25944Open →
WikiData QIDQ245280Open →

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

📚 Scientific references (Chicago Author-Date) (4 sources)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. dotyczy: PubChem CID · InChIKey · InChI · SMILES
  2. ECHA. EC Inventory — EINECS, ELINCS, NLP and List Numbers assigned under REACH. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency. dotyczy: EC Number
  3. ChEMBL. European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI), bioactivity database. dotyczy: ChEMBL
  4. ChemSpider. Royal Society of Chemistry, chemical structure database. dotyczy: ChemSpider

Dalsza literatura

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

Extended Bibliography (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. 1988. "Sorbitol see Charcoal/sorbitol." Reactions 191 (1): 10-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03278385. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100597_05_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_02. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m77640_40101_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
📡 Spectroscopy — CAS 50-70-4MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Spectroscopic spectra databases — inline data 9 sources MolGod_SPECDB_2

Spectra are fetched on demand from 9 sources. Each spectrum is stored in our database — the next time it is opened there are zero requests to the external API. Download JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG for every spectrum without searching.

IR IR (Infrared) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Click to load spectrum
🔗 Source
points
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (NIST) Mass Spectrum (EI) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Click to load spectrum
🔗 Source
points
📚 NIST Standard Reference Database 1A
UV-Vis UV/Visible Absorption — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Click to load spectrum
🔗 Source
points
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
¹H NMR NMR (¹H, ¹³C) — NMRShiftDB
CC-BY-SA 4.0
▶ Click to load spectrum
🔗 Source
points
📚 Steinbeck C et al. (2003) J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 43(1):10–16 DOI: 10.1021/ci025588g
MS (MoNA) MoNA — MassBank of North America
CC-BY 4.0
▶ Click to load spectrum
🔗 Source
points
📚 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

Reference source — no public API. Open in an external database:

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

Reference source — no public API. Open in an external database:

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

Reference source — no public API. Open in an external database:

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

Reference source — no public API. Open in an external database:

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

Data retrieved live from multiple sources (priority chain). JCAMP-DX / CSV / PNG available for download under each spectrum. ⓘ Single source ★★☆☆☆ ⓘ Single source ★★☆☆☆

IR — Fourier-transform infrared

Loading IR — Fourier-transform infrared…

MS — Mass spectrometry (EI 70eV)

Loading MS — Mass spectrometry (EI 70eV)…

Structural propertiesMolGod_STRUCT3D_1

Loading structural data...

❓ Frequently asked questions (3)MolGod_FAQ_1
What is 50-70-4?
50-70-4 (CAS 50-70-4) is a chemical compound. The chemical data comes from PubChem (National Institutes of Health, USA).
Helpful?
What is the CAS number of 50-70-4?
The CAS number for 50-70-4 is 50-70-4. A CAS Registry Number is the standard identifier for a chemical substance in scientific literature and in trade.
Helpful?
How should 50-70-4 be stored?
50-70-4 should be stored as its safety data sheet directs \— typically in a dry, cool, well-ventilated place, away from heat and from materials it is incompatible with.
Helpful?
➕ Suggest a question
Download structure filesMolGod_STRDL_1

Molecular structure files from the PubChem database (NIH). Compatible with Avogadro, PyMOL, Jmol, and ChemDraw.

Source: PubChem, National Library of Medicine (NIH). CID: 5780

🔄 Concentration unit converter LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

Enter the Sorbitol concentration in any unit — the rest will be calculated automatically.

MW: 182.17 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Conversion formulas + citations (per formula)
ConversionFormulaAccuracySource
% (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)
📚 Bibliography (8 authoritative sources)
  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
Similar molecular structuresMolGod_SIMSTR_1

Loading similar structures...

🧪 Solution Preparation Wizard WIZARD MolGod_PREP_1
① Select concentration
② Target volume
③ Solvent

Calculations per: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, Merck ↗

Computational chemistryMolGod_COMPCHEM_1

Loading computational data...

🛡️ Safety — CAS 50-70-4MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Data limitations notice. The safety information on this page is for reference only and does not replace a full safety data sheet (SDS). Before using the product, consult the manufacturer's current safety data sheet and the GHS/CLP guidance. The CLP classification applies to the pure bulk substance, not to commercial formulations.

No harmonised GHS classification for this substance — see the supplier's current safety data sheet (SDS).

