Citronensäure — Etikett CAS 77-92-9
kwas-cytrynowy-jednowodny-spozywczy-proszek-1kg CAS_NUMBER 77-92-9
Kwas 2-Hydroksypropano-1,2,3-Trikarboksylowy — CAS 77-92-9 — C6H8O7 — odczynnik chemiczny

Citronensäure

Lebensmittelzusatzstoff: E330 (EU 1333/2008) | Codex: 330
quantum satis
Klasyfikacja CLP (H-statements): H315 (Skin corrosion/irritation), H319 (Serious eye damage/eye irritation), H335 (Specific target organ toxicity, single exposure) (PubChem GHS)

6,99 €

czysty kwas cytrynowy do zastosowań kulinarnych i domowych, waga netto 1000g

🔒 Demomodus — dieser Artikel steht nicht zum Verkauf.

Legale Substanz. dhscientific.com ist eine Demonstration der MOL-GOD-Plattform — wir verkaufen nichts und es werden keine Bestellungen ausgeführt. Verbotene Substanzen werden hier automatisch anhand des regulatorischen Kanons blockiert (vgl. z. B. Heptachlor).

Prüfung Ihres Sicherheitsdatenblatts — kostenlos → · Kontakt

MolGod_SDSCARD_1
REACH 2020/878
v7 · 22.07.2026
SKU: kwas-cytrynowy-jedno-e14114 Kategoria: Znaczników: , , , , , , , ,
🧬 3D-Molekül-Visualisierer
Molekül wird geladen...
3D-Modell Citric Acid, CAS 77-92-9, Summenformel C6H8O7, molare Masse 192.12 g/mol

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

Chemische Übersicht: Citric AcidMolGod_OVERVIEW_1
SummenformelC6H8O7[1]
Molekulargewicht192.12 g/mol[1]
Schmelzpunkt153 °C[1][2][3]
Dichte1.542 g/cm³[1][3]
LogP (Lipophilie)-1.64[1][3]
pKa3.128[3]
IUPAC-Name2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid[1]
SMILESC(C(=O)O)C(CC(=O)O)(C(=O)O)O[1]
InChIKeyKRKNYBCHXYNGOX-UHFFFAOYSA-N[1]

Synonyme: citric acid · 77-92-9 · 2-hydroxypropane-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid · Citric acid, anhydrous · Aciletten

Datenquellen: PubChem (NLM/NIH), CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-06-30

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (3 Quellen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Summenformel · Molekulargewicht · Schmelzpunkt · Dichte · LogP (Lipophilie) · IUPAC-Name · SMILES · InChIKey
  2. O'Neil, M.J., ed. The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals. 15th ed. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2013. dotyczy: Schmelzpunkt
  3. Rumble, J.R., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2024. ↗ dotyczy: Schmelzpunkt · Dichte · LogP (Lipophilie) · pKa

🎓 Badania akademickie: 77-92-9

#1🎓Faculty of Science📅 2026
Synthesis of citric acid-coated nanomaterials releasing oxygen and antioxidant vitamin E and investigation of their effects on healthy…
Atmaca YB; Kehr NS.
Vollständiger LAB-Bericht →
#2🎓Faculty of Science and Stem Cell Institute📅 2026
Green synthesis of caffeine-catalyzed citric acid-PPG/PEG crosslinked alginate hydrogel scaffolds for prospective biomedical applications
Hategekimana F; Elçin AE; Elçin YM.
Vollständiger LAB-Bericht →
#3🎓College of Food Engineering📅 2026
Preparation, characterization and toxicological evaluation of tapioca starch/chitosan/anhydrous citric acid composite edible films and their application in cooked…
Ma CM; Liu WR; Xu Y; Zhang G; Xu XY; Wang B.
Vollständiger LAB-Bericht →
#4🎓Faculty of Engineering📅 2026
Dissolving Amyloid Fibrils with Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents: Citric Acid-Glycerol Achieves Superior Solubilization and Partial Protein Refolding
Hirano S; Oshima T; Inada A; Tsuruda T.
Vollständiger LAB-Bericht →
#5🎓School of Food Science and Technology📅 2026
Effect of oil-soluble emulsifiers on the self-assembly behaviors of citric acid esters in bulk and emulsified systems
Chen Y; Jin J; Xu X; Zhang H; Zhu L.
Vollständiger LAB-Bericht →

WISSENSCHAFTLICHE FORSCHUNG

[1]EuropePMC2026
Safety and efficacy of the feed additives consisting of citric acid anhydrous and citric acid monohydrate produced by…
EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), Villa RE, Azimonti G, Bonos E, Christensen H, Durjava M, Dusemund B, Gehring R, Glandorf B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, Ma
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[2]PubMed2025
Revisiting the solid-state landscape of creatine citric acid: A salt or a cocrystal?
York G; Kelly AW; Robison L; Iuzzolino L; Lee AY. 2025. "Revisiting the solid-state landscape of creatine citric acid: A salt or a cocrystal?." Journal of pharmaceutical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1
Analytical Research & Development
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
[3]PubMed2025
Design of oleofoams from citric acid esters of mono-/diglycerides
Ugarte-Pereyra C; Argyri SM; Bordes R; Vincent-Bonnieu S; Beaucé J; Binks BP. 2025. "Design of oleofoams from citric acid esters of mono-/diglycerides." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). htt
University Lille
Zur vollständigen Studie ↗
📊 Physikochemische Eigenschaften

Kurzübersicht

Formel: C6H8O7
MW: 192.12 g/mol
CAS: 77-92-9
Aussehen: Kristalle; monokline Holoedern; kristallisiert aus heißer konzentrierter wässriger Lösung
Geruch: Geruchlos

Detaillierte Eigenschaften

Uzupełnienie tabeli „Właściwości fizykochemiczne (baza danych)” poniżej — powtórzone wartości pokazujemy tylko raz.

Eigenschaft Wert Einheit Bedingungen Quelle
Siedepunkt (bp) Decomposes (NTP, 1992) CAMEO Chemicals ↗
Flammpunkt 100 °C[1] ILO-WHO International Chemical Safety Cards (ICSCs) ↗
Viskosität (η) 2.549 cP 30% aqueous solution at 20 °C[1][2] Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB) ↗
Brechungsindex (nD) 1.493[1][3] 20 °C, D-line CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
🔬 Erweiterte Eigenschaften

Chemische Kennungen

SMILES: C(C(=O)O)C(CC(=O)O)(C(=O)O)O
InChI: InChI=1S/C6H8O7/c7-3(8)1-6(13,5(11)12)2-4(9)10/h13H,1-2H2,(H,7,8)(H,9,10)(H,11,12)
InChIKey: KRKNYBCHXYNGOX-UHFFFAOYSA-N

Datenquellen: CAMEO Chemicals, ILO-WHO International Chemical Safety Cards (ICSCs), Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB), CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024) (ISBN 9781032655628)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: 2026-04-27

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (3 Quellen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Flammpunkt · Viskosität (η) · Brechungsindex (nD)
  2. NLM. Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). National Library of Medicine. ↗ dotyczy: Viskosität (η)
  3. Rumble, J.R., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2024. ↗ dotyczy: Brechungsindex (nD)
Regulatorischer Status der Substanz
Diese Substanz unterliegt regulatorischen Anforderungen: Bewirtschaftung gefährlicher Abfälle (BDO-Register). Details im Abschnitt "Regulatorischer Status (REACH/ECHA/CLP)" und im SDS. Regulatorische Information — schränkt den Kauf in diesem Shop nicht ein.
🧮 Stöchiometrie-RechnerMolGod_STOICH_1
🔍 Externe IdentifikatorenMolGod_EXTID_1
15 von 16 ID-Systemen94%
DatenbankIdentifikatorAktionen
CAS Registry Number77-92-9Öffnen →
PubChem CID311[1]Öffnen →
InChIKeyKRKNYBCHXYNGOX-UHFFFAOYSA-N[1]Öffnen →
InChIInChI=1S/C6H8O7/c7-3(8)1-6(13,5(11)12)2-4(9)10/h…[1]
SMILESC(C(=O)O)C(CC(=O)O)(C(=O)O)O[1]
EC Number201-069-1[2]Öffnen →
DrugBankDB04272Öffnen →
KEGG CompoundD00037Öffnen →
HMDBHMDB0000094Öffnen →
ChemSpider305[3]Öffnen →
CompTox DTXSID (EPA)DTXSID3020332[4]Öffnen →
MeSH UID (NLM)D019343Öffnen →
UNII (FDA)XF417D3PSLÖffnen →
NSC Number (NCI)30279Öffnen →
WikiData QIDQ159683Öffnen →

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

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (4 Quellen)
  1. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: PubChem CID · InChIKey · InChI · SMILES
  2. ECHA. EC Inventory — EINECS, ELINCS, NLP and List Numbers assigned under REACH. Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency. ↗ dotyczy: EC Number
  3. ChemSpider. Royal Society of Chemistry, chemical structure database. ↗ dotyczy: ChemSpider
  4. U.S. EPA. CompTox Chemicals Dashboard — ToxCast/Tox21 high-throughput screening bioactivity summary (testing coverage, not a hazard finding). Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ↗ dotyczy: CompTox DTXSID (EPA)
📡 Spektroskopie — CAS 77-92-9MolGod_SPECHUB_MAIN
📊 Spektren (NMR, IR, MS, UV-Vis) (1)

