Acrylamid — Etikett CAS 79-06-1

Acrylamid

IARC-Gruppe 2A — Wahrscheinlich krebserzeugend für den Menschen
CAS: 79-06-1 | IARC-Quelle
EU SVHCMolGod-Score: Primär

4,99 €

Chemisches Reagenz Akrylamid (CAS 79-06-1). Vollständige enzyklopädische Karte — Klassifizierung, Eigenschaften und Sicherheitsdaten — unten.

🔒 VERKAUF DURCH DAS SYSTEM GESPERRT

Akryloamid · Beschränkung (REACH Anhang XVII)

Anhang XVII · Art. 67 Abs. 1 · REACH-Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1907/2006

Sperre automatisch anhand des regulatorischen Kanons verhängt, nicht durch eine Entscheidung des Betreibers. Rechtsgrundlage ↗

MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v8 · 16.07.2026
Category:
🧬 3D-Molekül-Visualisierer
Molekül wird geladen...
3D-Modell Acrylamide, CAS 79-06-1, Summenformel C3H5NO, molare Masse 71.08 g/mol
Chemische Übersicht: AcrylamideMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
SummenformelC3H5NO
Molekulargewicht71.08 g/mol
Schmelzpunkt84.5 °C
Dichte1.13 g/cm³
LogP (Lipophilie)-0.7
IUPAC-Nameprop-2-enamide
SMILESC=CC(=O)N
InChIKeyHRPVXLWXLXDGHG-UHFFFAOYSA-N

Synonyme: ACRYLAMIDE · 79-06-1 · 2-Propenamide · prop-2-enamide · Propenamide

Datenquellen: PubChem (NLM/NIH)
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-11-10

WISSENSCHAFTLICHE FORSCHUNG

[1]OpenAlex2021
Developmental and Neurotoxicity of Acrylamide to Zebrafish
Jong‐Su Park, Palas Samanta, Sangwoo Lee et al.. (2021). "Developmental and Neurotoxicity of Acrylamide to Zebrafish". International Journal of Molecular Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22073518
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[2]OpenAlex2018
Acrylamide acute neurotoxicity in adult zebrafish
Melissa Faria, Tamar Ziv, Cristian Gómez‐Canela et al.. (2018). "Acrylamide acute neurotoxicity in adult zebrafish". Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26343-2
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[3]OpenAlex2016
Acrylamide-forming potential of potatoes grown at different locations, and the ratio of free asparagine to reducing sugars at…
N. Muttucumaru, Stephen J. Powers, J. Stephen Elmore et al.. (2016). "Acrylamide-forming potential of potatoes grown at different locations, and the ratio of free asparagine to reducing sugars at whic
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[4]OpenAlex2012
Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of acrylamide (CASRN 79-06-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (feed and drinking water…
(2012). "Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of acrylamide (CASRN 79-06-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (feed and drinking water studies).". PubMed.
[5]OpenAlex2011
Exposure to acrylamide and human cancer—a review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies
Claudio Pelucchi, Carlo La Vecchia, Cristina Bosetti et al.. (2011). "Exposure to acrylamide and human cancer—a review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies". Annals of Oncology. https://doi.org/
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[6]OpenAlex2011
Results on acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007–2009 and Exposure assessment
European Food Safety Authority. (2011). "Results on acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007–2009 and Exposure assessment". EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2133
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[7]OpenAlex2009
Diet-Induced Obesity in Male Mice Is Associated with Reduced Fertility and Potentiation of Acrylamide-Induced Reproductive Toxicity1
Burhan I. Ghanayem, Re Bai, Grace E. Kissling et al.. (2009). "Diet-Induced Obesity in Male Mice Is Associated with Reduced Fertility and Potentiation of Acrylamide-Induced Reproductive Toxicity1". Bi
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[8]OpenAlex2008
Biomonitoring Equivalents (BE) dossier for acrylamide (AA) (CAS No. 79-06-1)
Sean M. Hays, Lesa L. Aylward. (2008). "Biomonitoring Equivalents (BE) dossier for acrylamide (AA) (CAS No. 79-06-1)". Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.05.0
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) 11 refs · 3 baz

MOLEKUŁA Bibliografie pro CAS (live aus 13+ Datenbanken)

Quellen: db:openalex (8) · db:core (3)

  1. db:openalex Jong‐Su Park, Palas Samanta, Sangwoo Lee et al.. (2021). "Developmental and Neurotoxicity of Acrylamide to Zebrafish". International Journal of Molecular Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22073518 →
  2. db:openalex Melissa Faria, Tamar Ziv, Cristian Gómez‐Canela et al.. (2018). "Acrylamide acute neurotoxicity in adult zebrafish". Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26343-2 →
  3. db:openalex N. Muttucumaru, Stephen J. Powers, J. Stephen Elmore et al.. (2016). "Acrylamide-forming potential of potatoes grown at different locations, and the ratio of free asparagine to reducing sugars at which free asparagine becomes a limiting factor for acrylamide formation". Food Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.09.199 →
  4. db:openalex (2012). "Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of acrylamide (CASRN 79-06-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (feed and drinking water studies).". PubMed.
  5. db:openalex Claudio Pelucchi, Carlo La Vecchia, Cristina Bosetti et al.. (2011). "Exposure to acrylamide and human cancer—a review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies". Annals of Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq610 →
  6. db:openalex European Food Safety Authority. (2011). "Results on acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007–2009 and Exposure assessment". EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2133 →
  7. db:openalex Burhan I. Ghanayem, Re Bai, Grace E. Kissling et al.. (2009). "Diet-Induced Obesity in Male Mice Is Associated with Reduced Fertility and Potentiation of Acrylamide-Induced Reproductive Toxicity1". Biology of Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.109.078915 →
  8. db:openalex Sean M. Hays, Lesa L. Aylward. (2008). "Biomonitoring Equivalents (BE) dossier for acrylamide (AA) (CAS No. 79-06-1)". Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.05.010 →
  9. db:core Skott, A., Hofmann, A., Sorgel, F. et al.. (2002). "Acrylamide: Increased concentrations in homemade food and first evidence of its variable absorption from food, variable metabolism and placental and breast milk transfer in humans". https://doi.org/10.1159/000069715 →
  10. db:core Lawrence, Justin R., O\u27Neill, Feidhlim T., O'Neill, Feidhlim T. et al.. (2001). "Thickness variation of self-processing acrylamide-based photopolymer and reflection holography". https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1353801 →
  11. db:core (0). "NIOSH skin notation profile : acrylamide [CAS No. 79-06-1]".
📊 Physikochemische Eigenschaften

Kurzübersicht

Formel: C3H5NO
MW: 71.08 g/mol
CAS: 79-06-1
Aussehen: Flake-like crystals from benzene
Geruch: Odorless
Geruch: Odorless

Detaillierte Eigenschaften

Eigenschaft Wert Einheit Bedingungen Quelle
Dichte (ρ) 1.1300 g/cm³ 20 °C (68 °F)
Schmelzpunkt (mp) 84.50 °C (184.1 °F) 1 atm
Flammpunkt 137.80 °C (280 °F) closed cup
Wasserlöslichkeit soluble (≥999) g/L 25 °C (77 °F)
🔬 Erweiterte Eigenschaften

Chemische Kennungen

SMILES: C=CC(=O)N

Datenquellen: PubChem, NIST Chemistry WebBook, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (103rd ed.)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-06-30

Regulatorischer Status der Substanz
Diese Verbindung: ist in der SVHC-Kandidatenliste aufgeführt (REACH Art. 59). Verzeichnisse: EU/SVHC. Regulatorische Information — schränkt den Kauf in diesem Shop nicht ein.
🧮 Stöchiometrie-RechnerMolGod_STOICH_1
🔍 Externe IdentifikatorenMolGod_EXTID_1
13 von 16 ID-Systemen81%
DatenbankIdentifikatorAktionen
CAS Registry Number79-06-1Öffnen →
PubChem CID6579Öffnen →
InChIKeyHRPVXLWXLXDGHG-UHFFFAOYSA-NÖffnen →
InChIInChI=1S/C3H5NO/c1-2-3(4)5/h2H,1H2,(H2,4,5)
SMILESC=CC(=O)N
EC Number201-173-7Öffnen →
KEGG CompoundC01659Öffnen →
HMDBHMDB0004296Öffnen →
ChemSpider6331Öffnen →
MeSH UID (NLM)D020106Öffnen →
UNII (FDA)20R035KLCIÖffnen →
NSC Number (NCI)7785Öffnen →
WikiData QIDQ342939Öffnen →

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

📡 Spektroskopie — CAS 79-06-1MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Spektroskopische Spektrendatenbanken — Inline-Daten 9 Quellen MolGod_SPECDB_2

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

IR IR (Infrared) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
— Punkte
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
MS (NIST) Mass Spectrum (EI) — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
— Punkte
📚 NIST Standard Reference Database 1A
UV-Vis UV/Visible Absorption — NIST WebBook
Public domain (US Federal)
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
— Punkte
📚 NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69
¹H NMR NMR (¹H, ¹³C) — NMRShiftDB
CC-BY-SA 4.0
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
— Punkte
📚 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
▶ Klicken, um das Spektrum zu laden
🔗 Quelle
— Punkte
📚 MassBank of North America (UC Davis) DOI: 10.1002/jms.1777
IR/NMR/MS (SDBS) SDBS — Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (Japan AIST)
Free for non-commercial

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

🔗 DOAJ →
📚 DOAJ — doaj.org

Daten werden über MolGod_Spectra_Remote_Fetcher (JCAMP-DX-Parser) abgerufen und in der Tabelle wp_molgod_spectra_cache gespeichert. Keine doppelten Downloads, keine erneuten Anfragen an NIST bei späteren Aufrufen. Lizenzen werden eingehalten (veröffentlicht wird nur ein Deep-Link plus eigene Visualisierung).