📚 Consolidated scientific references — Chicago Author-Date 10 sources

References collected from all Safety Hub tabs. CAS: 50-70-4 · PubChem ↗

  1. Parlament Europejski i Rada UE. 2008. "Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1272/2008 w sprawie klasyfikacji, oznakowania i pakowania substancji (CLP)." Dz.Urz. UE L 353. [↗] GHS, Regulations
  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

Tabs with their own references (Emergency, PPE, Storage, Waste) contain additional bibliographic entries within their respective sections.

📈 Analytical statistics (t-test · RSD · Grubbs · Q-Dixon) ICH Q2

Paste a series of replicate measurements (CSV, or one number per line). The calculator computes the mean, standard deviation and 95% CI, and detects outliers (Grubbs + Dixon Q).

Separator: comma, space, tab, new line. Minimum 3 measurements.
📐 Statistical formulas
  • x̄ = Σxᵢ / n — arithmetic mean
  • s² = Σ(xᵢ - x̄)² / (n-1) — sample variance
  • s = √s² — standard deviation
  • RSD% = (s / x̄) × 100% — relative standard deviation
  • 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

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

🧪 Buffer Recipe Calculator UNIQUE

Choose a buffer from the list of 20 popular systems → enter the target pH → get an exact recipe with the masses to weigh out.

Step 1: Choose a buffer system

📜 Recipe history (last 10)
Pharmacological Status

Lek zatwierdzony (Faza 4)

Phase I
Phase II
Phase III
Approved

Approved for marketing by regulatory authorities.

ChEMBL CHEMBL1682 ↗

Extended Bibliography (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. 1988. "Sorbitol see Charcoal/sorbitol." Reactions 191 (1): 10-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03278385. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100597_05_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_02. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m77640_40101_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
📅 Project Planner — Lab Experiment Manager NEW

Plan your entire laboratory project: add experiments with reagents, replicates, and duration. You'll get a Gantt chart, a shopping list (with links to the store!), a budget with a 10% margin, and a GHS risk matrix.

🧪 Solubility and solvent compatibility MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molecule
Sorbitol
Formula
C6H14O6
logP (XLogP3)
-3.10
Mass (g/mol)
182.17
Polarity
Hydrophilic (polar)

⚠️ HSP estimate (literature / group contribution). Indicative data — does not replace experimental studies.

Ra < R₀ = good miscibility · Ra < 1,5×R₀ = borderline · above = poor (R₀ — radius of the Hansen sphere of this molecule) For this molecule R₀ = 20..

Solvent Compat. Ra Visual GC-MS HPLC Applications References
Water (H₂O)+ Good15.9
✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
buffercell cultureanalyticalextraction (hydrophilic)
Ethanol (EtOH)+ Good15.5
✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
extractionspectroscopy (UV-Vis)synthesisHPLC modifier
Methanol (MeOH)+ Good13.9
✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent to 205 nm
Acetone~ Avg.25.9
✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspacecrystallisationdegreasingsynthesis
Acetonitrile (ACN)~ Avg.27.1
✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC eluent (gold standard)LC-MS (low UV cut-off, 190 nm)peptide analysis
DMSO~ Avg.21.0
✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)cell biology (cryopreservation)drug deliverysynthesis
THF~ Avg.25.1
✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (polymer analysis)Grignard synthesisorganometallics
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)~ Avg.25.9
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
extractionNP-HPLCGC-MScrystallisation (anti-solvent)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)~ Avg.27.5
✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)lipid extraction (Folch method)NP-TLC
Hexane− Poor35.3
✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLCoil extraction (lipids)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluene− Poor31.4
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)synthesisazeotropic drying (Dean-Stark)
📚 Scientific references for solvents (Chicago Author-Date) — click to expand

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
Solubility theory (applied in compatibility prediction):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — HSP triplet (dD, dP, dH) + Ra formula.
  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 — Complete tabular set of 250+ solvents (ε, μ, donicity, acceptor numbers).
  8. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 50-70-4 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

Full bibliography in the REFERENCES accordion (at the bottom of the page) — Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date.

