Re: AMMRL: Peak volume error for 2D?

From: Michael Strain <strain_at_mango.uoregon.edu>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:56:37 -0800 (PST)

Hi Martha,

I would recommend using non-linear regression or simplex fitting to a
model lineshape with baseline as an explicitly fitted parameter.
(this is not necessarily a trival thing to do....). These procedures will
also yield statistics on the quality of the fit, though there may be other
sources of error.

Baseline issues are bad enough when trying to obtain accurate integrals on
1-D spectra, but they will "bad-squared" on volume integrals.

Do the math: what happens if you include a +/- 5% or 10% baseline error
in the volume integral? You will be amazed. With the usual S/N in 2D
spectra I would be surprised can know the "baseline" reliable to within
even 10%.

Then there all the issues with artifacts, overlapping peaks, etc, etc...

Good luck!

--Mike

-----------------------------
Michael Strain
Director, CAMCOR NMR Facility
University of Oregon
Eugene, OR 97403-1253
mstrain_at_uoregon.edu
541-346-4605 office/lab
541-556-4077 mobile
http://nmr.uoregon.edu



On Wed, 19 Feb 2014, marthadmorton_at_gmail.com wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We are trying to determine the degree of error in peak volumes of a 2D
> spectrum, specifically H-D exchange experiments. Does anyone have a good
> estimate of error?
>
> Best,
> Martha Morton
> University of Nebraska-Lincooln
> Director of Research Instrumentation
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
Received on Thu Feb 20 2014 - 13:56:39 MST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sun Jun 18 2023 - 17:22:26 MST