Verfügbare Spektrentypen: IR

IR-Spektrum (KBr, 4000-400 cm⁻¹)

477 Datenpunkte · Quelle: NIST WebBook · NIST ↗ · 📥 JCAMP-DX
🎓 Leitfaden zur Spektreninterpretation (für Studierende)
Wie man ein IR-Spektrum liest
  • 3200-3600 cm⁻¹ — O-H-Streckschwingung (breiter Peak = Wasserstoffbrücke)
  • 2850-3000 cm⁻¹ — C-H-Streckschwingung (sp³)
  • 1650-1750 cm⁻¹ — C=O-Streckschwingung (Ketone, Aldehyde, Ester)
  • 1400-1600 cm⁻¹ — Schwingungen des aromatischen Rings
  • 1000-1300 cm⁻¹ — C-O-Streckschwingung (Ether, Alkohole)
  • Keine Absorption = keine funktionelle Gruppe → mit einer Referenz vergleichen

Quellen: LibreTexts ↗, Silverstein (Spectrometric ID) ↗

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (7 Quellen)
  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology. 2024. "NIST Chemistry WebBook, SRD 69." Gaithersburg, MD: NIST. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  2. Spectral Database for Organic Structure Determination (SDBS). 2024. National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Japan. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
  3. Ulrich, Eldon L., Hideo Akutsu, John F. Doreleijers, Yoko Harano, Yannis E. Ioannidis, Jundong Lin, Miron Livny, et al. 2008. "BioMagResBank." Nucleic Acids Research 36 (D1): D402–D408. [DOI ↗]
  4. Horai, Hisayuki, Masanori Arita, Shigehiko Kanaya, Yoshito Nihei, Tasuku Ikeda, Kazuhiro Suwa, Yuya Ojima, et al. 2010. "MassBank: A Public Repository for Sharing Mass Spectral Data for Life Sciences." Journal of Mass Spectrometry 45 (7): 703–714. [DOI ↗]
  5. Linstrom, P.J., and W.G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. ↗
  6. McDonald, M. Shane, Mike McAvoy, and Ajit Bhalerao. 1988. "JCAMP-DX: A Standard Form for Exchange of Infrared Spectra in Computer Readable Form." Applied Spectroscopy 42 (1): 151–162. [DOI ↗]
  7. PubChem. 2024. "PubChem Compound Database." National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Accessed 2025-01-01. ↗
📐 Physikalisch-chemische Eigenschaften (DB) 10 Felder MolGod-Score: Primär
Eigenschaft Wert Einheit Bedingungen Quelle
Schmelzpunkt 153 [1][2][3] °C decomp. CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Siedepunkt rozkłada się [1] — przed wrzeniem (decomp.) CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Wasserlöslichkeit 592 [1] g/L 20°C CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Dichte (ρ) 1.542 [1][3] g/cm³ 20°C CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Brechungsindex (n_D) 1.493 [1][3] — 20°C, sodium D CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
pKa₁ 3.128 [1] — CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
pKa₂ 4.761 [1] — CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
pKa₃ 6.396 [1] — CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
logP (Octanol/Wasser) -1.64 [1][4] — CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
Spezifische Wärme (cp) 1.135 [1] J/(g·K) CRC Handbook 105th ed. (2024)
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) (4 Quellen)
  1. Rumble, J.R., ed. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2024. ↗ dotyczy: Schmelzpunkt · Siedepunkt · Wasserlöslichkeit · Dichte (ρ) · Brechungsindex (n_D) · pKa₁ · pKa₂ · pKa₃ · logP (Octanol/Wasser) · Spezifische Wärme (cp)
  2. O'Neil, M.J., ed. The Merck Index: An Encyclopedia of Chemicals, Drugs, and Biologicals. 15th ed. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2013. dotyczy: Schmelzpunkt
  3. PubChem. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NIH/NLM), chemical compound database. ↗ dotyczy: Schmelzpunkt · Dichte (ρ) · Brechungsindex (n_D)
  4. Sangster, J. "Octanol-Water Partition Coefficients of Simple Organic Compounds." Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 18, no. 3 (1989): 1111-1229. ↗ dotyczy: logP (Octanol/Wasser)

Die physikochemischen Werte stammen aus den oben genannten unabhängigen, begutachteten Quellen.

🔄 Umrechner für Konzentrationseinheiten LIVE MolGod_UNITCONV_1

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

MW: 192.12 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 ↗

🛡️ Sicherheit — CAS 77-92-9MolGod_SAFEHUB_MAIN
Hinweis zu Datenbeschränkungen. Die Sicherheitsinformationen auf dieser Seite dienen nur zur Information und ersetzen kein vollständiges Sicherheitsdatenblatt (SDS). Konsultieren Sie vor der Verwendung des Produkts das aktuelle Sicherheitsdatenblatt des Herstellers sowie die GHS/CLP-Leitlinien. Die CLP-Einstufung bezieht sich auf die reine Bulk-Substanz, nicht auf handelsübliche Zubereitungen.

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

⚠ Achtung (Warning)
GHS07 — Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich
GHS07 Reizend / gesundheitsschädlich

🚨 Gefahrenhinweise (H)

  • H335 — Kann die Atemwege reizen.
  • H319 — Verursacht schwere Augenreizung.

🛡 Sicherheitshinweise (P)

  • P261 — Einatmen von Staub/Rauch/Gas/Nebel/Dampf/Aerosol vermeiden.
  • P264 — Nach Gebrauch gründlich waschen.
  • P271 — Nur im Freien oder in gut belüfteten Räumen verwenden.
  • P280 — Schutzhandschuhe/Schutzkleidung/Augenschutz/Gesichtsschutz tragen.
  • P304+P340 — BEI EINATMEN: Die betroffene Person an die frische Luft bringen und für ungehinderte Atmung sorgen.
  • P305+P351+P338 — BEI KONTAKT MIT DEN AUGEN: Einige Minuten lang behutsam mit Wasser ausspülen.; Eventuell vorhandene Kontaktlinsen nach Möglichkeit entfernen. Weiter ausspülen.
  • P312 — Bei Unwohlsein GIFTINFORMATIONSZENTRUM/Arzt/… anrufen.
  • P337+P313 — Bei anhaltender Augenreizung: Ärztlichen Rat einholen/ärztliche Hilfe hinzuziehen.
  • P403+P233 — An einem gut belüfteten Ort aufbewahren.: Behälter dicht verschlossen halten.
  • P405 — Unter Verschluss aufbewahren.
  • P501 — Inhalt/Behälter … zuführen.

✓ Harmonisierte Einstufung gemäß Anhang VI der CLP-Verordnung (EG) 1272/2008 (amtliche, verbindliche Einstufung). Indexnummer: 607-750-00-3.

Referenz (Chicago): European Chemicals Agency. "citric acid, Index No. 607-750-00-3." In Table 3 of Annex VI to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP Regulation), 23rd Adaptation to Technical Progress (harmonised list as of 2026-07-07). Helsinki: European Chemicals Agency, 2026. https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp.

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: 77-92-9 · PubChem ↗

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

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

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

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

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

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

🧪 Puffer-Rezept-Rechner EINZIGARTIG
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-Methoden (importbereit) (3)

C18 · analytical · generic-rphplc

Method Summary

Kolumna: C18 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

Runtime: 23 min · Rt: 2 min · λ: 220 nm

Column Selection

Typ: C18 · Wymiary: 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

C18 daje wystarczającą retencję dla związków hydrofilowych

  • Agilent Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18
  • Waters Symmetry C18
  • Phenomenex Luna C18(2)
Mobile Phase

A: Woda + 0.1% kwas fosforowy (pH 2.5, bufor H3PO4)

B: Acetonitryl

🔬 Dostępność + substytuty
ℹ️ Single-CAS Integrity: Die folgenden Lösungsmittel sind analytische Werkzeuge (HPLC mobile Phase) — KEINE analysierte Substanz. Die in anderen Akkordeons angezeigten Werte (MW, GHS, Toxikologie) beziehen sich auf das aktuelle Molekül, nicht auf diese Lösungsmittel. Ausnahme: Single-CAS Integrity (Kategorie "Lösungsmittel/Puffer/analytische Methoden").
PhaseLösungsmittel / CASStatusAktion
AWoda + 0.1% kwas fosforowy
CAS 7732-18-5		prüfe…
BAcetonitryl
CAS 75-05-8		prüfe…
Gradient Program
Time (min)% BFlow
0.005.01.00
2.005.01.00
15.0050.01.00
17.0050.01.00
18.005.01.00
23.005.01.00
Detection Settings

λ primary: 220 nm · reference: 320 nm · bandwidth: 4 nm

Validation Parameters

QC: Resolution ≥2.0 · Tailing ≤1.5 · RSD ≤2%

Uwagi:

  • Predykowany Rt < 3 min — rozważ wolniejszy gradient

Referencje:

  • USP <621> Chromatography
  • ICH Q2(R1) Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology
  • Snyder LR, Kirkland JJ, Dolan JW (2010). Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography, 3rd ed.
  • Avdeef A. (2012). Absorption and Drug Development: Solubility, Permeability, and Charge State, 2nd ed. Wiley.
Download Method

C18 · analytical · generic-rphplc

Method Summary

Kolumna: C18 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

Runtime: 23 min · Rt: 2 min · λ: 220 nm

Column Selection

Typ: C18 · Wymiary: 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

C18 daje wystarczającą retencję dla związków hydrofilowych

  • Agilent Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18
  • Waters Symmetry C18
  • Phenomenex Luna C18(2)
Mobile Phase