⚗️ Check reaction compatibility MolGod_RXNCOMP_1

Check whether Sorbitol is compatible with another reagent

📦 Storage compatibility matrix
Acids Bases Oxidizers Flammable Toxic Gazy
Acids
Bases
Oxidizers
Flammable
Toxic
Gazy
✓ Can be stored together · ⚠ Caution · ✗ Do NOT store together · OSHA Chemical Segregation ↗

Compatibility data from: Bretherick's Handbook (7th ed.) ↗, GESTIS ↗, ECHA REACH ↗, NFPA 704 ↗

🧮 Laboratory calculators (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Dilution (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molarity (M=n/V)
pH Buffer (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Mass → Moles
Concentration % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperature C↔F↔K

Verified formulas: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Spectroscopic Databases MolGod_SPECDB_3
📋 Laboratory protocol generator MolGod_PROTOCOL_1

Protocol generated based on: GHS SDS, Aldrich Lab Guide ↗

🏷️ Label generator (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
D-sorbitol• sorbitol / D-Glucitol• IUPAC: (2R,3R,4R,5S)-hexane-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexol• CAS: 50-70-4• EC: 200-061-5• Formula: C6H14O6• Mass: 182.17 g/molAnhui Eapearl Chemical Co., Ltd.12th Floor, Tongguan Number Valley, Tongling, Anhui, China+86 186 5620 1888[email protected]epchems.com
Deskryptory Lipinskiego (struktura)

Drug-likeness radar chart (Lipinski Ro5 / Veber). Green zone = compliance with criteria.

Predictive data — properties calculated in silico (SMILES/RDKit). These do not replace clinical studies. Do not use for drug evaluation without experimental verification.