🔬 Interaktive Spektren (live — NIST / MoNA / NMRShiftDB / SDBS) (2)

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

IR — Fourier-Transform-Infrarot

IR — Fourier-Transform-Infrarot wird geladen…

MS — Massenspektrometrie (EI 70eV)

MS — Massenspektrometrie (EI 70eV) wird geladen…

📐 Physikalisch-chemische Eigenschaften (DB) 6 Felder MolGod-Score: Keine Quelle
Eigenschaft Wert Einheit Bedingungen Quelle
Schmelzpunkt 84.50 °C 1 atm
Wasserlöslichkeit soluble (≥999) g/L 25°C
Dichte (ρ) 1.1300 g/cm³ 20°C
Flammpunkt 137.80 °C closed cup
Zündtemperatur 240.00 °C in air
logP (Octanol/Wasser) -0.700 — 25°C
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (12 Quellen)
  1. Haynes, William M., ed. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press/Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-1-032-55554-4. ↗
  2. National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2024. "NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69." Gaithersburg, MD: NIST. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  3. Yaws, Carl L. 2014. The Yaws Handbook of Physical Properties for Hydrocarbons and Chemicals. 2nd ed. Oxford: Gulf Professional Publishing.
  4. PubChem. 2024. "PubChem Compound Database." National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  5. Marrero, J., and R. Gani. 2001. "Group-Contribution Based Estimation of Pure Component Properties." Fluid Phase Equilibria 183–184: 183–208. ↗
  6. Joback, K. G., and R. C. Reid. 1987. "Estimation of Pure-Component Properties from Group-Contributions." Chemical Engineering Communications 57 (1–6): 233–243. ↗
  7. Sangster, J. 1997. Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients: Fundamentals and Physical Chemistry. Chichester: Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-97397-3.
  8. Mannhold, Raimund, and Han van de Waterbeemd. 2001. "Substructure and Whole Molecule Approaches for Calculating Log P." Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 15 (4): 337–354. ↗
  9. Perrin, Ditlev D., Boyd Dempsey, and E. P. Serjeant. 1981. pKa Prediction for Organic Acids and Bases. London: Chapman and Hall. ISBN 0-412-21090-5.
  10. Constantinou, Leonidas, and Rafiqul Gani. 1994. "New Group Contribution Method for Estimating Properties of Pure Compounds." AIChE Journal 40 (10): 1697–1710. ↗
  11. Ertl, Peter, Bernhard Rohde, and Paul Selzer. 2000. "Fast Calculation of Molecular Polar Surface Area as a Sum of Fragment-Based Contributions and Its Application to the Prediction of Drug Transport Properties." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 43 (20): 3714–3717. ↗
🔄 Umrechner für Konzentrationseinheiten LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

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

MW: 71.08 g/mol · IUPAC Gold Book ↗

⚗️ Umrechnungsformeln + Zitate (pro Formel)
UmrechnungFormelGenauigkeitQuelle
% (w/v) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (% × 10) / MW±0.5% rel. when density ≈ 1.0 g/mLIUPAC (2019)
millimolar ↔ molarc (mol/L) = mM × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
molarity (mol/L)c = n/V = (m/MW)/V±0.1% (depends on MW precision)IUPAC (2019)
parts per million (mg/L) ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = ppm / (1000 × MW); equivalently ppm = mg/L for dilute aqueous±1% (density-independent for dilute solutions)IUPAC (2019)
mg/mL ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (mg/mL × 1000) / MW / 1000 = mg/mL / MW × 1±0.2%Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
g/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (g/L) / MW±0.1% (depends on MW precision)Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
mmol/L ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = mmol/L × 10⁻³ExactCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
Celsius ↔ KelvinT(K) = t(°C) + 273.15±0.01 K (ITS-90 scale)BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019)
Celsius ↔ FahrenheitT(°F) = T(°C) × 9/5 + 32±0.1 °FThompson A, Taylor BN (2008)
density-corrected % ↔ molarityc (mol/L) = (%w/w × ρ × 10) / MW, ρ in g/mL±0.1% when ρ known to 3 decimalsCohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007)
📚 Bibliographie (8 autoritative Quellen)
  1. Thompson A, Taylor BN (2008). Guide for the Use of the International System of Units (SI). NIST Special Publication 811 · DOI: 10.6028/NIST.SP.811-2008
    → Primary SI standard for US scientific usage
  2. Cohen ER, Cvitaš T, Frey JG, Holmström B, Kuchitsu K, Marquardt R, Mills I, Pavese F, Quack M, Stohner J, Strauss HL, Takami M, Thor AJ (2007). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry — The IUPAC Green Book. RSC Publishing, 3rd ed. · DOI: 10.1039/9781847557889 · ISBN: 978-0-85404-433-7
    → Canonical IUPAC guide for chemistry quantities/units
  3. BIPM (Bureau International des Poids et Mesures) (2019). The International System of Units (SI), 9th edition. BIPM · ↗
    → International SI definitions (incl. redefined kilogram 2019)
  4. ISO/IEC (2022). Quantities and units — Part 1: General. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-1:2022 · ↗
    → General rules for physical quantities and units
  5. ISO/IEC (2019). Quantities and units — Part 9: Physical chemistry and molecular physics. International Organization for Standardization — ISO 80000-9:2019 · ↗
    → Concentration / molality / amount-of-substance conventions
  6. Tiesinga E, Mohr PJ, Newell DB, Taylor BN (2021). CODATA recommended values of the fundamental physical constants: 2018. Rev. Mod. Phys. 93(2):025010 · DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025010
    → Avogadro, gas constant, molar volume (2019 SI revision)
  7. IUPAC (2019). Compendium of Chemical Terminology — the IUPAC Gold Book (online). IUPAC · DOI: 10.1351/goldbook
    → Definitions of mass fraction, molality, normality, ppm, activity
  8. Mills IM, Cvitaš T, Homann K, Kallay N, Kuchitsu K (1988). Quantities, Units and Symbols in Physical Chemistry. Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1st ed. · ISBN: 0-632-01773-5
    → Historical predecessor of IUPAC Green Book
🧪 Assistent zur Lösungsvorbereitung WIZARD MolGod_PREP_1
① Konzentration auswählen
② Zielvolumen
③ Lösungsmittel

Berechnungen nach: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, Merck ↗

LösungsmittelkompatibilitätMolGod_SOLV_1

Schätzung auf Basis der Wasserlöslichkeit und des logP. Richtwerte — ersetzen keine experimentellen Untersuchungen.

LösungsmittelVerträglichkeitAnmerkungenReferenzen
Water+ GutlogP deutet auf Hydrophilie hin
EtOH+ GutEtOH — universelles polares Lösungsmittel
Acetone~ MäßigTeilweise kompatibel
DCM- SchwachGeringe Kompatibilität mit polaren Lösungsmitteln
DMSO+ GutDMSO — starkes aprotisches Lösungsmittel
THF~ MäßigTHF — begrenzt für stark polare Verbindungen
Hexane- SchwachPraktisch unlöslich in Hexan
CHCl3- SchwachGeringe Kompatibilität mit polaren Lösungsmitteln

Datenquellen für logP/Löslichkeit: logP: -0.70

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

Jedes Lösungsmittel ist durch 5 unabhängige wissenschaftliche Quellen belegt (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/GESTIS). Vollständige Zitate unten.

Water · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  2. International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS). 1997. "Release on the Static Dielectric Constant of Ordinary Water Substance." IAPWS R8-97. [link ↗]
  3. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  4. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Water." GESTIS Substance Database. Institut für Arbeitsschutz der Deutschen Gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
EtOH · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  2. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  3. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-340-64578-9.X5000-9. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Ethanol." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Acetone · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. Rumble, John R., ed. 2023. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 104th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Acetone." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
DCM · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, dichloro- (CAS 75-09-2)." NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 1999. "Dichloromethane." IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans 71: 251–315. [link ↗]
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Dichloromethane." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
DMSO · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Wypych, George. 2019. Handbook of Solvents. Volume 1: Properties. 3rd ed. Toronto: ChemTec Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-02235-3. [link ↗]
  2. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  3. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, sulfinylbis- (CAS 67-68-5)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Dimethyl sulfoxide." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
THF · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. Armarego, Wilfred L. F., and Christina Li Lin Chai. 2009. Purification of Laboratory Chemicals. 6th ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-85617-567-8.50003-3. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Furan, tetrahydro- (CAS 109-99-9)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  4. Smallwood, Ian M. 1996. Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties. London: Arnold. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Tetrahydrofuran." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Hexane · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Hexane (CAS 110-54-3)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  3. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. [link ↗]
  4. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1999. Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "n-Hexane." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
CHCl3 · NIST CAS lookup ↗
  1. International Agency for Research on Cancer. 1999. "Chloroform." IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans 73: 131–182. [link ↗]
  2. National Institute of Standards and Technology. n.d. "Methane, trichloro- (CAS 67-66-3)." NIST Chemistry WebBook. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
  3. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. [link ↗]
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. [link ↗]
  5. IFA. n.d. "Chloroform." GESTIS Substance Database. Accessed April 25, 2026. [link ↗]
Löslichkeitstheorie (angewendet in der Verträglichkeitsvorhersage):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — HSP-Triplett (dD, dP, dH) + Ra-Formel.
  3. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220 — E_T(30) polarity scale, solwatochromia.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 — Eluotropic series, polarity index.
  5. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 79-06-1 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

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

🛡️ Sicherheit — CAS 79-06-1MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Hinweis zu Datenbeschränkungen. Die Sicherheitsinformationen auf dieser Seite dienen nur zur Information und ersetzen kein vollständiges Sicherheitsdatenblatt (SDS). Konsultieren Sie vor der Verwendung des Produkts das aktuelle Sicherheitsdatenblatt des Herstellers sowie die GHS/CLP-Leitlinien. Die CLP-Einstufung bezieht sich auf die reine Bulk-Substanz, nicht auf handelsübliche Zubereitungen.

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

⚠️ Gefahr (Danger)
GHS06 — Giftig
GHS06 Giftig
GHS07 — Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich
GHS07 Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich
GHS08 — Gesundheitsgefahr
GHS08 Gesundheitsgefahr

🚨 Gefahrenhinweise (H)

  • H350 — Kann Krebs erzeugen.
  • H340 — Kann genetische Defekte verursachen.
  • H361f — Kann vermutlich die Fruchtbarkeit beeinträchtigen.
  • H332 — Gesundheitsschädlich bei Einatmen.
  • H312 — Gesundheitsschädlich bei Hautkontakt.
  • H301 — Giftig bei Verschlucken.
  • H372 — Schädigt die Organe bei längerer oder wiederholter Exposition.
  • H315 — Verursacht Hautreizungen.
  • H319 — Verursacht schwere Augenreizung.
  • H317 — Kann allergische Hautreaktionen verursachen.

🛡 Sicherheitshinweise (P)

  • P203 — Vor Gebrauch alle Sicherheitshinweise einholen, lesen und befolgen.

✓ Harmonisierte Einstufung gemäß Anhang VI der CLP-Verordnung (EG) 1272/2008 (amtliche, verbindliche Einstufung). Indexnummer: 616-003-00-0.

Referenz (Chicago): European Chemicals Agency. "acrylamide; prop-2-enamide, Index No. 616-003-00-0." In Table 3 of Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP Regulation), 23rd Adaptation to Technical Progress. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency, 2026. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp.