A: Woda + 0.1% kwas fosforowy (pH 2.5, bufor H3PO4)

B: Acetonitryl

🔬 Dostępność + substytuty
ℹ️ Single-CAS Integrity: Die folgenden Lösungsmittel sind analytische Werkzeuge (HPLC mobile Phase) — KEINE analysierte Substanz. Die in anderen Akkordeons angezeigten Werte (MW, GHS, Toxikologie) beziehen sich auf das aktuelle Molekül, nicht auf diese Lösungsmittel. Ausnahme: Single-CAS Integrity (Kategorie "Lösungsmittel/Puffer/analytische Methoden").
PhaseLösungsmittel / CASStatusAktion
AWoda + 0.1% kwas fosforowy
CAS 7732-18-5		prüfe…
BAcetonitryl
CAS 75-05-8		prüfe…
Gradient Program
Time (min)% BFlow
0.005.01.00
2.005.01.00
15.0050.01.00
17.0050.01.00
18.005.01.00
23.005.01.00
Detection Settings

λ primary: 220 nm · reference: 320 nm · bandwidth: 4 nm

Validation Parameters

QC: Resolution ≥2.0 · Tailing ≤1.5 · RSD ≤2%

Uwagi:

  • Predykowany Rt < 3 min — rozważ wolniejszy gradient

Referencje:

  • USP <621> Chromatography
  • ICH Q2(R1) Validation of Analytical Procedures
  • Snyder LR, Kirkland JJ, Dolan JW (2010). Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography, 3rd ed.
Download Method

C18 · purity · agilent

Method Summary

Kolumna: C18 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

Runtime: 23 min · Rt: 2 min · λ: 210 nm

Column Selection

Typ: C18 · Wymiary: 150 × 4.6 mm, 5 μm

C18 daje wystarczającą retencję dla związków hydrofilowych

  • Agilent Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18
  • Waters Symmetry C18
  • Phenomenex Luna C18(2)
Mobile Phase

A: Woda + 10mM bufor wodorowęglanu amonu (pH 7, bufor NH4HCO3)

B: Acetonitryl

🔬 Dostępność + substytuty
ℹ️ Single-CAS Integrity: Die folgenden Lösungsmittel sind analytische Werkzeuge (HPLC mobile Phase) — KEINE analysierte Substanz. Die in anderen Akkordeons angezeigten Werte (MW, GHS, Toxikologie) beziehen sich auf das aktuelle Molekül, nicht auf diese Lösungsmittel. Ausnahme: Single-CAS Integrity (Kategorie "Lösungsmittel/Puffer/analytische Methoden").
PhaseLösungsmittel / CASStatusAktion
AWoda + 10mM bufor wodorowęglanu amonu
CAS 7732-18-5		prüfe…
BAcetonitryl
CAS 75-05-8		prüfe…
Gradient Program
Time (min)% BFlow
0.005.01.00
2.005.01.00
15.0050.01.00
17.0050.01.00
18.005.01.00
23.005.01.00
Detection Settings

λ primary: 210 nm · reference: 310 nm · bandwidth: 4 nm

Validation Parameters

QC: Resolution ≥2.0 · Tailing ≤1.5 · RSD ≤2%

Uwagi:

  • Predykowany Rt < 3 min — rozważ wolniejszy gradient

Referencje:

  • USP <621> Chromatography
  • ICH Q2(R1) Validation of Analytical Procedures
  • Snyder LR, Kirkland JJ, Dolan JW (2010). Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography, 3rd ed.
Download Method
📊 HPLC-Methodenvalidierung (ICH Q2(R1)) PARTIAL

3 of 3 critical 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 6 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 erwartete Retentionszeit in der Methodendatenbank des Plugins
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).
🧪 Löslichkeit und Lösungsmittelkompatibilität MolGod_SOLUB_1
Molekül
Citric Acid
Formel
C6H8O7
logP (XLogP3)
-1.70
Masse (g/mol)
192.12
Polarität
Hydrophil (polar)

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

Ra < R₀ = dobra mieszalność · Ra < 1,5×R₀ = graniczna · powyżej = słaba (R₀ — promień sfery Hansena tej molekuły) Dla tej molekuły R₀ = 14.

Lösungsmittel Compat. Ra Visuell GC-MS HPLC Anwendungen Referenzen
Water (H₂O)592 g/L (pomiar)16.5
✗ NieA (aqueous) (RP)
PufferZellkulturanalytischhydrophile Extraktion
Ethanol (EtOH)+ Gut11.0
✗ NieA/B modifier (RP/NP)
ExtraktionSpektroskopie (UV-Vis)SyntheseHPLC-Modifier
Methanol (MeOH)+ Gut9.3
✗ NieA/B (RP) (RP)
HPLC (eluent)LC-MSKarl FischerUV-transparent do 205 nm
Acetone− Schwach21.8
✗ NieB modifier (NP)
GC headspaceKristallisationEntfettungSynthese
Acetonitrile (ACN)− Schwach23.3
✗ NieB (RP) (RP)
HPLC-Eluent (Goldstandard)LC-MS (wolny cut-off UV 190 nm)Peptidanalyse
DMSO~ Mittel17.8
✗ NieN/A (N/A)
NMR (d6-DMSO)Zellbiologie (Kryokonservierung)ArzneimittelabgabeSynthese
THF− Schwach21.3
✗ NieB (NP) (NP)
GPC/SEC (Polymeranalyse)Grignard-Synthesemetallorganisch
DCM (CH₂Cl₂)− Schwach22.5
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
ExtraktionNP-HPLCGC-MSKristallisation (Anti-Solvens)
Chloroform (CHCl₃)− Schwach24.1
✓ TakN/A (toxic) (N/A)
NMR (CDCl3)Lipidextraktion (Folch-Methode)NP-TLC
Hexane− Schwach31.5
✓ TakA (NP) (NP)
NP-HPLCÖlextraktion (Lipide)GC-MSTLC (NP)
Toluene− Schwach28.1
✓ TakB (NP) (NP)
NMR (d8-toluene)SyntheseDean-Stark azeotrope Trocknung
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen für Lösungsmittel (Chicago Author-Date) — zum Aufklappen klicken

11 Lösungsmittel · 54 vollständige Zitate (NIST/CRC/IARC/Hansen/Reichardt/Smallwood/Wypych/Armarego/Snyder/GESTIS) — 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 77-92-9 lookup ↗ — logP (XLogP3), water solubility experimental + predicted.

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

🧮 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
Citronensäure• citric acid• CAS: 77-92-9• Formel: C6H8O7• Masse: 192.12 g/molACHTUNGGHS-GEFAHRENHINWEISE:H319: Verursacht schwere Augenreizung.H335: Kann die Atemwege reizen.P304+P340 P305+P351+P338 P337+P313 P312 P280 P501 P403+P233 P405 P261 P264 P271Nur für Laborzwecke!DH ScientificScience first. Commerce as consequence.Charge-Nr.: Nettomasse: Herst.:
Deskryptory Lipinskiego (struktura)

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.

MW192.1LogP-1.7HBD4HBA7RotB5TPSA132 Ų
✓ Lipinski Ro5✓ Veber✗ Egan✗ Ghose (LogP=-1.7)✗ REOS (MW=192)✗ Lead-like Ro3 (HBD=4, HBA=7, RotB=5)
EigenschaftWertBewertung
Resorption (GI)niedrig⚠
BHS-Permeabilitätnein
Bioverfügbarkeit (Daina 2017)
55%
CYP450-ProfilCYP1A2 non-inhibitorCYP2C9 non-inhibitorCYP2C19 non-inhibitorCYP2D6 non-inhibitorCYP3A4 non-inhibitor
PAINS-Warnungen0✓
Brenk-Warnungen0✓
pKa (pH 7.4)3.13 (curated)
hERG (Kardiotox.)✓ nein
P-gp-Substrat—
Ames-Mutagenität⚠ ja
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. Apelblat, Alexander. 2014. "Citric Acid Chemistry." Citric Acid: 213-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11233-6_4. [DOI ↗]
  22. Anonymous. 1998. "Downstream Processing in Citric Acid Production." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-11. [DOI ↗]
  23. Anonymous. 1998. "Biochemistry of Citric Acid Production by Yeasts." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-5. [DOI ↗]
  24. Anonymous. 1998. "Redox Potential in Submerged Citric Acid Fermentation." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 95-114. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-8. [DOI ↗]
  25. McDONAGH, J.E.R.. 1966. "THE CITRIC ACID CYCLE." Protein: The Basis of All Life: 21-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-1-4831-8038-0.50016-2. [DOI ↗]
  26. 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 ↗]
  27. Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. [DOI ↗]
  28. Kim, Sunghwan, Tiejun Cheng, Jianyong He, Chen Cheng, et al. 2021. "PubChem Protein, Pathway, Reaction, and Disease Specifications." Journal of Cheminformatics 13: 16. [DOI ↗]
  29. Hähnke, Volker D., Sunghwan Kim, and Evan E. Bolton. 2018. "PubChem chemical structure standardization." Journal of Cheminformatics 10: 36. [DOI ↗]
  30. Wang, Yanli, Stephen H. Bryant, Tiejun Cheng, Jiyao Wang, et al. 2017. "PubChem BioAssay: 2017 update." Nucleic Acids Research 45 (D1): D955-D963. [DOI ↗]
  31. 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 ↗]
  32. Wilkinson, Mark D., et al. 2016. "The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship." Scientific Data 3: 160018. [DOI ↗]
  33. Hersey, Anne, et al. 2015. "Chemical databases: curation or integration by user-defined equivalence?" Drug Discovery Today: Technologies 14: 17-24.
  34. 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.
  35. ECHA. 2024. "REACH Guidance." European Chemicals Agency. ↗
  36. 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. ↗
  37. James T. Mellonig, American Academy of Periodontology. Research, Science and Therapy Committee. 1991. "Citric acid and fibronectin in periodontal therapy." The Academy. ↗
🧪 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 77-92-9MolGod_LITHUB_MAIN
⭐ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse (wissenschaftliche Literatur) 4 Publikationen
🏆 CAS 77-92-9 — multi-criteria ranking (W12): 30% Zitierungen · 20% Aktualität · 20% Thema · 15% historisch · 15% Open Access.
  1. #1
    Apelblat, A. (1973) · Journal of the Chemical Society
    Warum es wichtig ist: Pflichtzitat (Kanon) · 540 Zitierungen
    SCORE 10.45 Mechanismus MUST-CITE Zitierungen: 540 DOI ↗
  2. #2
    Vandenberghe, L.P.S.; Soccol, C.R.; Pandey, A.; Lebeault, J.M. (2007) · Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology
    Warum es wichtig ist: Pflichtzitat (Kanon) · 520 Zitierungen · Übersichtsarbeit
    SCORE 9.95 Übersicht MUST-CITE Zitierungen: 520 DOI ↗
  3. #3
    Lambros, M.; Tran, T.H.; Fei, Q.; Nicolaou, M. (2020) · Pharmaceutics
    Warum es wichtig ist: Pflichtzitat (Kanon) · 140 Zitierungen · Übersichtsarbeit
    SCORE 9.45 Übersicht MUST-CITE Zitierungen: 140 DOI ↗
  4. #4
    Behera, B.C.; Mishra, R.; Mohapatra, S. (2018) · Food Frontiers
    Warum es wichtig ist: Pflichtzitat (Kanon) · 160 Zitierungen
    SCORE 9.02 Industrie MUST-CITE Zitierungen: 160 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: -1.7 (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.

