Monoisotopic versus average mass
A 3 Da distinction that produces a 620 ppm error when confused. The most common single mistake in submitted identity data.
What a mass measurement establishes, what resolution buys you, and the specific compound pairs where unit resolution is not enough.
Identity confirmation by mass spectrometry compares an observed mass against a theoretical mass calculated from the molecular formula. If they agree within a stated tolerance, the observed species has the elemental composition of the named compound. That is the entire claim. It is a strong claim and a narrow one.
The index computes theoretical masses monoisotopically — the sum of the masses of the most abundant isotope of each atom — and every ppm error on the site is calculated against a monoisotopic value. For a 4,813 Da peptide the monoisotopic and average masses differ by about 3 Da, which is 620 ppm. Reporting an observed monoisotopic mass against a theoretical average mass produces an apparent error of that size, and it is the single commonest cause of a spurious mass-accuracy flag in the index.
Electrospray ionisation produces multiply protonated species. The measured quantity is m/z, not mass:
m/z = (M + z × 1.007276) / z for M = 4 810.4103 Da (tirzepatide): z = 3 m/z = 1 604.4794 z = 4 m/z = 1 203.6106 ← base peak z = 5 m/z = 963.0900 z = 6 m/z = 802.7429
The neutral mass is recovered by deconvolution across the charge-state envelope. An error of one in the assigned charge state produces a mass error of hundreds of daltons, so a very large apparent error should always prompt a check of the assignment before any conclusion about the material.
A single-quadrupole instrument at unit resolution can tell a 4,813 Da species from a 4,764 Da species. It cannot tell a 1,025.16 Da species from a 1,024.18 Da species with any confidence. The index therefore records identity as confirmed only where a high-resolution instrument was used, and as consistent with otherwise, naming the alternatives not excluded.
| Pair | Δ mass | Δ retention on RG-2 | Excluded at unit resolution? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bremelanotide / Melanotan II | 0.98 Da | 0.32 min | No |
| Deamidated / parent (any peptide) | 0.98 Da | 0.2–0.5 min | No |
| Reduced / oxidised cyclic peptide | 2.02 Da | 0.5–1.2 min | No |
| Hexarelin / GHRP-6 | 14.02 Da | 0.48 min | Marginal |
| Met sulfoxide / parent | 15.99 Da | 0.3–0.9 min | Yes |
| Survodutide / Tirzepatide | 45.90 Da | 0.28 min | Yes |
| AOD-9604 / hGH frag 176-191 | 163.06 Da | 0.84 min | Yes |
| Any diastereomer pair | 0.00 Da | 0.10–0.26 min | No — and no MS resolution helps |
Sodium and potassium adducts appear at +21.982/z and +37.956/z relative to the protonated species. They are not impurities — they are the same molecule with a different cation attached in the source — and counting them as impurities inflates the impurity total. They are typically 5–17 % of the protonated peak intensity for sodium and under 7 % for potassium, and their presence is a glassware and diluent artefact.
Cited because they are the documents the acceptance criteria above are taken from. The index applies them as written and states every deviation.
A 3 Da distinction that produces a 620 ppm error when confused. The most common single mistake in submitted identity data.
Recovering a neutral mass from an electrospray envelope, the arithmetic, and the failure modes that produce confident wrong answers.
What ppm means at 340 Da and at 4,813 Da, how calibration drifts, and the checks that separate an instrument problem from a material problem.
Epimerisation during synthesis, why the resulting impurity is functionally significant and analytically invisible, and what it takes to see it.