⚠ IARC — Gruppe 2A: wahrscheinlich krebserzeugend für den Menschen. (Unabhängige Bewertung der Karzinogenitätsnachweise durch IARC/WHO — ergänzt die obige CLP-Einstufung.)
Referenz (Chicago): IARC. 2026. IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans: CAS 79-06-1. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
Einstufung aus der lokalen MOL-GOD-Liste (Snapshot) — nicht gegen die aktuelle IARC-Liste verifiziert. Überprüfen

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

📚 Konsolidierte wissenschaftliche Referenzen — Chicago Author-Date 10 Quellen

Referenzen aus allen Safety-Hub-Registerkarten gesammelt. CAS: 79-06-1 · PubChem ↗

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

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

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

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

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

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

🧪 Puffer-Rezept-Rechner EINZIGARTIG
Literatur: pKa-Werte aus Goldberg NIST 81 · CRC Handbook 100th ed. · Stoll & Blanchard 1990 (DOI)

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

Schritt 1: Puffersystem wählen

📜 Rezeptverlauf (letzte 10)
🔬 HPLC/GC-Methoden (3 Methoden)
📄
Biochemical Characterization of Thermostable Acrylamide Amidohydrolase from Aspergillus fumigatus with Potential Activity for Acrylamide Degradation in Various Food Products
HPLCCurrent Microbiology202388% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Säule: C18, 1 μm
Phase: mobile phase was methanol/acetonitrile/water (90:5:5, v/v/v) at a flow rate 1 ml/min for…
Detektion: UV 425 nm
Fluss: 1.00 mL/min
Temp.: 30.0 °C
Gradient: s: at the beginning (10% A and 90% B); up…
El-Sayed A, Elghamry H, Yassin M. Biochemical Characterization of Thermostable Acrylamide Amidohydrolase from Aspergillus fumigatus with Potential Activity for Acrylamide Degradation in Various Food Products. Current Microbiology. 2023;81:30. doi:10.1007/s00284-023-03544-1
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
Acrylamide is the major by-product of the Maillard reactions in foods with the overheating processes of L-asparagine-rich foods with reducing sugars that usually allied with neurotoxicity and carcinogenicity. Several approaches have been used to prevent the formation of acrylamide, however, degrading the already formed acrylamide in foods remains unequivocal. Acrylamide hydrolyzing enzyme “amidohydrolase” is one of the most promising enzymes for acrylamide degradation in foods. So, amidohydrolase “amidase” from thermotolerant Aspergillus fumigatus EFBL was purified to their electrophoretic homogeneity by gel-filtration and ion-exchange chromatography, with overall purification folds 2.8 and yield 9.43%. The apparent molecular subunit structure of the purified A. fumigatus amidase was 50 kDa, with highest activity at reaction temperature of 40 °C and pH of 7.5 The enzyme displayed a significant thermal stability as revealed from the value of T1/2 (13.37 h), and thermal denaturation rate (Kr 0.832 × 10–3 min) at 50 °C, with metalloproteinic identity. The purified enzyme had a significant activity for acrylamide degradation in various food products such as meat, cookies, potato chips, and bread as revealed from the HPLC analysis and LC–MS analysis. So, with the purified amidase, the acrylamide in the food products was degraded by about 95% to acrylic acid, ensuring the possibility of using this enzyme in abolishing the toxic acrylamide in the foods products. This is the first report exploring the potency of A. fumigatus amidase for an actual degradation of acrylamide in foods efficiently. Further biochemical analyses are ongoing to assess the affinity of this enzyme for selective hydrolyses of acrylamide in foods, without affecting the beneficial stereochemical related compounds.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00284-023-03544-1.
📄
Effect of Brewing Methods on Acrylamide Content and Antioxidant Activity: Studying Eight Different Filter Coffee Preparations
HPLC-MSAntioxidants202395% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Säule: C18, 0.2 μm
Phase: mobile phase consisted of water (A) and acetonitrile (B), both containing 0
Detektion: UV 325 nm
Fluss: 0.80 mL/min
Temp.: 18.0 °C
Inj.: 2 μL
Gradient: elution mode
Santanatoglia A, Angeloni S, Bartolucci D, Fioretti L, Sagratini G, Vittori S, et al. Effect of Brewing Methods on Acrylamide Content and Antioxidant Activity: Studying Eight Different Filter Coffee Preparations. Antioxidants. 2023;12:1888. doi:10.3390/antiox12101888
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
The aim of this study was to investigate the parameters affecting the extraction of positive molecules such as chlorogenic acids and antioxidants, as well as potentially carcinogenic substances such as acrylamide, in different coffee brewing methods. Three coffee varieties, each assigned a different roasting degree, were used to prepare coffee brews following eight different preparation methods. Acrylamide was quantified using the HPLC-MS/MS instrument, while chlorogenic acids and caffeine were quantified using the HPLC-DAD system. Three spectrophotometric analyses were also performed (DPPH, TFC and TPC) to evaluate antioxidant activity. The results showed that the main brewing parameters, which have the greatest influence on the final content of these compounds, were the volume of water used, more specifically the brewing ratio (coffee to water ratio), the extraction time and the particle size of the coffee powder. In addition, the variables that have the greatest impact on the discrimination of the preparation methods studied are total chlorogenic acid content, TFC, TPC, caffeine and the DPPH assay. For this reason, the recipe and infusion parameters used for each of the extraction systems are the key factors that determine the extraction of coffee components and, consequently, the quality of the cup.
acrylamideantioxidant activitybrewing methodschlorogenic acidscoffeeHPLC-MS/MSHPLC-DAD
📄
Simultaneous Determination of Furanic Compounds and Acrylamide in Insect-Based Foods by HPLC-QqQ-MS/MS Employing a Functionalized Mesostructured Silica as Sorbent in Solid-Phase Extraction
LC-MS/MSFoods202190% ✓CC-BYResearch method (specificity, robustness)
Säule: NH2, 0.45 μm
Phase: mobile phases: solvent A (ACN) and solvent B (Milli-Q Water), both phases…
Detektion: MS
Fluss: 0.30 mL/min
Temp.: 20.0 °C
Inj.: 100 μL
Gradient: elution mode
González-Gómez L, Morante-Zarcero S, Pérez-Quintanilla D, Sierra I. Simultaneous Determination of Furanic Compounds and Acrylamide in Insect-Based Foods by HPLC-QqQ-MS/MS Employing a Functionalized Mesostructured Silica as Sorbent in Solid-Phase Extraction. Foods. 2021;10:1557. doi:10.3390/foods10071557
🔗 DOI🏠 PMC📚 PubMed📄 PDF
Insect-based products are novel foods (NF) that merit careful study. For this reason, in this work a method has been developed for the simultaneous analysis of four food processing contaminants (FPC), acrylamide (AA), 5-hydroxymethylfurfural, (HMF), 5-methylfurfural (MF) and furfural (F), in insect-based products (bars, crackers and flours) by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to triple quadrupole mass spectrometry (HPLC-QqQ-MS/MS). The method consisted of a solid-liquid extraction (SLE) with acidified water, followed by solid-phase extraction (SPE), using 100 mg of a sorbent based on mesostructured silica with a large pore functionalized with amino groups (SBA-15-LP-NH2). The analytical method was properly optimized and validated in a representative bar sample of pineapple & coconut with cricket flour (Ins-B-Pine-Coco) showing good accuracy, with recoveries ranging from 70–101% for the four analytes and adequate precision (RSD < 9%). Good linearity (R2 ≥ 0.995) and low method quantification limits for AA (between 1.3–1.4 µg/g), F (between 7.9–8.8 µg/g), MF (between 3.1–6.5 µg/g) and HMF (between 1.5–3.3 µg/g) were also obtained in all samples studied. The proposed method was successfully applied in eleven insect-based foods. Results revealed that insect-based bars can be a good alternative to traditional cereal bars to reduce dietary exposure to HMF; but, in order to reduce the exposure to AA, alternative formulations must be evaluated in the design of innovative insect-based crackers.
acrylamide5-hydroxymethylfurfuralfurfural5-methylfurfuralinsect-based foods
📈 Methodenvalidierung (ICH Q2)

Keine Validierungsdaten. Kontaktieren Sie den Methodenautor.

Parameter nach: ICH Q2(R2) ↗

📋 Methodenvergleich
Technik Säule Analysenzeit Detektion Mobile Phase Quelle
HPLC C18 — UV 425 nm mobile phase was methanol/acetonitrile/water (90:5:5, v/v/v) at a… DOI ↗
HPLC-MS C18 — UV 325 nm mobile phase consisted of water (A) and acetonitrile… DOI ↗
LC-MS/MS NH2 — MS mobile phases: solvent A (ACN) and solvent B… DOI ↗
🔧 Fehlerbehebung HPLC/GC
Breite Peaks / Tailing
Ursachen: Verschlissene Säule, falscher pH der mobilen Phase, Säulenüberladung, Totvolumen
Lösung: Säule austauschen, Puffer-pH prüfen (±0,2), Injektionsvolumen verringern, Verbindungen prüfen
Basisliniendrift
Ursachen: Verunreinigte mobile Phase, Gradientenprobleme, instabile Temperatur
Lösung: Phase entgasen, 0,22 µm filtrieren, Säulentemperatur stabilisieren, System spülen
Kein Peak
Ursachen: Falsche Wellenlänge, Substanz eluiert nicht, thermische Zersetzung, falsche Phase
Lösung: λmax prüfen, Gradient verlängern, Temperatur senken, mobile Phase wechseln
Geisterpeaks (ghost peaks)
Ursachen: Systemverunreinigung, Verschleppung (Carry-over), verunreinigte Vials
Lösung: System reinigen (MeOH/H₂O), neue Vials verwenden, Blank injizieren
Geringe Wiederfindung
Ursachen: Adsorption an Wänden, unzureichende Extraktion, Zersetzung
Lösung: IS zugeben, Glas silanisieren, Extraktion optimieren, Stabilität prüfen

Quellen: Snyder, Kirkland & Dolan ↗, Waters ↗

📊 HPLC-Methodenvalidierung (ICH Q2(R1)) PARTIAL

3 metrics need experimental data

Parameter Wert Einheit ICH-Q2-Kriterium Status
Linearität (R²) keine Daten unitless R² ≥ 0.999 (≥0.99 für bioanalytische) —
LOD (S/N = 3:1) keine Daten ng/mL S/N ≥ 3:1 (niedrigste nachweisbare Konzentration) —
LOQ (S/N = 10:1) keine Daten ng/mL S/N ≥ 10:1 (LOQ ≥ 3×LOD typischerweise) —
Präzision (RSD intraday, n=6) keine Daten % RSD RSD ≤ 2% (intraday) / ≤ 3% (interday) für den API —
Richtigkeit (Wiederfindung, 3 Niveaus) keine Daten % (target 100±2%) Recovery 98-102% (target 100%) —
Linearitätsbereich keine Daten z. B. 0.1-100 ng/mL Mind. 80-120% der Nominalkonzentration —
Selektivität/Spezifität keine Daten qualitative Keine Interferenz — Analyt-Peak vollständig aufgelöst (Rs ≥ 2.0) —
Robustheit (Robustness) keine Daten RSD < 2% bei ±5% Variation RSD < 2% bei kleinen Parametervariationen —
Legende: ✓ PASS ⚠ CAUTION ✗ FAIL — NO_DATA
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken

Standards für die Validierung analytischer Methoden — 4 unabhängige Quellen (ICH + USP + AOAC + Snyder).