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/gradient/77-92-9

🌈 Detektor + Wellenlänge (UV/Vis) 184 nm
Verbindung1,2,3-Propanetricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxy-
λmax184 nm
λmin—
εmax (M⁻¹·cm⁻¹)—
Lösungsmittel (Referenz)gas phase or unknown (NIST WebBook)
Empfohlene λ184 nm
Empfohlener DetektorELSD
AlternativenRID, MS, CAD

Datenquelle: NIST WebBook UVVis JCAMP — peak picked from spectrum

⚠ Kompatibilität mit der mobilen Phase

  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Water (HPLC-grade) (190 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Acetonitrile (190 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Methanol (205 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Ethanol (210 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff n-Hexane (200 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Tetrahydrofuran (THF) (220 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Diethyl ether (218 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Dichloromethane (232 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff Acetic acid (1%) (230 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff 0.1% TFA in water (210 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • critical λ=184 nm < UV-Cutoff 20 mM phosphate pH 7 (200 nm) — Lösungsmittel absorbiert, Messung nicht möglich.
  • advisory Das Arbeiten unter 220 nm erfordert: Lösungsmittel in HPLC-Qualität, Entgasung der mobilen Phase, einen sauberen Puffer (TFA/Acetat vermeiden) sowie eine Deuteriumlampe in gutem Zustand.
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date) 10 refs

METODA Methoden-Bibliografie

  1. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2017. "Principles of Instrumental Analysis." 7th ed. Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-305-57721-3.
  2. Perkampus, Heinz-Helmut. 1992. "UV-VIS Spectroscopy and Its Applications." Springer. ISBN 978-3-642-77479-9. →
  3. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." 2nd ed. Wiley-Interscience. ISBN 978-0-471-41138-4.
  4. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. →
  5. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. →
  6. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.
  7. Stoll, Dwight R., and Peter W. Carr. 2017. "Two-Dimensional Liquid Chromatography: A State of the Art Tutorial." Analytical Chemistry 89: 519-531 →
  8. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." Analytical Chemistry 82: 8525-8531 →
  9. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. ISBN 978-0-471-68162-4. →
  10. Kim, Sunghwan, et al.. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51: D1373-D1380 →

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/hplc/detector/77-92-9

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

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

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

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

📚 Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-16754-0. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183 [link ↗] — Chapter 2 covers resolution, plate count and HETP fundamentals (Snyder et al. 2010).
  2. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." USP-NF 2024 ed. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. [link ↗] — Defines Rs >= 1.5 acceptance criterion and N calculation methods.
  3. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." LCGC North America 21: 350-353 [link ↗] — Practical guidance on Rs targets for routine method development.
  4. Van Deemter, J. J., F. J. Zuiderweg, and A. Klinkenberg. 1956. "Longitudinal diffusion and resistance to mass transfer as causes of nonideality in chromatography." Chemical Engineering Science 5: 271-289 https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509(56)80003-1 [link ↗] — Origin of N = 5.54·(tr/w0.5)² half-height plate count formulation.
  5. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker. ISBN 978-0-8247-1357-7. — Resolution equation Rs = (1/4)·√N·(α-1)/α·k/(1+k) (master equation).
  6. Foley, Joe P., and John G. Dorsey. 1983. "Equations for calculation of chromatographic figures of merit for ideal and skewed peaks." Analytical Chemistry 55: 730-737 https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00255a033 [link ↗] — Skewed-peak corrections to apparent N.
  7. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." Journal of Chromatographic Science 15: 352-364 https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352 [link ↗]
  8. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." Journal of Chromatography A 1216: 1764-1772 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094 [link ↗]
  9. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. "HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists." 2nd ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-31378-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793 [link ↗]
  10. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. "Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." 5th ed. Wiley. ISBN 978-0-470-68218-0.
🧪 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.
⚗️ Jonizacja w funkcji pH (Henderson-Hasselbalch)MolGod_PHION_1

Typ: Kwas · pKa: 3.13 · pKa2: 4.76

024681012140%50%100%% zjonizowany% niejonowypH
pH% jonowy% niejonowy
00.1 %99.9 %
26.9 %93.1 %
488.1 %11.9 %
699.9 %0.1 %
8100.0 %0.0 %
10100.0 %0.0 %
12100.0 %0.0 %
14100.0 %0.0 %
Źródła dla tej substancji (9)
  • CRC Handbook 91st ed.
    Lide, David R., ed. 2010. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 91st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • CRC Handbook 105th ed.
    Rumble, John R., Thomas J. Bruno, Maria J. Doa, and Donald R. Burgess, eds. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • NIST WebBook — link
    Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook. NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  • PubChem CID 311 — link
    Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, Asta Gindulyte, Jia He, Siqian He, Qingliang Li, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380. PubChem CID 311.
  • DrugBank DB04272 — link
    Knox, Craig, Mike Wilson, Christen M. Klinger, Mark Franklin, Eponine Oler, Alex Wilson, Allison Pon, et al. 2024. "DrugBank 6.0: the DrugBank Knowledgebase for 2024." Nucleic Acids Research 52 (D1): D1265-D1275. DrugBank ID DB04272.
  • KEGG COMPOUND C00158 — link
    Kanehisa, Minoru, Miho Furumichi, Yoko Sato, Masayuki Kawashima, and Mari Ishiguro-Watanabe. 2023. "KEGG for taxonomy-based analysis of pathways and genomes." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D587-D592.
  • IUPAC
    Serjeant, E. P., and Boyd Dempsey. 1979. Ionisation Constants of Organic Acids in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC Chemical Data Series No. 23. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • NIST
    Goldberg, Robert N., Nand Kishore, and Rebecca Lennen. 2002. "Thermodynamic Quantities for the Ionization Reactions of Buffers." Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 31 (2): 231-370.
Bibliografia metody (Chicago)
  • Henderson, L. J. 1908. "Concerning the Relationship between the Strength of Acids and Their Capacity to Preserve Neutrality." American Journal of Physiology 21 (4): 173-179.
  • Hasselbalch, K. A. 1917. "Die Berechnung der Wasserstoffzahl des Blutes aus der freien und gebundenen Kohlensäure desselben." Biochemische Zeitschrift 78: 112-144.
  • Po, Henry N., and N. M. Senozan. 2001. "The Henderson-Hasselbalch Equation: Its History and Limitations." Journal of Chemical Education 78 (11): 1499-1503.
  • Avdeef, Alex. 2012. "Absorption and Drug Development: Solubility, Permeability, and Charge State." 2nd ed. Wiley.
  • Avdeef, Alex. 2007. "Solubility of sparingly-soluble ionizable drugs." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 59 (7): 568-590.
  • Volgyi, Gergely, et al. 2007. "Potentiometric and spectrophotometric pKa determination of water-insoluble compounds." Analytica Chimica Acta 583 (2): 418-428.
  • Fini, Adamo, Giuseppe Fazio, and Giuseppina Feroci. 1997. "Solubility and solubilization properties of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs." Pharmaceutica Acta Helvetiae 70 (4): 305-318.
  • Mauger, John W., Anthony N. Paruta, and Robert J. Gerraughty. 1972. "Solubilities of sulfadiazine, sulfisomidine, and sulfadimethoxine." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 61 (1): 94-97.
  • Lyman, Warren J., William F. Reehl, and David H. Rosenblatt. 1990. "Handbook of Chemical Property Estimation Methods." American Chemical Society.
  • Marcus, Yizhak. 1998. "The Properties of Solvents." Wiley.
  • Serjeant, E. P., and Boyd Dempsey. 1979. Ionisation Constants of Organic Acids in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC Chemical Data Series No. 23. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
  • Perrin, Douglas D. 1965. Dissociation Constants of Organic Bases in Aqueous Solution. IUPAC. London: Butterworths.
  • Goldberg, Robert N., Nand Kishore, and Rebecca Lennen. 2002. "Thermodynamic Quantities for the Ionization Reactions of Buffers." Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data 31 (2): 231-370.
  • Rumble, John R., Thomas J. Bruno, Maria J. Doa, and Donald R. Burgess, eds. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 105th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Lide, David R., ed. 2010. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 91st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
  • Kim, Sunghwan, Jie Chen, Tiejun Cheng, Asta Gindulyte, Jia He, Siqian He, Qingliang Li, et al. 2023. "PubChem 2023 update." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D1373-D1380.
  • Knox, Craig, Mike Wilson, Christen M. Klinger, Mark Franklin, Eponine Oler, Alex Wilson, Allison Pon, et al. 2024. "DrugBank 6.0: the DrugBank Knowledgebase for 2024." Nucleic Acids Research 52 (D1): D1265-D1275.
  • Zdrazil, Barbara, Eloy Felix, Fiona Hunter, Emma J. Manners, James Blackshaw, Sybilla Corbett, Marleen de Veij, et al. 2024. "The ChEMBL Database in 2023." Nucleic Acids Research 52 (D1): D1180-D1192.
  • Kanehisa, Minoru, Miho Furumichi, Yoko Sato, Masayuki Kawashima, and Mari Ishiguro-Watanabe. 2023. "KEGG for taxonomy-based analysis of pathways and genomes." Nucleic Acids Research 51 (D1): D587-D592.
  • Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. 2024. NIST Chemistry WebBook. NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology.
  • Nelson, David L., and Michael M. Cox. 2017. Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry. 7th ed. New York: W. H. Freeman.
📈 UV-VIS-Spektrenvorhersage (200-400 nm) λmax 184 nm MolGod_UVVIS_1
0%25%50%75%100%200250300350400A = ε·c·lA / Aₘₐₓ (%)
Verbindung1,2,3-Propanetricarboxylic acid, 2-hydroxy-
λmax184 nm
λmin—
εmax (M⁻¹·cm⁻¹)—
Lösungsmittel (Abfrage)water
Lösungsmittel (Referenz)gas phase or unknown (NIST WebBook)
Konzentration (M)1e-4
Schichtdicke (cm)1
FWHM der Kurve30 nm