MW182.2LogP-3.1HBD6HBA6RotB5TPSA121 Ų
✓ Lipinski Ro5✓ Veber✓ Egan✗ Ghose (LogP=-3.1)✗ REOS (MW=182, HBD=6)✗ Lead-like Ro3 (HBD=6, HBA=6, RotB=5)
PropertyValueRating
Absorption (GI)high
BBB permeabilityno
Bioavailability (Daina 2017)
55%
CYP450 profileCYP1A2 non-inhibitorCYP2C9 non-inhibitorCYP2C19 non-inhibitorCYP2D6 non-inhibitorCYP3A4 non-inhibitor
PAINS alerts0
Brenk alerts0
pKa (pH 7.4)7 (heuristic)
hERG (cardiotox.)✓ no
P-gp substrate
Ames mutagenicity✓ no
DILI (hepatotox.)
LogS (aq. solub.)
Sources (ADMET methodology)
  1. Lipinski, Christopher A., Franco Lombardo, Beryl W. Dominy, and Paul J. Feeney. 1997. "Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 23 (1-3): 3-25.
  2. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, et al. 2002. "Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  3. Daina, Antoine, Olivier Michielin, and Vincent Zoete. 2017. "SwissADME: a free web tool to evaluate pharmacokinetics, drug-likeness and medicinal chemistry friendliness." Scientific Reports 7: 42717.
  4. Egan, William J., and Gregory Lauri. 2002. "Prediction of intestinal permeability." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 273-289.
  5. Baell, Jonathan B., and Georgina A. Holloway. 2010. "New substructure filters for removal of pan assay interference compounds (PAINS) from screening libraries." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 53 (7): 2719-2740.
  6. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, et al. 2008. "Lessons learnt from assembling screening libraries for drug discovery for neglected diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  7. Ertl, Peter, and Ansgar Schuffenhauer. 2009. "Estimation of synthetic accessibility score of drug-like molecules based on molecular complexity and fragment contributions." Journal of Cheminformatics 1: 8.
  8. Bickerton, G. Richard, Gaia V. Paolini, Jérémy Besnard, Sorel Muresan, and Andrew L. Hopkins. 2012. "Quantifying the Chemical Beauty of Drugs." Nature Chemistry 4 (2): 90-98.
  9. Hopkins, Andrew L., and Colin R. Groom. 2002. "The Druggable Genome." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 1 (9): 727-730.
  10. Ghose, Arup K., Vellarkad N. Viswanadhan, and John J. Wendoloski. 1999. "A Knowledge-Based Approach in Designing Combinatorial or Medicinal Chemistry Libraries for Drug Discovery." Journal of Combinatorial Chemistry 1 (1): 55-68.
  11. Tice, Raymond R., Christopher P. Austin, Robert J. Kavlock, and John R. Bucher. 2013. "Improving the Human Hazard Characterization of Chemicals: A Tox21 Update." Environmental Health Perspectives 121 (7): 756-765.
  12. Leeson, Paul D., and Brian Springthorpe. 2007. "The Influence of Drug-Like Concepts on Decision-Making in Medicinal Chemistry." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 6 (11): 881-890.
  13. Hann, Michael M. 2011. "Molecular Obesity, Potency and Other Addictions in Drug Discovery." MedChemComm 2 (5): 349-355.
  14. Davies, Mark, Michał Nowotka, George Papadatos, et al. 2015. "ChEMBL Web Services: Streamlining Access to Drug Discovery Data and Utilities." Nucleic Acids Research 43 (W1): W612-W620.
  15. Walters, W. Patrick, and Mark A. Murcko. 2002. "Prediction of 'Drug-Likeness.'". Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 54 (3): 255–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(02)00003-0.
  16. Congreve, Miles, Robin Carr, Christopher Murray, and Harren Jhoti. 2003. "A 'Rule of Three' for Fragment-Based Lead Discovery?" Drug Discovery Today 8 (19): 876–877. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-6446(03)02831-9.
  17. Brenk, Ruth, Alessandro Schipani, Daniel James, Agata Krasowski, Iain Hugh Gilbert, Julie Frearson, and Paul Graham Wyatt. 2008. "Lessons Learnt from Assembling Screening Libraries for Drug Discovery for Neglected Diseases." ChemMedChem 3 (3): 435-444.
  18. Schomburg, Karen T., Sascha Bietz, Hans Briem, Andrea M. Henzler, Stefan Urbaczek, and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "Facing the Challenges of Structure-Based Target Prediction by Inverse Virtual Screening." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (6): 1676-1686.
  19. Bemis, Guy W., and Mark A. Murcko. 1996. "The Properties of Known Drugs. 1. Molecular Frameworks." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 39 (15): 2887-2893.
  20. Schomburg, Karen T., and Matthias Rarey. 2014. "What Is the Potential of Structure-Based Target Prediction Methods?" Future Medicinal Chemistry 6 (17): 1987-1989.