  1. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1). ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Gold-standard ICH guideline — accepted by EMA, FDA, MHLW, NMPA
  2. United States Pharmacopeia (USP) Convention. 2024. USP General Chapter <621> Chromatography. USP-NF 2024 ed. USP. [link ↗]
  3. AOAC International. 2016. Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements. AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — AOAC SMPR — alternative to ICH Q2 for food/dietary supplements
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Industry standard textbook — Chapter 11 covers method validation
  5. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Classic method-development reference (DryLab heritage).
  6. 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 [link ↗] — Comparison of FDA / EMA / ICH validation expectations — used for ICH Q2(R1) interpretation.
  7. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — Plackett-Burman design for robustness — basis of ICH Q2 §3.7.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Modern (UHPLC) update of validation chapter — practical RSD/LOD examples.
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — European pharmacopeial perspective — complements USP/AOAC.
  10. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists. Wiley-Interscience. ISBN 978-0-471-68162-4. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954 [link ↗] — Pharma-focused validation case studies (specificity, robustness).
  11. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009. EMA Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. [link ↗] — EMA bioanalytical companion to ICH Q2(R1) for clinical samples.

· ⚠ Regulatorische Warnungen SVHC/REACH ↑

🔧 Fehlerbehebung HPLC — Entscheidungsbaum 6 häufige Probleme

Diagnose der 12 häufigsten HPLC-Probleme mit Entscheidungsbaum (5 Schritte pro Problem). Quelle: Snyder/Kirkland/Dolan 3rd ed. Chapter 17 + LCGC LC Troubleshooting columns 1989-2024.

Verbreiterte Peaks (broad peaks) medium

Symptom: Alle Peaks im Chromatogramm sind breiter als erwartet (FWHM > 2× normal)

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Prüfen Sie, ob alle Peaks verbreitert sind oder nur einige
    → JA: Alle → instrumentelles Problem (Säule oder System)
    → NEIN: Nur einige → chemisches Problem (Wechselwirkung mit der Säule bei bestimmten Analyten)
  2. 2. Tauschen Sie eine Testsäule ein — verschwindet das Problem?
    → JA: SÄULE verschlissen — Packung beschädigt, Void in den ersten mm. Ersetzen.
    → NEIN: Problem im LC-System
  3. 3. Prüfen Sie das Totvolumen (dead volume) — Injektionsschleife, Verbindungen, Detektor
    → JA: Schleife > 100 µL für eine 4.6-mm-Säule oder lose Verbindungen → Ferrulen ersetzen, Kapillaren kürzen
    → NEIN: Diagnose fortsetzen
  4. 4. Temperaturtest: Erhöhen Sie die Säule von 25°C auf 40°C
    → JA: Schmalere Peaks → Massentransferkinetik zu langsam (T erhöhen)
    → NEIN: Continue
  5. 5. Prüfen Sie die Flussrate gegenüber dem van-Deemter-Optimum für diese Säule
    → JA: Optimum für 4.6mm/5µm = 1.0 mL/min, für 2.1mm/3µm = 0.4 mL/min
    → NEIN: Continue
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • Säule verschlissen (>2000 Injektionen ohne Vorsäule)
  • Totvolumen des Systems > 100 µL (falsche Schleife, lange Kapillaren, lose Ferrulen)
  • Temperatur zu niedrig (Massentransferkinetik)
  • Flussrate außerhalb des van-Deemter-Optimums
  • Probenlösungsmittel stärker als mobile Phase A
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ Säule ersetzen (bei >2000 Injektionen)
  • ✓ Alle Verbindungen prüfen — Kapillaren so kurz wie möglich
  • ✓ Säulentemperatur auf 40°C erhöhen (wenn die Substanz stabil ist)
  • ✓ Fluss auf das van-Deemter-Optimum reduzieren
  • ✓ Probe in mobiler Phase A lösen (nicht in reinem Organischem)
Peak-Tailing (Tailing, T > 1.5) high

Symptom: Peaks haben einen verlängerten "Schwanz" auf der Seite der späten Elution (Asymmetrie T = b/a > 1.5 gemäß USP)

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Enthält die Substanz basische Gruppen (Amino, Pyridin)?
    → JA: Ja → Silanol-Wechselwirkungen! Fügen Sie 0.1% TFA oder 5-10 mM TEA zur mobilen Phase A hinzu.
    → NEIN: Continue
  2. 2. Prüfen Sie den pH der mobilen Phase gegenüber dem pKa der Substanz
    → JA: pH = pKa ± 1 → teilweise Ionisierung, Peak-Split. Gehen Sie pH ≥ 2 Einheiten vom pKa weg.
    → NEIN: Continue
  3. 3. Prüfen Sie das Alter der Säule (>1500 Injektionen?)
    → JA: Ja → freigelegte Silanole (Column Bleed). Ersetzen Sie die Säule durch eine mit höherem Endcapping (XTerra, Symmetry).
    → NEIN: Continue
  4. 4. Enthält die Probe Metalle (Fe, Cu aus Glasfläschchen)?
    → JA: Ja → verwenden Sie klare Typ-II-Fläschchen oder PFA. 0.1mM EDTA zur Probe geben.
    → NEIN: Continue
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • Silanol-Wechselwirkungen (basischer Analyt + freie Silanole des Kieselgels)
  • pH an der Grenze des Analyt-pKa (Peak-Split)
  • Alte Säule (Column Bleed, hohe Silanolaktivität)
  • Metalle in der Probe (Chelatbildung → Tailing)
  • Säulenüberladung (>50 µg auf einer 4.6mm-Säule)
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ 0.1% TFA (UV) oder 0.1% Ameisensäure (LC-MS) zur mobilen Phase A hinzufügen
  • ✓ Wählen Sie eine Säule mit hochreinem Endcapping: Waters XBridge BEH, Phenomenex Kinetex
  • ✓ Arbeiten Sie bei pH ≥ 2 Einheiten vom pKa entfernt
  • ✓ 0.1mM EDTA zur Probe (Fe/Cu-Chelatbildung)
  • ✓ Injektionsvolumen auf ≤ 20 µL für eine 4.6mm-Säule reduzieren
Grundliniendrift (Baseline Drift) medium

Symptom: Die Grundlinie steigt oder fällt systematisch über >5 Minuten

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Verwenden Sie einen Gradienten (B% steigt)?
    → JA: Ja → unterschiedliche Absorption der Phasen A vs. B bei dλ. Lösungsmittelwechsel im UV-Cutoff. Prüfen Sie die UV-Absorption des %-Organik-Anteils.
    → NEIN: Weiter (isokratisch)
  2. 2. Prüfen Sie die Säulentemperatur — ist sie auf ±0.5°C stabil?
    → JA: Ja (stabil) → weiter
    → NEIN: Instabil → Säulenthermostat einschalten (>25°C kontrolliert)
  3. 3. Test: Autosampler ausschalten, nur Pumpe+Säule+Detektor betreiben
    → JA: Drift verschwindet → Autosampler-Kontamination (Nadel, Septum reinigen)
    → NEIN: Continue
  4. 4. Prüfen Sie das Alter der Lampe (D2 für UV)
    → JA: Ja (>1500 Stunden) → Lampe ersetzen
    → NEIN: Continue
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • Gradientenelution mit unterschiedlichem UV-Cutoff der Phasen
  • Instabile Säulentemperatur
  • Autosampler-Kontamination von Nadel/Septum
  • UV-Lampe alt (>1500h)
  • Detektor-Durchflusszelle verschmutzt
  • Säule nicht äquilibriert (<10 Säulenvolumina)
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ Säule 10-15 Säulenvolumina bei 100% A voräquilibrieren
  • ✓ Säulenthermostat ein, T 30-40°C stabil
  • ✓ Detektor-Durchflusszelle mit 50:50 ACN:H2O reinigen
  • ✓ D2-Lampe ersetzen, wenn >1500h
  • ✓ Grundlinien-Subtraktion verwenden (Chromeleon, native Empower-Funktion)
Kein Peak / verlorener Peak (no peak) critical

Symptom: Der erwartete Analyt-Peak erscheint nicht im Chromatogramm

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Hat die Injektion tatsächlich stattgefunden?
    → JA: Prüfen Sie das Autosampler-Log, den Pumpendruck (sollte bei der Injektion abfallen)
    → NEIN: Autosampler-Problem → Schleife, Nadel, Probe im Fläschchen prüfen
  2. 2. Ist die Probe im Fläschchen (korrektes Volumen, nicht verdunstet)?
    → JA: Continue
    → NEIN: Keine Probe — erneut pipettieren
  3. 3. Probenstabilität — vor >24h vorbereitet?
    → JA: Ja → Degradation. Bereiten Sie eine frische Probe vor.
    → NEIN: Continue
  4. 4. Prüfen Sie die Detektionswellenlänge gegenüber dem λmax der Substanz
    → JA: Detektion bei λ entspricht NICHT dem λmax → kein Signal. DAD 200-400nm scannen.
    → NEIN: Continue
  5. 5. Test: Injizieren Sie einen reinen Standard (bekannter Konzentration, frisch)
    → JA: Standard ergibt einen Peak → Problem mit der Probe (Matrix, Derivatisierung)
    → NEIN: Kein Peak auch mit dem Standard → Systemproblem (Säule, Phase, Gradient)
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • Probe nicht aus dem Fläschchen entnommen (Autosampler-Fehler)
  • Probe degradiert (>24h pH/Temp/Licht)
  • Detektion bei falscher Wellenlänge
  • Falsche mobile Phase (z. B. vergessenes TFA)
  • Säule umgekehrt / falsche stationäre Phase
  • Substanz eluiert an der Front (V0) → nicht retendiert, nicht sichtbar
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ Frische Probe nach dem exakten Protokoll neu vorbereiten
  • ✓ UV-Vis-DAD-Scan 200-400nm + Suche nach λmax
  • ✓ Zusammensetzung der mobilen Phase prüfen — TFA hinzugefügt?
  • ✓ Umgekehrte Säulenrichtung testen (vorsichtig!)
  • ✓ Bei Retention <1 min — % B verringern, MeOH statt ACN
  • ✓ Prüfen Sie die Tabelle "expected_rt" in wp_molgod_hplc_methods
Druck zu hoch (pressure too high) critical