Modell: Gauß-Kurve zentriert auf λmax mit Skalierung nach dem Beer-Lambert-Gesetz A = ε · c · l. Transmission T = 10^(-A) · 100%.

📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Apelblat, Alexander. 2014. "Citric Acid Chemistry." Citric Acid: 213-266. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11233-6_4. [DOI]
  2. Anonymous. 1998. "Downstream Processing in Citric Acid Production." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 145-158. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-11. [DOI]
  3. Anonymous. 1998. "Biochemistry of Citric Acid Production by Yeasts." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-5. [DOI]
  4. Anonymous. 1998. "Redox Potential in Submerged Citric Acid Fermentation." Citric Acid Biotechnology: 95-114. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781482272826-8. [DOI]
  5. McDONAGH, J.E.R.. 1966. "THE CITRIC ACID CYCLE." Protein: The Basis of All Life: 21-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-1-4831-8038-0.50016-2. [DOI]
  6. Chen Y; Jin J; Xu X; Zhang H; Zhu L. 2026. "Effect of oil-soluble emulsifiers on the self-assembly behaviors of citric acid esters in bulk and emulsified systems." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117896. [DOI]
  7. Atmaca YB; Kehr NS. 2026. "Synthesis of citric acid-coated nanomaterials releasing oxygen and antioxidant vitamin E and investigation of their effects on healthy and cancer cells under hypoxic and normoxic conditions." Biomedical materials (Bristol, England). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/ae5e12. [DOI]
  8. Hategekimana F; Elçin AE; Elçin YM. 2026. "Green synthesis of caffeine-catalyzed citric acid-PPG/PEG crosslinked alginate hydrogel scaffolds for prospective biomedical applications." International journal of biological macromolecules. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2026.151850. [DOI]
  9. Ma CM; Liu WR; Xu Y; Zhang G; Xu XY; Wang B. 2026. "Preparation, characterization and toxicological evaluation of tapioca starch/chitosan/anhydrous citric acid composite edible films and their application in cooked rice." International journal of biological macromolecules. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2026.151712. [DOI]
  10. Hirano S; Oshima T; Inada A; Tsuruda T. 2026. "Dissolving Amyloid Fibrils with Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents: Citric Acid-Glycerol Achieves Superior Solubilization and Partial Protein Refolding." ACS applied bio materials. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.5c02553. [DOI]
  11. EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), Villa RE, Azimonti G, Bonos E, Christensen H, Durjava M, Dusemund B, Gehring R, Glandorf B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, Marcon F, Nebbia C, Pechová A, Prieto-Maradona M, Theodoridou K, Yurkov A, Dulak-Lis M, Galobart J, Vettori MV, Villa AN, Pettenati E, Valeri P.. 2026. "Safety and efficacy of the feed additives consisting of citric acid anhydrous and citric acid monohydrate produced by fermentation with <i>Aspergillus niger</i>CGMCC 6.466 for all animal species (Sunshine Biotech International)." . https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10031. [DOI]
  12. York G; Kelly AW; Robison L; Iuzzolino L; Lee AY. 2025. "Revisiting the solid-state landscape of creatine citric acid: A salt or a cocrystal?." Journal of pharmaceutical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2025.01.023. [DOI]
  13. Ugarte-Pereyra C; Argyri SM; Bordes R; Vincent-Bonnieu S; Beaucé J; Binks BP. 2025. "Design of oleofoams from citric acid esters of mono-/diglycerides." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117119. [DOI]
  14. Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. 2023. NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. [DOI]
  15. Mayerhöfer, Thomas G., Samir Pahlow, and Jürgen Popp. 2020. "The Bouguer-Beer-Lambert Law: Shining Light on the Obscure." ChemPhysChem 21 (18): 2029-2046. [DOI]
  16. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2017. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-305-57721-3.
  17. Lindon, John C., George E. Tranter, and David W. Koppenaal, eds. 2017. "Encyclopedia of Spectroscopy and Spectrometry." 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Academic Press. ISBN 978-0-12-803224-4.
  18. Field, Leslie D., Sev Sternhell, and John R. Kalman. 2013. "Organic Structures from Spectra." 5th ed. Chichester: Wiley. ISBN 978-1-119-96582-6.
  19. Reusch, William. 2013. "Virtual Textbook of Organic Chemistry: Spectroscopy." East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.
  20. Lampman, Gary M., Donald L. Pavia, George S. Kriz, and James R. Vyvyan. 2010. "Spectroscopy." 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-0-495-88992-9.
  21. Kalsi, P. S. 2010. "Spectroscopy of Organic Compounds." 6th ed. New Delhi: New Age International. ISBN 978-81-224-2032-9.
  22. Williams, Dudley H., and Ian Fleming. 2008. "Spectroscopic Methods in Organic Chemistry." 6th ed. London: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-711559-0.
  23. Sadek, Paul C. 2002. The HPLC Solvent Guide. 2nd ed. Hoboken: Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-41242-2.
  24. Banwell, Colin N., and Elaine M. McCash. 1994. "Fundamentals of Molecular Spectroscopy." 4th ed. London: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 978-0-07-707976-1.
  25. Perkampus, Heinz-Helmut. 1992. UV-VIS Spectroscopy and Its Applications. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-77479-9.
  26. Fieser, Louis F. 1949. "Extension of Woodward's Rules for Prediction of Conjugated Diene Absorption." Journal of the American Chemical Society 71 (5): 1854-1857. [DOI]
  27. Woodward, Robert B. 1942. "Structure and the Absorption Spectra of Alpha,Beta-Unsaturated Ketones." Journal of the American Chemical Society 64 (1): 72-75. [DOI]
  28. Beer, August. 1852. "Bestimmung der Absorption des rothen Lichts in farbigen Flüssigkeiten." Annalen der Physik und Chemie 86: 78-88. https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.18521620505.
  29. Lambert, Johann Heinrich. 1760. Photometria. Augsburg: Sumptibus Vidae.

📖 Wartość λmax = 184 nm pochodzi z bazy/literatury. Brak niezależnego potwierdzenia krzyżowego (NIST / CrossRef / PubChem) — weryfikacja krzyżowa niedostępna.

REST: /wp-json/molgod/v1/spectra/uv-vis/77-92-9?solvent=water&path_length_cm=1

☣️ Toxizität (LD50 / LC50) GHS Kat. 5 — Sehr niedrigMolGod_LD50_1
LD50
3000 mg/kg[1]
Gatunek / droga
Rat / doustnie
Klasyfikacja
Slightly toxic[2][3]
Skala GHS (Acute Toxicity, oral, mg/kg bw):
Cat 1 (≤5)
Cat 2 (5–50)
Cat 3 (50–300)
Cat 4 (300–2000)
Cat 5 (2000–5000)

Quelle: RTECS GE7350000; Lipnick et al. 1995, Food Chem. Toxicol. (1995). CAS 77-92-9.