  21. Torrino S, Oldham WM, Tejedor AR et al.. (2025). "Mechano-dependent sorbitol accumulation supports biomolecular condensate.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.10.048
  22. Jackstadt MM, Fowle-Grider R, Song MG et al.. (2025). "Intestine-derived sorbitol drives steatotic liver disease in the absence of gut bacteria.". Science signaling. https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.adt3549
  23. Lee JY, Tiffany CR, Mahan SP et al.. (2024). "High fat intake sustains sorbitol intolerance after antibiotic-mediated Clostridia depletion from the gut microbiota.". Cell. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.01.029
  24. Papatriantafyllou M. (2024). "Tackling sorbitol intolerance.". Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41575-024-00921-4
  25. Yang Z, Qin J, Zhao L et al.. (2023). "Host Sorbitol and Bacterial Sorbitol Utilization Promote Clostridioides difficile Infection in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.". Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2023.02.046
  26. Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2022.31.LatAm_sup_6.27
  27. Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al.. (2022). "Curación de úlceras venosas crónicas inducida con un hidrogel de aloe vera, sorbitol, alantoína y glicerol.". Journal of wound care. https://doi.org/10.12968/jowc.2022.31.LatAm_sup_6a.27
  28. Li Y, Huang H, Zhang X. (2022). "Identification of catabolic pathway for 1-deoxy-D-sorbitol in Bacillus licheniformis.". Biochemical and biophysical research communications. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2021.11.072
  29. Anonymous. 1988. "Sorbitol see Charcoal/sorbitol." Reactions 191 (1): 10-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03278385. [DOI ↗]
  30. Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_01. [DOI ↗]
  31. Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100597_05_01. [DOI ↗]
  32. Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_02. [DOI ↗]
  33. Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m77640_40101_01. [DOI ↗]
  34. Bolton, Evan E., Yanli Wang, Paul A. Thiessen, and Stephen H. Bryant. 2008. "PubChem: Integrated Platform of Small Molecules and Biological Activities." Annual Reports in Computational Chemistry 4: 217-241. [DOI ↗]
  35. Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. [DOI ↗]
  36. Kim, Sunghwan, Tiejun Cheng, Jianyong He, Chen Cheng, et al. 2021. "PubChem Protein, Pathway, Reaction, and Disease Specifications." Journal of Cheminformatics 13: 16. [DOI ↗]
  37. Hähnke, Volker D., Sunghwan Kim, and Evan E. Bolton. 2018. "PubChem chemical structure standardization." Journal of Cheminformatics 10: 36. [DOI ↗]
  38. Wang, Yanli, Stephen H. Bryant, Tiejun Cheng, Jiyao Wang, et al. 2017. "PubChem BioAssay: 2017 update." Nucleic Acids Research 45 (D1): D955-D963. [DOI ↗]
  39. Cheng, Tiejun, et al. 2014. "Computation of Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients by Guiding an Additive Model with Knowledge." Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 54 (3): 793-805. [DOI ↗]
  40. 2020. "Structures, Biogenesis, and Biological Activities of Pyrano[4, 3-c]isochromen-4-one Derivatives from the Fungus Phellinus igniarius." https://doi.org/10.1021/NP060476H.S001. [DOI ↗]
  41. 2007. "Biological test on Schefflera glycosides and ginseng glycosides by radio-ligand receptor binding assays." Studies in Plant Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-3420(99)80012-3. [DOI ↗]
  42. Wilkinson, Mark D., et al. 2016. "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship." Scientific Data 3: 160018. [DOI ↗]
  43. Hersey, Anne, et al. 2015. "Chemical databases: curation or integration by user-defined equivalence?" Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 14: 17-24.
  44. Lutz Schneider. 2019. "Sorbitol Intolerance - Living Better with Sorbitol Intolerance." Independently Published.
  45. Veber, Daniel F., Stephen R. Johnson, Hung-Yuan Cheng, Brian R. Smith, Keith W. Ward, and Kenneth D. Kopple. 2002. "Molecular Properties That Influence the Oral Bioavailability of Drug Candidates." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 45 (12): 2615-2623.
  46. ECHA. 2024. "REACH Guidance." European Chemicals Agency.
  47. Groom, Colin R., Ian J. Bruno, Matthew P. Lightfoot, and Suzanna C. Ward. 2016. "The Cambridge Structural Database." Acta Crystallographica Section B 72 (2): 171-179.
  48. Anonymous. 2008. "Phytochemistry research progress." Nova Biomedical Books.
🧪 Solution preparation assistant (Smart Prep) MolGod_PREP_2