Symptom: Pumpendruck > 80% des Säulenmaximums oder System-Shutdown mit High-Pressure-Fehler

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Prüfen Sie, ob die Säule korrekt angeschlossen ist (Pfeilrichtung)
    → JA: OK
    → NEIN: Säule umgekehrt → umdrehen (niemals "rückwärts" betreiben)
  2. 2. Test: Säule aus dem System entfernen, nur Pumpe+Detektor betreiben
    → JA: Druck fällt auf <50 bar → Problem in der Säule (verstopft)
    → NEIN: Druck bleibt hoch → In-Line-Filter verstopft, Fritte verschmutzt
  3. 3. Prüfen Sie den Vorsäulenfilter (In-Line-Fritte)
    → JA: Verschmutzt und braun → ersetzen
    → NEIN: Continue
  4. 4. Säule rückwärts mit 50:50 ACN:H2O spülen, ohne die Säule — verschwindet es?
    → JA: Partikel im ersten mm stecken geblieben — 30 min Spülung kann sie wiederherstellen
    → NEIN: Säule ersetzen
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • In-Line-Filter (Fritte) mit Partikeln verstopft
  • Puffer-Aussalzung (Ausfällung bei hohem %B)
  • Probe enthält Schwebstoffe (0.22 µm vor der Injektion filtrieren)
  • Säule verstopft (Column Bed Compaction)
  • Gradient mit Pufferphase + viel Organik → Salzausfällung
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ Probe IMMER durch 0.22 µm PVDF vor der Injektion filtrieren
  • ✓ In-Line-Filter alle 100 Injektionen ersetzen (oder wenn der Druck >20% steigt)
  • ✓ Verwenden Sie NICHT >20mM Phosphatpuffer + >70% ACN (das Salz fällt aus)
  • ✓ Säule 30 min mit 50:50 ACN:H2O in umgekehrter Richtung spülen (wenn vom Hersteller zugelassen)
  • ✓ Vorsäule 4×3mm zum Schutz der Hauptsäule
Geisterpeaks (Ghost Peaks) high

Symptom: Unerklärte Peaks im Chromatogramm, die in der Kalibrierung fehlen

🔍 Diagnosebaum:
  1. 1. Test: Blindinjektion (reines Probenlösungsmittel)
    → JA: Ein Geisterpeak erscheint → Kontamination des Systems oder der Eluenten
    → NEIN: Erscheint nur mit der Probe → Matrix
  2. 2. Wächst der Geisterpeak mit dem Gradienten (eluiert bei hohem %B)?
    → JA: Ja → überladene Säule oder stark retendiert aus einem vorherigen Lauf
    → NEIN: Unabhängig vom Gradienten → Autosampler-Verschleppung
  3. 3. Increase carryover wash (between injections)
    → JA: Hilft → Verschleppung war die Ursache. Stärkeres Waschprotokoll.
    → NEIN: Continue
  4. 4. Reinwasser-Injektion — gibt es einen Peak?
    → JA: Ja → Kontamination der Wasserquelle (Organik aus dem DI-System)
    → NEIN: Continue
⚠️ Typische Ursachen:
  • Verschleppung in Autosampler-Nadel/-Schleife
  • Eluent-Kontamination (auch in HPLC-Qualität)
  • Stark retendierte Komponenten aus vorherigen Läufen
  • Kunststoff in den Fläschchen (Phthalate, PEG aus den Kappen)
  • DI-Wasser unzureichend gereinigt
✓ Lösungen:
  • ✓ Waschprotokoll verstärken: 100% B → 100% A → 50:50 (3 Zyklen)
  • ✓ Starke Wäsche: 100% DMSO oder 100% MeOH vor der Kalibrierung
  • ✓ Eluenten im Zweifelsfall durch 0.22 µm PTFE filtrieren
  • ✓ Braunglas + Teflon-beschichtete Kappen für Proben verwenden
  • ✓ Periodische Gradientenrampe auf 100% B für 10 min (Reinigung)
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. Chapter 17 (Troubleshooting) pp. 559-616. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗]
  2. Dolan, John W.. 2014. LC Troubleshooting (monthly column 1989-2024). LCGC North America. [link ↗] — John Dolan 35-letnia seria miesięcznych artykułów problemowych
  3. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-31377-1. — Praktyczny przewodnik problem-solving dla labs analitycznych
  4. Dolan, John W.. 2013. When to Modify Method Conditions. 192-199. [link ↗] — Decision flow for changing flow rate / temperature / %B vs swapping columns.
  5. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗] — Chapter 9 covers troubleshooting modern UHPLC systems (sub-2 µm particles).
  6. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0. — Solid step-by-step problem isolation chapter (eluents, columns, instruments).
  7. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. Practical HPLC Method Development. 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-00703-6. — Method-development companion volume with troubleshooting cross-refs.
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. The new physical chemistry of HPLC. 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗] — Theoretical basis for diagnosing efficiency losses (mass-transfer, eddy diffusion).
  9. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods. 2120-2129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗] — How to diagnose method failures vs. system failures (Plackett-Burman).
  10. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5. — Historical context for ghost-peak phenomenology (silica chemistry).
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial. 519-531. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b03506 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. The new physical chemistry of HPLC. 1764-1772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations. 1167-1182. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.200700026 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography. 8525-8531. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]
🧪 Löslichkeit und Lösungsmittelkompatibilität MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molekül
Acrylamide
Formel
C3H5NO
logP
-0.70
Masse (g/mol)
71.08
Polarität
Hydrophil (polar)

⚠️ HSP-Schätzung (Literatur / Group Contribution). Richtwerte — ersetzen keine experimentellen Untersuchungen.

Lösungsmittel Compat. Ra Visuell GC-MS HPLC Anwendungen Referenzen
Water (H₂O)− Schwach25.7
✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
PufferZellkulturanalytischhydrophile Extraktion
Ethanol (EtOH)+ Gut7.0
✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
ExtraktionSpektroskopie (UV-Vis)SyntheseHPLC-Modifier
Methanol (MeOH)+ Gut9.0
✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent do 205 nm
Acetone~ Mittel13.1
✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspaceKristallisationEntfettungSynthese
Acetonitrile (ACN)− Schwach15.6
✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC-Eluent (Goldstandard)LC-MS (wolny cut-off UV 190 nm)Peptidanalyse
DMSO~ Mittel9.5
✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)Zellbiologie (Kryokonservierung)ArzneimittelabgabeSynthese
THF~ Mittel12.2
✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (Polymeranalyse)Grignard-Synthesemetallorganisch
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)~ Mittel13.0
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
ExtraktionNP-HPLCGC-MSKristallisation (Anti-Solvens)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)− Schwach14.9
✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)Lipidextraktion (Folch-Methode)NP-TLC
Hexane− Schwach22.7
✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLCÖlextraktion (Lipide)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluene− Schwach18.9
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)SyntheseDean-Stark azeotrope Trocknung
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen für Lösungsmittel (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken

11 Lösungsmittel × 5 unabhängige wissenschaftliche Quellen (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/Wypych/Armarego/Snyder/GESTIS). 55+ vollständige Zitate unten.

Water (H₂O)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Water (CAS 7732-18-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 104th ed., Sec. 8 (Properties of Water)
  3. IAPWS — IAPWS Release on Static Dielectric Constant of Water
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Water
Ethanol (EtOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Ethanol (CAS 64-17-5)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Ethanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — Ethanol eluotropic
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Ethanol
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Ethanol
Methanol (MeOH)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Methanol (CAS 67-56-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Methanol physical constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — MeOH eluotropic, eo=0.95
  4. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Methanol
Acetone
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetone (CAS 67-64-1)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetone physical & thermodynamic constants
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Acetone (dD=15.5, dP=10.4, dH=7.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Acetone
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetone
Acetonitrile (ACN)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Acetonitrile (CAS 75-05-8)
  2. CRC — CRC Handbook — Acetonitrile constants
  3. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — ACN gold-standard HPLC eluent
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — ACN dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Acetonitrile
DMSO
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — DMSO (CAS 67-68-5)
  2. Wypych 2019 — Handbook of Solvents Vol. 1 — DMSO comprehensive properties
  3. Hansen 2007 — HSP — DMSO (dD=18.4, dP=16.4, dH=10.2)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DMSO E_T(30)=45.1, dipolar aprotic
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — DMSO
THF
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — THF (CAS 109-99-9)
  2. Armarego 2009 — Purification of Laboratory Chemicals — THF drying & peroxide test
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — THF (dD=16.8, dP=5.7, dH=8.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — THF
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Tetrahydrofuran
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Dichloromethane (CAS 75-09-2)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — DCM (Group 2A carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — DCM (dD=18.2, dP=6.3, dH=6.1)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — DCM polarity index
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Dichloromethane
Chloroform (CHCl₃)
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Chloroform (CAS 67-66-3)
  2. IARC 73 — IARC Monograph 73 — Chloroform (Group 2B carcinogen)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — CHCl3 (dD=17.8, dP=3.1, dH=5.7)
  4. Reichardt 2011 — Solvents and Solvent Effects — CHCl3 H-bond donor strength
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Chloroform
n-Hexane
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — n-Hexane (CAS 110-54-3)
  2. ATSDR n-Hexane — ATSDR Toxicological Profile for n-Hexane — neuropatia obwodowa (n-Heksan NIE jest kancerogenem IARC)
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — n-Hexane (dD=14.9, dP=0, dH=0)
  4. Snyder & Kirkland — Modern Liquid Chromatography — n-Hexane NP standard, eo=0.00
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — n-Hexane
Toluene
  1. NIST — NIST Chemistry WebBook — Toluene (CAS 108-88-3)
  2. IARC 71 — IARC Monograph 71 — Toluene
  3. Hansen 2007 — Hansen Solubility Parameters — Toluene (dD=18.0, dP=1.4, dH=2.0)
  4. Smallwood — Handbook of Organic Solvent Properties — Toluene
  5. GESTIS — GESTIS Substance Database — Toluene
Löslichkeitstheorie (angewendet in der Verträglichkeitsvorhersage):
  1. Yalkowsky, Samuel H., and Shri C. Valvani. 1980. "Solubility and Partitioning I: Solubility of Nonelectrolytes in Water." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 69 (8): 912–922. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600690814 — General Solubility Equation (GSE): logS = 0.5 − logP − 0.01(MP−25).
  2. Hansen, Charles M. 2007. Hansen Solubility Parameters: A User's Handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420006834 — HSP-Triplett (dD, dP, dH) + Ra-Formel.
  3. Stefanis, E., and C. Panayiotou. 2008. "Prediction of Hansen Solubility Parameters with a New Group-Contribution Method." Int J Thermophys 29: 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10765-008-0415-z
  4. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2011. Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry. 4th ed. Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527632220 — E_T(30) polarity scale, solwatochromia.
  5. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. 3rd ed. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 — Eluotropic series, polarity index.
  6. Van Krevelen, D. W., and K. Te Nijenhuis. 2009. Properties of Polymers. 4th ed. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-054819-7.X0001-5 — Hoftyzer–Van Krevelen group contribution dla dD/dP/dH z SMILES.
  7. Marcus, Yizhak. 1998. The Properties of Solvents. Wiley Series in Solution Chemistry, Vol. 4. ISBN 9780471983699 — Vollständige tabellarische Sammlung von 250+ Lösungsmitteln (ε, μ, Donizität, Akzeptorzahlen).
  8. PubChem Compound Database — CAS 79-06-1 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