LD50/LC50-Daten dienen nur zur Orientierung; sie ersetzen weder das Sicherheitsdatenblatt (SDS) noch eine toxikologische Expertenbewertung. GHS-Einstufung für den oralen Weg (mg/kg bw) gemäß UN GHS, 10. Rev. 2023, Anhang 1 §3.1.1.

Bibliografie (Chicago)
  1. NIOSH. Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECS). Cincinnati: NIOSH.
  2. United Nations. 2023. "Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS)." 10th rev. ed. New York: UN.
  3. Hodge, Harold C., and James H. Sterner. 1949. "Tabulation of toxicity classes." American Industrial Hygiene Association Quarterly 10 (4): 93-96.
Dalsze źródła (metodyka, nie cytowane bezpośrednio):
  • U.S. EPA. 2024. "ChemView." https://chemview.epa.gov/.
  • Lipnick, Robert L., et al. 1995. "Comparison of the up-and-down, conventional LD50, and fixed-dose acute toxicity procedures." Food and Chemical Toxicology 33 (3): 223-231.
  • ATSDR. 2024. "Toxicological Profiles." Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/.
  • Hayes, Wallace, and Claire L. Kruger, eds. 2014. "Hayes' Principles and Methods of Toxicology." 6th ed. CRC Press.
  • Lewis, Richard J. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." 12th ed. Wiley.
  • IARC. 2024. "Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans." International Agency for Research on Cancer (per kryteria klasyfikacji rakotwórczości IARC Group 1/2A/2B).
  • Pohanish, Richard P. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." 7th ed. Elsevier.
  • Bingham, Eula, Barbara Cohrssen, and Charles H. Powell, eds. 2012. "Patty's Toxicology." 6th ed. Wiley.
  • WHO. 2023. "Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard." World Health Organization (zgodne z UN GHS Annex 1 §3.1.1).
💎 Kristallformen / Polymorphe 2 Formen in der Datenbank MolGod_POLYMORPH_2
Form Raumgruppe Zelle (Å, °) Dichte (g/cm³) Smp. (°C) CCDC
anhydrous stabil P21/a a=12.817 b=5.619 c=11.326 · α=90 β=111.218 γ=90 · Z=4 1.665 153.0 CITRAC10 DOI
monohydrate P21/a a=12.817 b=5.623 c=11.414 · α=90 β=111.45 γ=90 · Z=4 1.542 100.0 CITARC10 DOI

Quelle: Cambridge Structural Database (CSD) + Primärliteratur. Polymorphismus beeinflusst Löslichkeit, Bioverfügbarkeit und Stabilität (Brittain 2009; Bernstein 2020).

Erweiterte Bibliografie — 3 Quellen (PubMed/CrossRef/EuropePMC)
  • PUBChen Y; Jin J; Xu X; Zhang H; Zhu L. 2026. "Effect of oil-soluble emulsifiers on the self-assembly behaviors of citric acid esters in bulk and emulsified systems." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117896.
  • PUBYork G; Kelly AW; Robison L; Iuzzolino L; Lee AY. 2025. "Revisiting the solid-state landscape of creatine citric acid: A salt or a cocrystal?." Journal of pharmaceutical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2025.01.023.
  • PUBUgarte-Pereyra C; Argyri SM; Bordes R; Vincent-Bonnieu S; Beaucé J; Binks BP. 2025. "Design of oleofoams from citric acid esters of mono-/diglycerides." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117119.
📚 Wissenschaftliche Referenzen (Chicago Author-Date)
  1. Chen Y; Jin J; Xu X; Zhang H; Zhu L. 2026. "Effect of oil-soluble emulsifiers on the self-assembly behaviors of citric acid esters in bulk and emulsified systems." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117896. [DOI]
  2. Atmaca YB; Kehr NS. 2026. "Synthesis of citric acid-coated nanomaterials releasing oxygen and antioxidant vitamin E and investigation of their effects on healthy and cancer cells under hypoxic and normoxic conditions." Biomedical materials (Bristol, England). https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-605X/ae5e12. [DOI]
  3. Hategekimana F; Elçin AE; Elçin YM. 2026. "Green synthesis of caffeine-catalyzed citric acid-PPG/PEG crosslinked alginate hydrogel scaffolds for prospective biomedical applications." International journal of biological macromolecules. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2026.151850. [DOI]
  4. Ma CM; Liu WR; Xu Y; Zhang G; Xu XY; Wang B. 2026. "Preparation, characterization and toxicological evaluation of tapioca starch/chitosan/anhydrous citric acid composite edible films and their application in cooked rice." International journal of biological macromolecules. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2026.151712. [DOI]
  5. Hirano S; Oshima T; Inada A; Tsuruda T. 2026. "Dissolving Amyloid Fibrils with Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents: Citric Acid-Glycerol Achieves Superior Solubilization and Partial Protein Refolding." ACS applied bio materials. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.5c02553. [DOI]
  6. EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), Villa RE, Azimonti G, Bonos E, Christensen H, Durjava M, Dusemund B, Gehring R, Glandorf B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, Marcon F, Nebbia C, Pechová A, Prieto-Maradona M, Theodoridou K, Yurkov A, Dulak-Lis M, Galobart J, Vettori MV, Villa AN, Pettenati E, Valeri P.. 2026. "Safety and efficacy of the feed additives consisting of citric acid anhydrous and citric acid monohydrate produced by fermentation with <i>Aspergillus niger</i>CGMCC 6.466 for all animal species (Sunshine Biotech International)." . https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10031. [DOI]
  7. York G; Kelly AW; Robison L; Iuzzolino L; Lee AY. 2025. "Revisiting the solid-state landscape of creatine citric acid: A salt or a cocrystal?." Journal of pharmaceutical sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2025.01.023. [DOI]
  8. Ugarte-Pereyra C; Argyri SM; Bordes R; Vincent-Bonnieu S; Beaucé J; Binks BP. 2025. "Design of oleofoams from citric acid esters of mono-/diglycerides." Food research international (Ottawa, Ont.). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.117119. [DOI]
  9. Newman, David J., and Gordon M. Cragg. 2020. "Natural Products as Sources of New Drugs over the Nearly Four Decades from 01/1981 to 09/2019." Journal of Natural Products 83 (3): 770-803.
  10. Macrae, Clare F., Ioana Sovago, Simon J. Cottrell, et al. 2020. "Mercury 4.0: from visualization to analysis, design and prediction." Journal of Applied Crystallography 53 (1): 226-235. https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600576719014092.
  11. International Conference on Harmonisation. 2017. "ICH Q6A: Specifications: Test Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for New Drug Substances and New Drug Products." Geneva: ICH. https://www.ich.org/page/quality-guidelines.
  12. Groom, Colin R., Ian J. Bruno, Matthew P. Lightfoot, and Suzanna C. Ward. 2016. "The Cambridge Structural Database." Acta Crystallographica Section B: Structural Science, Crystal Engineering and Materials 72 (2): 171-179.
  13. 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.
  14. Price, Sarah L. 2014. "Predicting crystal structures of organic compounds." Chemical Society Reviews 43 (7): 2098-2111. https://doi.org/10.1039/C3CS60279F.
  15. Hann, Michael M. 2011. "Molecular Obesity, Potency and Other Addictions in Drug Discovery." MedChemComm 2 (5): 349-355.
  16. Yu, Lian. 2010. "Polymorphism in molecular solids: an extraordinary system of red, orange, and yellow crystals." Accounts of Chemical Research 43 (9): 1257-1266. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar100040r.
  17. Spek, Anthony L. 2009. "Structure validation in chemical crystallography." Acta Crystallographica D 65 (2): 148-155. https://doi.org/10.1107/S090744490804362X.
  18. Sheldrick, George M. 2008. "A short history of SHELX." Acta Crystallographica A 64 (1): 112-122. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108767307043930.
  19. Florence, Alastair J. 2008. "Approaches to high-throughput physical form screening and discovery." In Polymorphism: in the Pharmaceutical Industry, edited by Rolf Hilfiker, 139-184. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.
  20. 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.
  21. Bond, Andrew D., Roland Boese, and Gautam R. Desiraju. 2007. "On the polymorphism of aspirin: crystalline aspirin as intergrowths of two polymorphic domains." Angewandte Chemie International Edition 46 (4): 618-622. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200603373.
  22. Hilfiker, Rolf, ed. 2006. Polymorphism in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH.
  23. Singhal, Dharmendra, and William Curatolo. 2004. "Drug Polymorphism and Dosage Form Design: A Practical Perspective." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 56 (3): 335-347.
  24. Datta, Sapan, and David J. W. Grant. 2004. "Crystal structures of drugs: advances in determination, prediction and engineering." Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 3 (1): 42-57. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd1280.
  25. Allen, Frank H. 2002. "The Cambridge Structural Database: a quarter of a million crystal structures and rising." Acta Crystallographica B 58 (3): 380-388. https://doi.org/10.1107/S0108768102003890.
  26. Bauer, Jeffery, Stephen Spanton, Rodger Henry, et al. 2001. "Ritonavir: an extraordinary example of conformational polymorphism." Pharmaceutical Research 18 (6): 859-866. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011052932607.
  27. Vippagunta, Sudha R., Harry G. Brittain, and David J. W. Grant. 2001. "Crystalline solids." Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 48 (1): 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-409X(01)00097-7.
  28. Mullin, John W. 2001. Crystallization. 4th ed. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
  29. Chemburkar, Sanjay R., Jeffery Bauer, Klaus Deming, et al. 2000. "Dealing with the impact of ritonavir polymorphs on the late stages of bulk drug process development." Organic Process Research & Development 4 (5): 413-417. https://doi.org/10.1021/op000023y.
  30. Davey, Roger J., and John Garside. 2000. From Molecules to Crystallizers: An Introduction to Crystallization. Oxford Chemistry Primer 86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  31. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2000. "Guidance for Industry — Q6A Specifications: Test Procedures and Acceptance Criteria for New Drug Substances and New Drug Products: Chemical Substances." Silver Spring, MD: FDA. https://www.fda.gov/media/71361/download.
  32. Bernstein, Joel, and Anthony L. Henck. 1998. "Disappearing and Reappearing Polymorphs — An Anathema to Crystal Engineering?" Crystal Engineering 1 (2): 119-125.
  33. Threlfall, Terence L. 1995. "Analysis of organic polymorphs: a review." The Analyst 120 (10): 2435-2460. https://doi.org/10.1039/AN9952002435.
  34. Desiraju, Gautam R. 1995. "Supramolecular synthons in crystal engineering — a new organic synthesis." Angewandte Chemie International Edition 34 (21): 2311-2327. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.199523111.
  35. Bürgi, Hans-Beat, and Jack D. Dunitz, eds. 1994. Structure Correlation. 2 vols. Weinheim: VCH.
  36. Gavezzotti, Angelo. 1994. "Are crystal structures predictable?" Accounts of Chemical Research 27 (10): 309-314. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar00046a004.
  37. Etter, Margaret C. 1990. "Encoding and decoding hydrogen-bond patterns of organic compounds." Accounts of Chemical Research 23 (4): 120-126. https://doi.org/10.1021/ar00172a005.
  38. Burger, Artur, and Rudolf Ramberger. 1979. "On the polymorphism of pharmaceuticals and other molecular crystals. I. Theory of thermodynamic rules." Mikrochimica Acta 72 (3-4): 259-271. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01197379.
  39. Haleblian, John, and Walter McCrone. 1969. "Pharmaceutical applications of polymorphism." Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 58 (8): 911-929. https://doi.org/10.1002/jps.2600580802.
  40. McCrone, Walter C. 1965. "Polymorphism." In Physics and Chemistry of the Organic Solid State, edited by David Fox, Mortimer M. Labes, and Arnold Weissberger, vol. 2, 725-767. New York: Interscience.
  41. Ostwald, Wilhelm. 1897. "Studien über die Bildung und Umwandlung fester Körper." Zeitschrift für Physikalische Chemie 22: 289-330.
📤 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 77-92-9