Enter what you want to prepare — I'll generate an SOP

Examples below — click to insert:
Preset recipes:
📚 Scientific literature overview — CAS 50-70-4MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Key findings (scientific literature) 8 publications
🏆 CAS 50-70-4 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% citations · 20% recency · 20% topic · 15% historical · 15% open access.
  1. #1
    Torrino S, Oldham WM, Tejedor AR et al. (2025) · Cell
    Why it matters: Recent (2025) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Mechanism Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  2. #2
    Lee JY, Tiffany CR, Mahan SP et al. (2024) · Cell
    Why it matters: Recent (2024) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Mechanism Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  3. #3
    Jackstadt MM, Fowle-Grider R, Song MG et al. (2025) · Science signaling
    Why it matters: Recent (2025) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Mechanism Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  4. #4
    Yang Z, Qin J, Zhao L et al. (2023) · Gastroenterology
    Why it matters: Recent (2023) · open access
    SCORE 6.15 Mechanism Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  5. #5
    Papatriantafyllou M (2024) · Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology
    Why it matters: Recent (2024)
    SCORE 4 Mechanism DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  6. #6
    Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al. (2022) · Journal of wound care
    Why it matters: Review
    SCORE 3.6 Review DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  7. #7
    Ulloa JH, Bravo J, Moreno OY et al. (2022) · Journal of wound care
    Why it matters: Review
    SCORE 3.6 Review DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  8. #8
    Li Y, Huang H, Zhang X (2022) · Biochemical and biophysical research communications
    Why it matters: Selected by multi-criteria score (citations + recency + topic + historical + OA).
    SCORE 3.6 Mechanism DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
🔬 HPLC — methods & parameters — CAS 50-70-4MolGod_HPLCHUB_MAIN
🔬 HPLC/GC methods (2 methods)
📄
Automatic periodical negative air ions reduce postharvest decay and maintain texture and flavor quality of ‘Fuji’ apple during long-term cold storage
HPLCFood Chemistry: X202490% ✓OAResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Column: NH2, 250 x 5.0 mm, 4.6 μm
Phase: comprised 85 % acetonitrile in water, flow rate at 1 mL min−1, oven temperature at…
Detection: RID
Flow: 1.00 mL/min
Temp.: 80.0 °C
Inj.: 20 μL
Zheng Y, Jiang Y, Yang X, Fu Z, Zhao Z, Li X, et al. Automatic periodical negative air ions reduce postharvest decay and maintain texture and flavor quality of ‘Fuji’ apple during long-term cold storage. Food Chemistry: X. 2024;24:101972. doi:10.1016/j.fochx.2024.101972
The aim of this study was to explore the effect of periodical negative air ions (NAI) on the quality of ‘Fuji’ apple fruit after treatment at 0, 30, 60, and 90 min every 4 weeks. NAI for 60 min decreased weight loss, mitigated decay, and maintained hardness of the apple fruit during the 40 weeks of storage. Treatment of fruits with NAI for 60 min enhanced the apple defense ability against pathogens by maintaining the cell wall integrity and improving the related-enzyme activities as well as accumulation of total phenols and flavonoids. Reverse-phase HPLC and solid-phase microextraction GC–MS analysis showed that NAI treatment for 60 min increased the levels of fructose, sucrose, sorbitol, malic acid and volatiles, such as 2-hexenal, 2-methylbutyl acetate, hexyl acetate, and ethyl butanoate. Taken together, NAI is promising for improving the quality ‘Fuji’ apples during the cold storage.
‘Fuji’ applePostharvest decayFlavor qualityNegative air ionsDefense-related enzyme
📄
Lipase-Catalyzed Production of Sorbitol Laurate in a “2-in-1” Deep Eutectic System: Factors Affecting the Synthesis and Scalability
HPLCMolecules202191% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Column: C18, 54 x 12 mm
Phase: , solvent A, was water and solvent B was acetonitrile
Detection: ELSD
Flow: 1.00 mL/min
Temp.: 50.0 °C
Inj.: 195 μL
Gradient: such as 2nd solvent percentage started at 0% for 1.5…
Delavault A, Opochenska O, Laneque L, Soergel H, Muhle-Goll C, Ochsenreither K, et al. Lipase-Catalyzed Production of Sorbitol Laurate in a “2-in-1” Deep Eutectic System: Factors Affecting the Synthesis and Scalability. Molecules. 2021;26:2759. doi:10.3390/molecules26092759
Surfactants, such as glycolipids, are specialty compounds that can be encountered daily in cleaning agents, pharmaceuticals or even in food. Due to their wide range of applications and, more notably, their presence in hygiene products, the demand is continuously increasing worldwide. The established chemical synthesis of glycolipids presents several disadvantages, such as lack of specificity and selectivity. Moreover, the solubility of polyols, such as sugars or sugar alcohols, in organic solvents is rather low. The enzymatic synthesis of these compounds is, however, possible in nearly water-free media using inexpensive and renewable building blocks. Using lipases, ester formation can be achieved under mild conditions. We propose, herein, a “2-in-1” system that overcomes solubility problems, as a Deep Eutectic System (DES) made of sorbitol and choline chloride replaces either a purely organic or aqueous medium. For the first time, 16 commercially available lipase formulations were compared, and the factors affecting the conversion were investigated to optimize this process, owing to a newly developed High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Evaporative Light Scattering Detector (HPLC-ELSD) method for quantification. Thus, using 50 g/L of lipase formulation Novozym 435® at 50 °C, the optimized synthesis of sorbitol laurate (SL) allowed to achieve 28% molar conversion of 0.5 M of vinyl laurate to its sugar alcohol monoester when the DES contained 5 wt.% water. After 48h, the de novo synthesized glycolipid was separated from the media by liquid–liquid extraction, purified by flash-chromatography and characterized thoroughly by one- and two-dimensional Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR) experiments combined to Mass Spectrometry (MS). In completion, we provide initial proof of scalability for this process. Using a 2.5 L stirred tank reactor (STR) allowed a batch production reaching 25 g/L in a highly viscous two-phase system.
glycolipidsugar alcoholesterbiosynthesisoptimizationunconventional media
📈 Method Validation (ICH Q2)

No validation data. Contact the method author.