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

📚 Technische FAQ — Acrylamide (5) MolGod_TECHFAQ_1
❓ Jak przygotować roztwór standardowy akrylamidu o stężeniu 10 mg/mL?
Aby przygotować roztwór standardowy akrylamidu (CAS 79-06-1) o stężeniu 10 mg/mL, należy odważyć 10 mg substancji (co odpowiada około 0.14 mol) i rozpuścić w 1 mL rozpuszczalnika (np. metanolu lub wody dejonizowanej). Masa akrylamidu potrzebna do przygotowania roztworu: masa = stężenie × objętość = 10 mg/mL × 1 mL = 10 mg. Wzór chemiczny: C3H5NO, masa molowa: 71.08 g/mol.
Hilfreich?
❓ Jak przechowywać akrylamid (CAS 79-06-1) w laboratorium?
Akrylamid należy przechowywać w szczelnie zamkniętych pojemnikach, w temperaturze 2-8°C, z dala od światła słonecznego i źródeł ciepła. Wilgotność względna powietrza nie powinna przekraczać 65%. Substancja jest higroskopijna, więc należy unikać kontaktu z wilgocią.
Hilfreich?
❓ Jaka metoda analityczna jest najlepsza do oznaczania akrylamidu w próbkach żywności?
Dla akrylamidu (logP nieokreślony, MW 71.08 g/mL) zalecana jest chromatografia cieczowa wysokosprawna (HPLC) z detektorem UV lub fluorescencyjnym. Metoda GC może być stosowana po odpowiedniej derywatyzacji próbki.
Hilfreich?
❓ Jakie są główne niezgodności chemiczne akrylamidu (CAS 79-06-1)?
Akrylamid reaguje z silnymi utleniaczami (np. nadtlenkiem wodoru) i zasadami (np. NaOH). Nie należy go przechowywać w obecności reduktorów lub kwasów organicznych, które mogą prowadzić do niepożądanych reakcji. Substancja jest również toksyczna i wymaga ostrożnego obchodzenia się.
Hilfreich?
❓ W jakich zastosowaniach laboratoryjnych wykorzystuje się akrylamid (CAS 79-06-1)?
Akrylamid jest stosowany jako monomer w produkcji poliakrylamidu, używanego w żelach elektroforetycznych do rozdziału białek i kwasów nukleinowych. W analizie chemicznej służy jako wzorzec do oznaczania zawartości w próbkach żywności i środowiskowych.
Hilfreich?
🧮 Laborrechner (8) MolGod_LABCALC_1
Verdünnung (C₁V₁=C₂V₂)
Molarität (M=n/V)
pH-Puffer (Henderson-Hasselbalch)
Beer-Lambert (A=εcl)
Masse → Mol
Konzentration % → M
ppm → mg/L
Temperatur C↔F↔K

Verifizierte Formeln: IUPAC Gold Book ↗, DOI ↗

📊 Spektroskopische Spektrendatenbanken MolGod_SPECDB_3
📋 Laborprotokoll-Generator MolGod_PROTOCOL_1

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

🏷️ Etiketten-Generator (QR) MolGod_LABEL_1
Acrylamid• ACRYLAMIDE• CAS: 79-06-1• EC: 201-173-7• Formel: C3H5NO• Masse: 71.08 g/molGEFAHRGHS-GEFAHRENHINWEISE:H350: Kann Krebs erzeugen.H340: Kann genetische Defekte verursachen.H332: Gesundheitsschädlich bei Einatmen.H312: Gesundheitsschädlich bei Hautkontakt.DH ScientificScience first. Commerce as consequence.Charge-Nr.: Nettomasse: Herst.:
ADMET — Pharmakologisches Profil

Drug-Likeness-Radardiagramm (Lipinski Ro5 / Veber). Grüne Zone = Übereinstimmung mit den Kriterien.

Vorhersagedaten — in silico berechnete Eigenschaften (SMILES/RDKit). Sie ersetzen keine klinischen Studien. Nicht zur Arzneimittelbewertung ohne experimentelle Verifizierung verwenden.