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

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

⬇ PNG herunterladen

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

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

Preview
📋 Lizenz: Der Embed behält einen Backlink zu 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) 131 Einträge

Alle wissenschaftlichen Quellen, die in den Akkordeons oben für CAS 77-92-9 zitiert werden.Format: Chicago Manual of Style, 17. Aufl., Autor-Datum-System.

🗄️ Wissenschaftliche Datenbanken

  1. NIST. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: CAS 77-92-9. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=77-92-9.
  2. AIST. n.d. Spectral Database for Organic Compounds (SDBS): CAS 77-92-9. Tsukuba, Japan: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology. https://sdbs.db.aist.go.jp/.
  3. Linstrom, Peter J., and William G. Mallard, eds. n.d. NIST Chemistry WebBook: NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18434/T4D303.
  4. PubChem. n.d. PubChem Compound Summary: CAS 77-92-9. Bethesda, MD: National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), National Library of Medicine. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/#query=77-92-9.
  5. U.S. EPA. n.d. CompTox Chemicals Dashboard: CAS 77-92-9. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/chemical/details/DTXSID3020332.

📐 Standards / Richtlinien

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

📖 Bücher

  1. Rumble, John R., ed. 2024. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: 105th Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://hbcp.chemnetbase.com/.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. Rumble, John R., ed. 2019. CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: 100th Edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. https://hbcp.chemnetbase.com/.
  6. Urben, Peter G. 2017. Bretherick's Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 8th Edition. Academic Press / Elsevier, Oxford. https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780081010594.

📄 Wissenschaftliche Artikel (peer-reviewed)