Parameters per: ICH Q2(R2) ↗

📋 Method comparison
Technique Column Analysis time Detection Mobile phase Source
HPLC NH2 RID comprised 85 % acetonitrile in water, flow rate at… DOI ↗
HPLC C18 ELSD , solvent A, was water and solvent B… DOI ↗
🔧 Troubleshooting HPLC/GC
Broad peaks / tailing
Causes: Worn column, wrong mobile-phase pH, column overload, dead volume
Solution: Replace the column, check buffer pH (±0.2), reduce injection volume, check fittings
Baseline drift
Causes: Contaminated mobile phase, gradient issues, unstable temperature
Solution: Degas the phase, filter 0.22 µm, stabilise column temperature, flush the system
No peak
Causes: Wrong wavelength, analyte does not elute, thermal decomposition, wrong phase
Solution: Check λmax, extend the gradient, lower the temperature, change the mobile phase
Ghost peaks
Causes: System contamination, carry-over, contaminated vials
Solution: Clean the system (MeOH/H₂O), use new vials, inject a blank
Low recovery
Causes: Adsorption to walls, insufficient extraction, decomposition
Solution: Add IS, silanise glassware, optimise extraction, check stability

Sources: Snyder, Kirkland & Dolan ↗, Waters ↗

Complete HPLC Method Guide Peer-Reviewed

Molecule-specific scenarios, troubleshooting, and literature references

Molecular Predictor

The predicted parameters for this molecule (CAS 50-70-4) are based on literature-backed models (Snyder-Dolan LSS, Neue pore-size rules).

Retention Time
-6.55 min
Range: 0.5 – -8.52
confidence: medium
Model: Snyder-Dolan LSS na kolumnie C18 150×4.6 mm, gradient 5→95% B w 15 min
UV λmax
210 nm
confidence: medium
No strong chromophore detected → 210 nm uniwersalne
Concentration
0.5 mg/mL
= 2.745 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.

Real Chemist Problem

First method — how do you know where to start?

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

How We Solve This

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

Interactive Calculator

Deep Education

Understanding Mobile Phase Chemistry

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:

Frequently Asked Questions

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

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

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

Dla logP=-3.1 rekomendacja zależy: jeśli logP<2 (polarny) → MeOH retencja wystarczy; logP≥2 (niepolarny) → ACN daje lepszy peak shape. Dla tej molekuły (MW=182.17, CAS 50-70-4) zaczynaj od ACN w gradiencie 5→95% B.

Source: Snyder LSS Model

Gradient Problem From The Lab

Impurity profiling per ICH Q3

You are developing a stability-indicating method. You have to detect impurities at the 0.05% level. System suitability: Rs ≥ 2.0, LOD 0.01%.

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.

Frequently Asked Questions

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

Heurystyka Snyder: Rt ≈ 2.5·logP + 1.2 min. Dla (2R,3R,4R,5S)-hexane-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexol (logP=-3.1) → szacunkowe Rt=-6.55 min. ±30% wariancja zależnie od dead volume i gradient slope. Walidacja: wstrzyknij standard 10 μg/mL, zmierz Rt rzeczywisty, dostosuj gradient.

Source: Predictive modeling

Column Choice Dilemma

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?

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

Frequently Asked Questions

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: analytes MW10000 (proteins) → pore 1000 Å. For MW=182.17 (CAS 50-70-4) use a standard C18 100 Å column.

Source: Phenomenex Guide

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

Source: Agilent App Notes

Detection Gotcha

How to prepare the mobile phase for the first time

Protokół mówi "ACN/H₂O 60:40". W szafce masz ACN HPLC grade i wodę z kranu. Nikt ci nie powiedział, że kran = dramat. Koszt błędu: zniszczona kolumna 1800 PLN.

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

Change control: transfer the method to a new HPLC

The old Agilent 1100 is due for replacement. New Waters Arc. How to run transfer validation without a repeat full validation?

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

Frequently Asked Questions

Dla API (active pharmaceutical ingredient) typowo 98-102% label claim. Dla (2R,3R,4R,5S)-hexane-1,2,3,4,5,6-hexol (CAS 50-70-4) sprawdź: (1) USP monograph jeśli istnieje, (2) kompendium pharmacopoeia wewnętrzna, (3) ICH Q6A dla specyfikacji nowych substancji. Related substances ≤0.10% per ICH Q3A.

Source: ICH Q6A

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

Source: USP Online

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

Prep Mistakes That Ruined The Run

How to prepare the mobile phase for the first time

Protokół mówi "ACN/H₂O 60:40". W szafce masz ACN HPLC grade i wodę z kranu. Nikt ci nie powiedział, że kran = dramat. Koszt błędu: zniszczona kolumna 1800 PLN.