MW71.1LogP-0.7HBD1HBA1RotB1TPSA43.1 Ų
✓ Lipinski Ro5✓ Veber✓ Egan✗ Ghose (MW=71, LogP=-0.7)✗ REOS (MW=71)✓ Lead-like Ro3
EigenschaftWertBewertung
Resorption (GI)hoch✓
BHS-Permeabilitätja (durchdringt)
Bioverfügbarkeit (Daina 2017)
55%
CYP450-ProfilCYP1A2 non-inhibitorCYP2C9 non-inhibitorCYP2C19 non-inhibitorCYP2D6 non-inhibitorCYP3A4 non-inhibitor
PAINS-Warnungen1⚠
Brenk-Warnungen1⚠
pKa (pH 7.4)9 (predicted)
hERG (Kardiotox.)✓ nein
P-gp-Substrat—
Ames-Mutagenität✓ nein
DILI (Hepatotox.)—
LogS (Wasserlösl.)—
Quellen (ADMET-Methodik)
  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. Jackson, Paul A., John C. Widen, Daniel A. Harki, and Kay M. Brummond. 2017. "Covalent Modifiers: A Chemical Perspective on the Reactivity of α,β-Unsaturated Carbonyls with Thiols via Hetero-Michael Addition Reactions." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 60 (3): 839-885. ↗
  22. Jackson, Paul A., et al. 2017. "Covalent Modifiers: A Chemical Perspective on the Reactivity of α,β-Unsaturated Carbonyls with Thiols via Hetero-Michael Addition Reactions." Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 60 (3): 839-885. ↗
  23. Jong‐Su Park, Palas Samanta, Sangwoo Lee et al.. (2021). "Developmental and Neurotoxicity of Acrylamide to Zebrafish". International Journal of Molecular Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22073518
  24. Melissa Faria, Tamar Ziv, Cristian Gómez‐Canela et al.. (2018). "Acrylamide acute neurotoxicity in adult zebrafish". Scientific Reports. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26343-2
  25. N. Muttucumaru, Stephen J. Powers, J. Stephen Elmore et al.. (2016). "Acrylamide-forming potential of potatoes grown at different locations, and the ratio of free asparagine to reducing sugars at which free asparagine becomes a limiting factor for acrylamide formation". Food Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.09.199
  26. (2012). "Toxicology and carcinogenesis studies of acrylamide (CASRN 79-06-1) in F344/N rats and B6C3F1 mice (feed and drinking water studies).". PubMed.
  27. Claudio Pelucchi, Carlo La Vecchia, Cristina Bosetti et al.. (2011). "Exposure to acrylamide and human cancer—a review and meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies". Annals of Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq610
  28. European Food Safety Authority. (2011). "Results on acrylamide levels in food from monitoring years 2007–2009 and Exposure assessment". EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2133
  29. Burhan I. Ghanayem, Re Bai, Grace E. Kissling et al.. (2009). "Diet-Induced Obesity in Male Mice Is Associated with Reduced Fertility and Potentiation of Acrylamide-Induced Reproductive Toxicity1". Biology of Reproduction. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.109.078915
  30. Sean M. Hays, Lesa L. Aylward. (2008). "Biomonitoring Equivalents (BE) dossier for acrylamide (AA) (CAS No. 79-06-1)". Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yrtph.2008.05.010
  31. Skott, A., Hofmann, A., Sorgel, F. et al.. (2002). "Acrylamide: Increased concentrations in homemade food and first evidence of its variable absorption from food, variable metabolism and placental and breast milk transfer in humans". https://doi.org/10.1159/000069715
  32. Lawrence, Justin R., O\u27Neill, Feidhlim T., O'Neill, Feidhlim T. et al.. (2001). "Thickness variation of self-processing acrylamide-based photopolymer and reflection holography". https://doi.org/10.1117/1.1353801
  33. (0). "NIOSH skin notation profile : acrylamide [CAS No. 79-06-1]".
  34. et al. 2026. "Design and synthesis of carbazole-acrylamide-pyridinium hybrids as dual acetylcholinesterase/butyrylcholinesterase inhibitors and evaluation of their cytotoxic profile on SH-SY5Y and HEK293 cell lines." DOI: 10.1039/d5md01075f. [DOI ↗]
  35. et al. 2026. "Design, Synthesis, and Cytotoxic Evaluation of <i>N</i>-Phenyl-3-(Thiophen-2-Yl)acrylamide Derivatives." DOI: 10.3390/molecules31183147. [DOI ↗]
  36. et al. 2026. "Processing-Dependent Acrylamide Formation in French Fries: Optimisation of QuEChERS-Based Extraction and HPLC-PDA Determination." DOI: 10.3390/molecules31162777. [DOI ↗]
  37. et al. 2026. "Corncob-Derived Xylo-Oligosaccharides Attenuate Acrylamide-Induced Gut-Liver Toxicity in Mice, Associated with Modulation of Gut Microbiota and SCFA Metabolism." DOI: 10.3390/biology15191684. [DOI ↗]
  38. Kocadağlı, Tolgahan; Gökmen, Vural. 2024. "Metabolism of acrylamide in humans and biomarkers of exposure to acrylamide." Acrylamide in Food. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-323-99119-3.00010-2. [DOI ↗]
  39. Kocadağlı, Tolgahan, Gökmen, Vural. 2024. "Metabolism of acrylamide in humans and biomarkers of exposure to acrylamide." Acrylamide in Food: 111-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-323-99119-3.00010-2. [DOI ↗]
  40. 2018. "Acrylamide and Processed Potatoes." Grow: Plant Health Exchange. DOI: 10.1094/grow-pot-11-18-077. [DOI ↗]
  41. Kocadağlı, Tolgahan; Gökmen, Vural. 2016. "Metabolism of Acrylamide in Humans and Biomarkers of Exposure to Acrylamide." Acrylamide in Food. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-802832-2.00006-1. [DOI ↗]
  42. Anese, Monica. 2016. "Acrylamide in Coffee and Coffee Substitutes." Acrylamide in Food. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-802832-2.00009-7. [DOI ↗]
  43. Mojska, Hanna. 2016. "Secular Trends in Food Acrylamide." Acrylamide in Food. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-802832-2.00003-6. [DOI ↗]
  44. Tepe, Yalçın. 2016. "Acrylamide in Surface and Drinking Water." Acrylamide in Food. DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-802832-2.00014-0. [DOI ↗]
  45. Kocadağlı, Tolgahan, Gökmen, Vural. 2016. "Metabolism of Acrylamide in Humans and Biomarkers of Exposure to Acrylamide." Acrylamide in Food: 109-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-802832-2.00006-1. [DOI ↗]
  46. Raloff, Janet. 2002. "Cooking up a carcinogen: Should we worry about all that acrylamide in our diet?." Science News 162 (8): 120-121. https://doi.org/10.2307/4013720. [DOI ↗]
  47. Anonymous. 1966. "now all the acrylamide you can handle." Chemical & Engineering News Archive 44 (20): 67. https://doi.org/10.1021/cen-v044n020.p067. [DOI ↗]
  48. "Acrylamide." DOI: 10.31003/uspnf_r8081_02_01. [DOI ↗]
  49. "Heat-Introduced Formation of Acrylamide in Table Olives: Analysis of Acrylamide, Free Asparagine, and 3Aminopropionamide." DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.3c03457.s001. [DOI ↗]
  50. Anonymous. "Preparation and Cross-Linking of All-Acrylamide Diblock Copolymer Nano-Objects via Polymerization-Induced Self-Assembly in Aqueous Solution.". https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.macromol.6b02643.s001. [DOI ↗]
  51. et al. 2026. "Design, characterization, DFT studies, and molecular docking of new benzofuran-pyrazol-acrylamide hybrids as insecticidal agents against Spodoptera littoralis and Tribolium castaneum." DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-39839-z. [DOI ↗]
  52. et al. 2026. "Acrylamide-Induced Neurotoxicity Is Mitigated by Curcumin and Its Nano Lipid Carrier Formulation in Albino Rats." DOI: 10.1002/tox.70043. [DOI ↗]
  53. et al. 2026. "ATRA-mediated RAR-α activation attenuates acrylamide-induced testicular toxicity." DOI: 10.1038/s41598-026-50168-z. [DOI ↗]
  54. et al. 2026. "AC Electrokinetics-Enhanced Capacitive Aptasensor for Point-of-Care Testing of Acrylamide in Coffee." DOI: 10.3390/mi17080966. [DOI ↗]
  55. 2026. "Acrylamide-Induced Developmental and Molecular Toxicity in Drosophila melanogaster: The Role of Vanillic Acid in CncC/Keap1 Modulation." DOI: 10.1002/jbt.71088. [DOI ↗]
  56. 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 ↗]
  57. Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. [DOI ↗]
  58. Kim, Sunghwan, Tiejun Cheng, Jianyong He, Chen Cheng, et al. 2021. "PubChem Protein, Pathway, Reaction, and Disease Specifications." Journal of Cheminformatics 13: 16. [DOI ↗]
  59. Hähnke, Volker D., Sunghwan Kim, and Evan E. Bolton. 2018. "PubChem chemical structure standardization." Journal of Cheminformatics 10: 36. [DOI ↗]
  60. Wang, Yanli, Stephen H. Bryant, Tiejun Cheng, Jiyao Wang, et al. 2017. "PubChem BioAssay: 2017 update." Nucleic Acids Research 45 (D1): D955-D963. [DOI ↗]
  61. 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 ↗]
  62. 2021. "HDAC6 screening dataset using tau-based substrate in an enzymatic assay yields selective inhibitors and activators." DOI: 10.6019/CHEMBL4808148. [ChEMBL bioactivity primary lit] [DOI ↗]
  63. PubMed PMID PubChem. (Metadata fetch failed.) ↗
  64. et al. 2026. "Investigation of the effects of acrylamide on tendon healing in rats." DOI: 10.5152/j.aott.2026.25781. [DOI ↗]
  65. et al. 2026. "Mechanism-guided mitigation of acrylamide in thermally processed foods: emerging technologies and analytical verification." DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2026.1981497. [DOI ↗]
  66. 2025. "Purification of vegetable oils from acrylamide pollutants using metal-organic frameworks." DOI: 10.1038/s41598-025-28117-z. [DOI ↗]
  67. Wilkinson, Mark D., et al. 2016. "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship." Scientific Data 3: 160018. [DOI ↗]
  68. Hersey, Anne, et al. 2015. "Chemical databases: curation or integration by user-defined equivalence?" Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 14: 17-24.
  69. Mendel Friedman. 2005. "Chemistry and safety of acrylamide in food." Springer. ↗
  70. United States. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine. 2009. "Acrylamide." Agency for Toxic Substances Disease Registry, Division of Toxicology and Environmental Medicine, Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. ↗
  71. 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.
  72. Levitt, David. 2024. "Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of glucocorticoids: modeling the glucocorticoid receptor dynamics and dose/response of commonly prescribed glucocorticoids." ADMET and DMPK. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.2414. [DOI ↗]
  73. Notario, Dion, Munzir, Angela Marietha, Novella, Yulina, Hananta, Linawati. 2024. "Impact of lactoferrin supplementation on cotrimoxazole pharmacokinetics: A preliminary clinical investigation." ADMET and DMPK. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.2358. [DOI ↗]
  74. ECHA. 2024. "REACH Guidance." European Chemicals Agency. ↗
  75. Sridharan, Kannan, Al Banna, Rashed, Husain, Aysha. 2021. "Evaluation of pharmacokinetics of warfarin from validated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model." ADMET and DMPK. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.909. [DOI ↗]
  76. Cabana, Bernard E.. 1984. "Bioavailability and Pharmacokinetics in Drug Development." Pharmacokinetics: 113-132. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-2799-8_12. [DOI ↗]
  77. 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. ↗
🧪 Assistent zur Lösungsherstellung (Smart Prep) MolGod_PREP_2

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

Beispiele unten — zum Einfügen anklicken:
Fertige Rezepte:
📚 Überblick über die wissenschaftliche Literatur — CAS 79-06-1MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse (wissenschaftliche Literatur) 20 Publikationen
🏆 CAS 79-06-1 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% Zitierungen · 20% Aktualität · 20% Thema · 15% historisch · 15% Open Access.
  1. #1
    et al. (2026) · Scientific Reports
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 10.08 Mechanismus Zitierungen: 2 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  2. #2
    et al. (2026) · Frontiers in Nutrition
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 8.65 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  3. #3
    et al. (2026) · Molecules
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 8.65 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  4. #4
    Reda M. Abdelhameed; Randa S. Hasan; Hassan Abdel-Gawad (2025) · Scientific Reports
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2025) · open access
    SCORE 7.95 Industrie Zitierungen: 1 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  5. #5
    et al. (2026) · Biology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.85 Pharmakologie Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  6. #6
    et al. (2026) · Micromachines
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.85 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  7. #7
    et al. (2026) · Environmental Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.15 Pharmakologie Zitierungen: 1 Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  8. #8
    et al. (2026) · Molecules
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  9. #9
    et al. (2026) · RSC Medicinal Chemistry
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  10. #10
    et al. (2026) · Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Industrie Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  11. #11
    et al. (2026) · Scientific Reports
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  12. #12
    Fahriye Zemheri‐Navruz; Sinan Ince; Gamze Ataman (2026) · Journal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Pharmakologie Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  13. #13
    et al. (2026) · Gels
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  14. #14
    Eman M.S. Shaheen; Marwa A. E. Abd El‐Maksoud (2026) · Journal of Biochemical and Molecular Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Pharmakologie Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  15. #15
    Milan Mandal; Seth Agrippa Oppong; Keka Ojha (2026) · ACS Omega
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  16. #16
    J. Wojciechowska-Puchałka, E. Drąg-Kozak, K. Kustra et al. (2026) · Poultry Science
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 7.05 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗
  17. #17
    Ghanayem BI; Bai R; Kissling GE et al. (2010) · Biology of reproduction
    Warum es wichtig ist: Pflichtzitat (Kanon) · 131 Zitierungen
    SCORE 6.36 Mechanismus MUST-CITE Zitierungen: 131 DOI ↗
  18. #18
    et al. (2026) · BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Pharmakologie Open Access DOI ↗ PubMed ↗
  19. #19
    Seyed Jamaleddin Peighambardoust, Hamzeh Khatooni, Naeimeh Sadat Peighambardoust (2026) · Scientific Reports
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗
  20. #20
    Damian Chandia-Poblete, Stéphane Tuffier, Efstathios Vryonidis et al. (2026) · EClinicalMedicine
    Warum es wichtig ist: Aktuell (2026) · open access
    SCORE 6.25 Mechanismus Open Access DOI ↗
📈 HPLC-Gradient — Optimierer (LSS) VORLAGE

Gradient basierend auf PubChem XLogP3 + LSS (Snyder et al. 2010, Kap. 9).