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

🌐 Websites

  1. ECHA. 2023. "Guidance on the Application of the CLP Criteria." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/guidance-documents/guidance-on-clp.
  2. European Parliament. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (REACH)." Official Journal of the European Union L 396: 1–849.
  3. ECHA. 2023. "Candidate List of Substances of Very High Concern for Authorisation." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/candidate-list-table.
  4. European Parliament. 2008. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP)." Official Journal of the European Union L 353: 1–1355.
  5. ECHA. 2017. "Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets." Version 3.1. European Chemicals Agency. ECHA-17-G-01-EN. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  6. ECHA. 2022. "Restrictions Under REACH — Annex XVII." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/substances-restricted-under-reach.
  7. United Nations. 2021. Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). 9th revised ed. ST/SG/AC.10/30/Rev.9. New York and Geneva: United Nations. https://unece.org/ghs-rev9-2021.
  8. ECHA. 2020. "Understanding REACH." European Chemicals Agency. https://echa.europa.eu/regulations/reach/understanding-reach.
  9. ECHA — Zalacznik VI do CLP (klasyfikacja zharmonizowana, ATP 23; 2026-07-07) https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/annex-vi-to-clp.
  10. European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (2024) — Citric acid — Substance Infocard https://echa.europa.eu/substance-information/-/substanceinfo/100.000.973.
  11. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (2020) — Citric acid — GRAS Status (21 CFR 184.1033) https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/section-184.1033.
  12. Institut für Arbeitsschutz (IFA) (2024) — Citric acid — GESTIS Substance Database https://gestis.dguv.de/data?name=028280.
  13. U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2024) — 29 CFR 1910.120 — Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) https://www.osha.gov/hazwoper.
  14. 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.
  15. European Parliament and Council (2012) — Directive 2012/18/EU on the Control of Major-Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances (Seveso III) https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32012L0018.
  16. U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (2024) — NIOSH Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  17. European Chemicals Agency (2020) — Guidance on the Compilation of Safety Data Sheets (SDS), Version 3.1 https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/23047722/sds_en.pdf.
  18. Snyder, Lloyd R., John W. Dolan, and Joseph J. Kirkland. 2010. Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  19. Schoenmakers, Peter J.. 1986. Optimization of Chromatographic Selectivity: A Guide to Method Development. Elsevier.
  20. Snyder, L. R., and J. W. Dolan. 2007. High-Performance Gradient Elution: The Practical Application of the Linear-Solvent-Strength Model. Wiley.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
  23. Dong, Michael W.. 2019. HPLC and UHPLC for Practicing Scientists. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119313793.
  24. 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.
  25. 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.
  26. Dolan, John W.. 2013. "When to Modify Method Conditions." LCGC North America 31: 192-199. https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/when-modify-method-conditions.
  27. Meyer, Veronika R.. 2010. Practical High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. Wiley.
  28. 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.
  29. Giddings, J. Calvin. 1965. "Dynamics of Chromatography, Part I: Principles and Theory." Marcel Dekker.
  30. Poppe, Hans. 1997. "Some reflections on speed and efficiency of modern chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(97)00376-2.
  31. 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.
  32. Carr, Peter W.. 2009. "The new physical chemistry of HPLC." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2008.11.094.
  33. Knox, John H.. 1977. "Practical aspects of LC theory." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/15.9.352.
  34. Snyder, L. R., J. J. Kirkland, and J. L. Glajch. 1997. "Practical HPLC Method Development." Wiley.
  35. Engelhardt, Heinz. 2014. "100 Years of Chromatography." Wiley-VCH.
  36. Sadek, Paul C.. 2002. "The HPLC Solvent Guide." Wiley-Interscience.
  37. Snyder, L. R.. 1978. "Classification of the solvent properties of common liquids." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/16.6.223.
  38. Reichardt, Christian, and Thomas Welton. 2010. "Solvents and Solvent Effects in Organic Chemistry." Wiley-VCH.
  39. Vailaya, Anant, and Csaba Horváth. 1998. "Retention thermodynamics in hydrophobic interaction chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ie980212h.
  40. Krstulović, Andrea M., and Phyllis R. Brown. 1981. "Reversed-phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography." Wiley.
  41. Boysen, Reinhard I., and Milton T. W. Hearn. 2009. "Multi-modal HPLC of proteins." https://doi.org/10.1093/chromsci/47.8.645.
  42. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  43. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2023. "Validation of Analytical Procedures Q2(R2)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2-R2_Document_Step4_Guideline_2023_1101.pdf.
  44. 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.
  45. Snyder, Lloyd R., Joseph J. Kirkland, and John W. Dolan. 2010. "Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography." Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470508183.
  46. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "Peak tailing and resolution." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/peak-tailing-and-resolution.
  47. Vivó-Truyols, Gabriel, and Hans-Gerd Janssen. 2010. "Probabilistic approach to peak deconvolution in chromatography." https://doi.org/10.1021/ac101742z.
  48. Kromidas, Stavros. 2017. "HPLC Made to Measure: A Practical Handbook for Optimization." Wiley-VCH.
  49. Heyden, Yvan Vander, et al.. 2009. "Robustness of pharmaceutical liquid chromatographic methods." https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchromb.2008.10.052.
  50. 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/.
  51. 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.
  52. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2022. "ICH Q2(R2): Validation of Analytical Procedures." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/ICH_Q2%28R2%29_Guideline_2022_1130.pdf.
  53. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1996. "ICH Q3A: Impurities in New Drug Substances." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  54. 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.
  55. Kolthoff, Izaak Maurits, and Philip J. Elving, eds. 1978. Treatise on Analytical Chemistry, Part I: Theory and Practice. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
  56. Skoog, Douglas A., F. James Holler, and Stanley R. Crouch. 2018. Principles of Instrumental Analysis. 7th ed. Boston: Cengage Learning.
  57. Christian, Gary D., Purnendu K. Dasgupta, and Kevin A. Schug. 2014. Analytical Chemistry. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  58. 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.
  59. 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.
  60. Dolan, John W.. 2003. "How much resolution is enough?." https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/how-much-resolution-enough.
  61. USP General Chapter <621>. 2024. "Chromatography (System Suitability section)." United States Pharmacopeial Convention. https://www.usp.org/harmonization-standards/pdg/general-chapters/chromatography.
  62. US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 2018. "Reviewer Guidance: Validation of Chromatographic Methods." US Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/media/74954/download.
  63. 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.
  64. 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.
  65. Kazakevich, Yuri V., and Rosario LoBrutto, eds.. 2007. "HPLC for Pharmaceutical Scientists." Wiley-Interscience. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470087954.
  66. 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.
  67. 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.
  68. Heckert, N. A., and J. J. Filliben. 2003. "NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods." NIST Handbook 151. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/.
  69. Grubbs, Frank E. 1950. "Sample Criteria for Testing Outlying Observations." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (1): 27–58.
  70. Dixon, Wilfrid J. 1950. "Analysis of Extreme Values." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 21 (4): 488–506.
  71. Snedecor, George W., and William G. Cochran. 1989. Statistical Methods. 8th ed. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press.
  72. Student [William Sealy Gosset]. 1908. "The Probable Error of a Mean." Biometrika 6 (1): 1–25.
  73. 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.
  74. 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.
  75. 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.
  76. International Air Transport Association. 2026. Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). 67th ed. Montreal: IATA. https://www.iata.org/en/programs/cargo/dgr/.
  77. 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.
  78. 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.
  79. 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.
  80. International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH). 2005. "Validation of Analytical Procedures: Text and Methodology Q2(R1)." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q2%28R1%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  81. 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.
  82. 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.
  83. European Commission. 2014. "Commission Decision 2014/955/EU on the list of waste pursuant to Directive 2008/98/EC." Official Journal of the European Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014D0955.
  84. Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. 2020. "Rozporządzenie Ministra Klimatu z dnia 2 stycznia 2020 r. w sprawie katalogu odpadów." Dziennik Ustaw RP 2020 poz. 10. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20200000010.
  85. Główny Inspektorat Ochrony Środowiska (GIOŚ). 2024. "Baza Danych O Odpadach (BDO) — System rejestracji firm utylizacyjnych." Ministerstwo Klimatu i Środowiska. https://bdo.mos.gov.pl/.
  86. Polska — Sejm RP. 2012. "Ustawa z dnia 14 grudnia 2012 r. o odpadach." Dz.U. 2013 poz. 21 (z późn. zm.). https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20130000021.
  87. Furr, A. Keith, ed.. 2000. "CRC Handbook of Laboratory Safety." CRC Press.
  88. Pohanish, Richard P.. 2017. "Sittig's Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens." Elsevier.
  89. Lewis, Richard J.. 2012. "Sax's Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials." Wiley.
  90. NIOSH. 2024. "Pocket Guide to Chemical Hazards." U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/.
  91. OSHA. 2024. "Occupational Chemical Database — Hazardous Waste Operations (HAZWOPER)." Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/chemicaldata.
  92. European Parliament and Council. 2008. "Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive)." Official Journal of the European Union L 312/3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098.
  93. European Parliament and Council. 2009. "Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures." Official Journal of the European Union L 353. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32008R1272.
  94. 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.
  95. IPCS INCHEM. 2024. "International Programme on Chemical Safety — Waste Management Guidelines." WHO/UNEP/ILO. https://www.inchem.org/.
  96. European Parliament and Council. 2006. "Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 on Shipments of Waste." Official Journal of the European Union L 190: 1–98. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006R1013.
  97. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2000. "Q7 Good Manufacturing Practice Guide for Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients." ICH Expert Working Group. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q7%20Guideline.pdf.
  98. 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.
  99. 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.
  100. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2003. "ICH Q1A(R2): Stability Testing of New Drug Substances and Products." International Council for Harmonisation. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q1A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  101. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2006. "ICH Q3A(R2): Impurities in New Drug Substances." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q3A%28R2%29%20Guideline.pdf.
  102. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 1999. "ICH Q6A: Specifications for New Drug Substances and Products." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q6A%20Guideline.pdf.
  103. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). 2008. "ICH Q10: Pharmaceutical Quality System." ICH. https://database.ich.org/sites/default/files/Q10%20Guideline.pdf.
  104. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2024. "21 CFR Part 211: Current Good Manufacturing Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals." US Code of Federal Regulations. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-C/part-211.
  105. 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.
  106. United States Pharmacopeial Convention. 2024. "United States Pharmacopeia and National Formulary, USP 47-NF 42." USP. https://www.uspnf.com/.
  107. European Pharmacopoeia Commission. 2024. "European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition." Council of Europe — EDQM. https://www.edqm.eu/en/european-pharmacopoeia-ph-eur-11th-edition.
  108. 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.
  109. 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.

Opis

Charakterystyka

  • Wzór chemiczny: C₆H₈O₇·H₂O
  • Numer CAS: 77-92-9
  • Masa molowa: 192,12 g/mol
  • Forma: biały krystaliczny proszek
  • Czystość: spożywcza (czysty min. 99,7%)
  • Inne nazwy: kwasek cytrynowy, kwas 2-hydroksypropanotrójkarboksylowy

Zastosowania

  • Regulator kwasowości w przetworach domowych (dżemy, kompoty)
  • Środek zakwaszający do napojów i deserów
  • Usuwanie kamienia z czajników i ekspresów
  • Konserwant żywności (E330)
  • Domowy peeling enzymatyczny do twarzy

Specyfikacja

Waga netto: 1000g, przechowywać w suchym miejscu w szczelnie zamkniętym opakowaniu. Rozpuszczalny w wodzie (27g/100ml w 25°C).

Najczęściej zadawane pytania

Jak używać kwasu cytrynowego do odkamieniania czajnika?

Rozpuść 2-3 łyżki proszku w 500ml wody, zagotuj mieszaninę w czajniku, pozostaw na 15 minut, dokładnie wypłucz. Unikaj stosowania do aluminium.

Czy kwas cytrynowy jest bezpieczny dla dzieci?

Tak, w małych ilościach (jako E330) jest dopuszczony do żywności. Nie stosować czystego proszku doustnie – może podrażniać błony śluzowe.

Czy wiesz, że kwas cytrynowy naturalnie występuje w cytrusach?

Jak odróżnić kwas cytrynowy spożywczy od technicznego?

Spożywczy ma czystość min. 99,7% i certyfikat HACCP, techniczny może zawierać zanieczyszczenia. Sprawdź oznaczenie na opakowaniu.

Źródła i literatura

  • PubChem — National Library of Medicine: Właściwości fizykochemiczne kwasu cytrynowego (CID [CAS?]). pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  • Rozporządzenie UE 1333/2008: Dopuszczenie E330 jako dodatku do żywności.
  • Karta charakterystyki produktu: Zawiera informacje o bezpiecznym stosowaniu i przechowywaniu.

⚠ UWAGA — ODCZYNNIK CHEMICZNY

Kwas cytrynowy (C6H8O7) powszechnie znana jako kwasek cytrynowy, kwas cytrynowy to odczynnik chemiczny przeznaczony wyłącznie do zastosowań laboratoryjnych, badawczych i profesjonalnych.
Numer CAS: 77-92-9
Numer WE (EC): 201-069-1
Nazwa IUPAC: kwas 2-hydroksypropano-1,2,3-trikarboksylowy
Nazwa łacińska (Farmakopea): Acidum citricum

NIE NADAJE SIĘ DO SPOŻYCIA przez ludzi ani zwierzęta. Produkt nie jest lekiem, suplementem diety, kosmetykiem ani środkiem spożywczym. Jakiekolwiek inne zastosowanie niż laboratoryjne lub przemysłowe jest niezgodne z przeznaczeniem produktu.

Wymagane środki ochrony osobistej: rękawice ochronne, okulary lub gogle, fartuch laboratoryjny, praca w dobrze wentylowanym pomieszczeniu lub pod wyciągiem chemicznym.

Przed użyciem zapoznaj się z kartą charakterystyki substancji (SDS/MSDS) zgodnie z rozporządzeniem REACH (WE) 1907/2006 oraz CLP (WE) 1272/2008. Sprzedaż wyłącznie do celów technicznych.

Opinie

Na razie nie ma opinii o produkcie.

Napisz pierwszą opinię o „Citronensäure”

Podobne produkty

Inne produkty z tej kategorii