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

Forensic Fix — real failure stories Lessons learned

Real chemists' mishaps — what happened, what helped, what to avoid.

Peak tailing ruined my results

Anna K., PhD student, Warszawa 2024-03 Poziom 3/5
What happened:

I ran the method exactly as written. Main peak Tf = 2.8 (should be <1.5). Integration impossible. I repeated it 6× — always tailing.

💡 Lekcja:

Causes: (1) buffer pH 8.2 instead of 7.0, (2) 2-month-old buffer (bacteria!), (3) C8 column instead of C18. Fix: fresh buffer pH 7.0 + switch to C18 → Tf 1.2, Rs 1.9→2.3.

Incorrect integration — publication rejected

Kasia M., PhD Analytical Chemistry, UJ 2025-06-03 Poziom 4/5
What happened:

Submission to JPBA. Reviewer 2: „Peak at 12.4 min shows manual integration, but baseline slope suggests co-elution". I had to revalidate the whole method. 3 months of delay.

💡 Lekcja:

Manual integration = a red flag for reviewers. Solve CO-ELUTION in methods dev, not in integration. Optimise the gradient instead of force-fitting the peak.

Ask about this method

Hi — I'm trained on all scenarios, FAQ, and literature for this method. Ask me anything.

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 50-70-4). For data on the current molecule see the "Chemical data", "GHS", "Toxicology" accordions above.
🧪
N-Hexyl alcohol
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
2-Methyl-1,3-Propanediol (MPO)
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
PEG (350/400/600/800/1000/2000)
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
PPG (400/700/1000/2000/3000/4000)
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
1,1′-Oxydi-2-propanol
Ta sama kategoria · Ta sama kategoria produktu
📄 Certificates of Analysis (CoA) CAS 50-70-4 none MolGod_COA_2

No certificates for this product in the database.

📚 Scientific references (Chicago Author-Date) — click to expand

Batch management and laboratory certification standards — 13 independent sources (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.

Extended Bibliography (5)

  1. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. 1988. "Sorbitol see Charcoal/sorbitol." Reactions 191 (1): 10-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03278385. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  2. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  3. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/fcc_f100597_05_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  4. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_r4012_01_02. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
  5. ★★☆☆☆ CROSSREF 🔓 OPEN ❓ unverified Anonymous. "Sorbitol.". https://doi.org/10.31003/uspnf_m77640_40101_01. link [accessed: 2026-09-22] CC0 (metadata)
Data from PubChemSource: PubChem (NIH) · ChEMBL
📤 Embed this molecule on your site

Have a blog, forum or scientific service? Embed the interactive 3D molecule on your website — every reader will see it, with a link below to our shop where they can buy the reagent.

🔗 HTML iframe code (easiest — works everywhere)

Copy and paste into your site's HTML editor:

Adjust width and height to your layout.

⚙ WordPress Shortcode (for other shops with MOL-GOD)

🌐 Direct link (for emails, chats, LinkedIn, Twitter)

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 50-70-4

📱 QR code (for printing on flyers / labels / catalogs)

Place it in a product catalog, on a bottle label or a flyer. The customer scans it — sees the 3D molecule on their phone, with a link to your shop.

⬇ Download PNG

🖼 Open Graph image (for social media meta tags)

When you share the link, Facebook/LinkedIn/Discord will automatically fetch the image preview:

Preview
📋 License: The embed keeps a backlink to Eapearl Chemical (required — the shop is the data source). Chemical data comes from PubChem (CC0 — public domain). The embed is FREE for educational, commercial and hobby use.
📚 REFERENCES (Aggregate bibliography, Chicago Author-Date) 120 items

All scientific sources cited in the accordions above for CAS 50-70-4. Format: Chicago Manual of Style 17th ed., Author-Date system.

🗄️ Scientific databases

  1. NIST. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 50-70-4. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=50-70-4.
  2. AIST. n.d. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 50-70-4. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/.
  3. Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18434/T4D303.
  4. PubChem. n.d. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 50-70-4. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=50-70-4.

📐 Standards / Guidelines

  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.

📖 Books

  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.

📄 Scientific articles (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.
📥 Download BibTeX📥 Download RISImport into Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.