  • Säule: C18
  • Puffer: phosphate
  • Fluss: 1 mL/min
  • logP: -0.7 (PubChem XLogP3)
  • Rampe: 5% → 95% B, 10 min
  • Gesamtanalysenzeit: 23 min
t (min) %A %B flow (mL/min) Kommentar
0 95 5 1 Start (Gleichgewicht)
2 95 5 1 Ende der Anfangshaltezeit
12 5 95 1 Ende der LSS-Rampe
17 5 95 1 Säulenspülung
18 95 5 1 Rückkehr zu init
23 95 5 1 Reäquilibrierung
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 9 — gradient elution, LSS theory (cited as Snyder et al. 2010 in tool description).
  2. Schoenmakers, Peter J. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier. — Numerical optimization of gradient programs.
  3. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley. — Foundational LSS reference for the %B_init = 5 + 8·logP heuristic implemented here.
  4. Nikitas, Pavlos, and Adrian Pappa-Louisi. 2009. "Retention models for isocratic and gradient elution in reversed-phase liquid chromatography." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1737-1755. [DOI ↗] — Modern review of gradient retention models — basis for non-LSS extensions.
  5. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  6. Dong, Michael W. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793. — Modern UHPLC gradient programming, sub-2 µm scaling rules.
  7. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  8. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗] — Reference for orthogonal gradient design (2D-LC second dimension).
  9. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199.
  10. Meyer, Veronika R. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley. — Chapter 7 — practical gradient design with isokratyczny scouting.
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531. [DOI ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772. [DOI ↗]
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations." Journal of Separation Science 30: 1167-1182. [DOI ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531. [DOI ↗]

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/gradient/79-06-1

📐 HPLC-Peaksymmetrie-Rechner (USP Tf / As)

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

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines USP Tailing Factor T = (a+b)/(2a) measured at 5% peak height.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Tailing factor is a system suitability parameter (Section 6).
  3. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Original asymmetry factor As = b/a at 10% height (Foley & Dorsey 1983).
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2.4 — peak shape diagnostics and remedies.
  5. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." LCGC North America 21: 610-614 [link ↗] — How tailing factor degrades effective resolution.
  6. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗] — Modern numerical deconvolution for asymmetric peaks.
  7. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH. — Practical Tf and As thresholds for routine QC.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  9. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  10. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." Journal of Chromatography B 877: 2120-2129 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052 [link ↗]
  11. 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 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. 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 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]
📊 Rechner für Auflösung und Bodenzahl (Rs, N, H)

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

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2 covers resolution, plate count and HETP fundamentals (Snyder et al. 2010).
  2. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines Rs >= 1.5 acceptance criterion and N calculation methods.
  3. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." LCGC North America 21: 350-353 [link ↗] — Practical guidance on Rs targets for routine method development.
  4. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." Chemical Engineering Science 5: 271-289 https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1 [link ↗] — Origin of N = 5.54·(tr/w0.5)² half-height plate count formulation.
  5. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-8247-1357-7. — Resolution equation Rs = (1/4)·√N·(α-1)/α·k/(1+k) (master equation).
  6. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Skewed-peak corrections to apparent N.
  7. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." Journal of Chromatographic Science 15: 352-364 https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352 [link ↗]
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.
  11. 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 [link ↗]
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  13. 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 [link ↗]
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH. ISBN 978-3-527-33473-5.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z [link ↗]

Related products

🧪 Systemeignung — Live-Rechner (USP <621>)

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

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines RSD area < 2%, tailing < 2.0, N > 2000 acceptance criteria.
  2. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. [link ↗] — Section 5.4 — system suitability is part of method validation.
  3. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. [link ↗] — CDER reviewer perspective on chromatographic validation expectations.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. Wiley. — Chapter 2 — system suitability fundamentals (RSD, Tf, N).
  5. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." — Robustness vs. system suitability — design-of-experiments framework.
  6. Rozet, Eric, et al.. 2013. "Analysis of recent pharmaceutical regulatory documents on analytical method validation."
  7. European Medicines Agency (EMA). 2011. "Guideline on bioanalytical method validation EMEA/CHMP/EWP/192217/2009." EMA. [link ↗] — EMA companion guideline with bioanalytical SS criteria.
  8. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. — UHPLC-specific suitability adjustments (n=5 vs. n=6).
  9. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience.
  10. AOAC International. 2016. "Appendix F: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements." AOAC INTERNATIONAL. [link ↗] — Alternative SS thresholds for food/dietary samples.
  11. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial."
  12. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC."
  13. Wu, Naijun, and Anton M. Clausen. 2007. "Fundamental and practical aspects of ultrahigh pressure liquid chromatography for fast separations."
  14. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." 2nd ed. Wiley-VCH.
  15. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography."

Inne produkty z tej kategorii

📋 Status prawny (REACH / TSCA / UK)MolGod_REG_2
JurysdykcjaListaStatusSunset
EUSVHClisted—
📤 Betten Sie dieses Molekül auf Ihrer Website ein

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

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

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

Passen Sie width und height an Ihr Layout an.

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

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

LinkedIn Twitter/X Facebook
QR code CAS 79-06-1

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

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

⬇ PNG herunterladen

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

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

Preview
📋 Lizenz: Der Embed behält einen Backlink zu DH Scientific (erforderlich — der Shop ist die Datenquelle). Chemische Daten stammen von PubChem (CC0 — gemeinfrei). Der Embed ist KOSTENLOS für Bildungs-, kommerzielle und Hobbyzwecke.
📚 REFERENZEN (Gesammelte Bibliografie, Chicago Author-Date) 107 Einträge

Alle wissenschaftlichen Quellen, die in den Akkordeons oben für CAS 79-06-1 zitiert werden.Format: Chicago Manual of Style, 17. Aufl., Autor-Datum-System.

🗄️ Wissenschaftliche Datenbanken

  1. NIST. 2026. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 79-06-1. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=79-06-1. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  2. AIST. 2026. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 79-06-1. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  3. PubChem. 2026. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 79-06-1. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=79-06-1. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  4. ECHA. 2026. C&L Inventory and REACH Registration: CAS 79-06-1. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)

📐 Standards / Richtlinien

  1. ICH. 2026. "ICH Harmonised Guideline: CAS 79-06-1." Geneva: International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  2. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). 2024. "NFPA 30: Flammable and Combustible Liquids Code." NFPA, Quincy, MA. https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/all-codes-and-standards/list-of-codes-and-standards/detail?code=30.
  3. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2023. "29 CFR 1910.106 — Flammable Liquids." U.S. Department of Labor, Federal Register. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.106.
  4. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA). 2024. "Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) — Harmonised Classification and Labelling." ECHA, Helsinki / Official Journal of the European Union. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/clp/clp-classification.
  5. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2016. "EN 374-1:2016 — Protective gloves against dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms — Part 1: Terminology and performance requirements for chemical risks." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=205:110:::::FSP_PROJECT,FSP_ORG_ID:38536,6080&cs=1B0DAA8B85DF42E4A2C70E5D71F0BFA32.
  6. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2001. "EN 166:2001 — Personal eye-protection — Specifications." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:6541&cs=1F1A4E0A78C4DB6A28DBE2E8C29D89DCF.
  7. European Committee for Standardization (CEN). 2009. "EN 14605:2005+A1:2009 — Protective clothing against liquid chemicals — Performance requirements for clothing with liquid-tight (Type 3) or spray-tight (Type 4) connections." CEN, Brussels. https://standards.cencenelec.eu/dyn/www/f?p=CEN:110:0::::FSP_PROJECT:21581&cs=1A04A2D3C7CC58E9E6CB58D55F7EBFB7E.
  8. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). 2017. "Recommendations for Chemical Protective Clothing: A Companion to the NIOSH Pocket Guide." U.S. Department of Health & Human Services / CDC. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ncpc/default.html.
  9. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). 2011. "Personal Protective Equipment — General requirements." U.S. Department of Labor — 29 CFR 1910.132. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910/1910.132.

📖 Bücher

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

📘 Monografien

  1. IARC. 2026. IARC Monographs on the Identification of Carcinogenic Hazards to Humans: CAS 79-06-1. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)

📄 Wissenschaftliche Artikel (peer-reviewed)

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

🌐 Websites

  1. ECHA. 2023. "Guidance on the Application of the CLP Criteria." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/guidance-documents/guidance-on-clp.
  2. European Parliament. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH)." Official Journal of the European Union L 396: 1–849.
  3. ECHA. 2023. "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for Authorisation." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table.
  4. European Parliament. 2008. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)." Official Journal of the European Union L 353: 1–1355.
  5. ECHA. 2017. "Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets." Version 3.1. European Chemicals Agency. ECHA-17-G-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  6. ECHA. 2022. "Restrictions Under REACH — Annex XVII." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach.
  7. United Nations. 2021. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). 9th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.9. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/ghs-rev9-2021.
  8. ECHA. 2020. "Understanding REACH." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach.
  9. U.S. OSHA. 2026. "Occupational Safety and Health Guidance: CAS 79-06-1." Washington, DC: U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/hazwoper. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  10. National Fire Protection Association (2018) — NFPA 472: Standard for Competence of Responders to Hazardous Materials/Weapons of Mass Destruction Incidents https://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/nfpa-472.
  11. European Union. 2026. "EUR-Lex Legal Database: CAS 79-06-1." Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012L0018. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  12. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2024) — NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  13. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  14. Schoenmakers, Peter J.. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier.
  15. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793.
  19. 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.
  20. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199. https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/when-modify-method-conditions.
  21. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  22. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. 100 Years of Chromatography. Wiley-VCH.
  23. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  24. 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.
  25. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker.
  26. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2.
  27. 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.
  28. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  29. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352.
  30. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development." Wiley.
  31. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  32. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." Wiley-Interscience.
  33. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223.
  34. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry." Wiley-VCH.
  35. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h.
  36. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  37. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645.
  38. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  39. 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.
  40. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  41. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/peak-tailing-and-resolution.
  42. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH.
  43. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052.
  44. 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/.
  45. 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.
  46. 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.
  47. Kolthoff, Izaak Maurits, and Philip J. Elving, eds. 1978. Treatise on Analytical Chemistry, Part I: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
  48. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2018. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
  49. Christian, Gary D., Purnendu K. Dasgupta, and Kevin A. Schug. 2014. Analytical Chemistry. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  50. 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.
  51. 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.
  52. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/how-much-resolution-enough.
  53. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  54. U.S. FDA. 2026. "FDA Guidance and Resources: CAS 79-06-1." Silver Spring, MD: U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/74954/download. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  55. 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.
  56. 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.
  57. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954.
  58. 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.
  59. 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.
  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. 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.
  72. 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.
  73. Sejm RP. 2026. "Internetowy System Aktow Prawnych (ISAP): CAS 79-06-1." Warszawa: Kancelaria Sejmu Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20200000010. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  74. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Srodowiska. 2026. "Baza Danych o Odpadach (BDO): CAS 79-06-1." Warszawa: Ministerstwo Klimatu i Srodowiska. https://bdo.mos.gov.pl/. (Accessed 2026-11-12.)
  75. Pohanish, Richard P.. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." Elsevier.
  76. Lewis, Richard J.. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." Wiley.
  77. NIOSH. 2024. "Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  78. 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.
  79. IPCS INCHEM. 2024. "International Programme on Chemical Safety — Waste Management Guidelines." WHO/UNEP/ILO. https://www.inchem.org/.
  80. 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.
  81. 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.
  82. 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.
  83. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  84. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  85. 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.
  86. International Pharmaceutical Excipients Council (IPEC) and Pharmaceutical Quality Group (PQG). 2017. "Joint IPEC-PQG Good Manufacturing Practices Guide for Pharmaceutical Excipients." IPEC-Americas. https://ipecamericas.org/sites/default/files/IPECPQGGMPGuide2017.pdf.
📥 BibTeX herunterladen📥 RIS herunterladenImport in Zotero/Mendeley/EndNote/Papers.