A reader’s guide to reliable peptide research resources
A curated starting point for definitions, analytical measurement and research methods, with the scope of each source made clear.
Start with the question you need to answer
A useful reference has a defined scope. This directory separates definitions, measurement guidance and study methods so that readers can choose a source for the question at hand. Inclusion is not an endorsement of FIG Peptides by an author, institution or laboratory.
Definitions: what does the term mean?
- IUPAC Gold Book: peptides. A chemistry definition of the peptide class. Useful for terminology; not evidence about a supplier’s product.
- IUPAC Gold Book: amino-acid residue. Explains what remains of an amino acid in a chain and the language used for chain positions.
- NHGRI: peptide. An accessible introductory glossary entry. Its short-chain description is a teaching convention, not a product qualification test.
Measurement: what does the number establish?
- IUPAC technical report: SI value assignment of organic purity. A metrology reference on purity, calibration and uncertainty. More technical than an introductory COA guide. It does not assess any FIG lot.
- Bachem technical FAQ. A peptide manufacturer’s explanations of purity, peptide content and related terminology. Useful technical context from a commercial source; not an independent evaluation of FIG.
Research practice: how was the experiment supported?
- NIH notice on authentication of key biological and chemical resources. Describes NIH application expectations within its stated scope. It is not a blanket certification requirement for every private laboratory.
- NCATS Assay Guidance Manual. A collection of chapters on assay development and validation. Read the relevant chapter’s authors, date and limitations rather than treating the whole collection as one protocol.
A published case study to read critically
Li and colleagues’ peptide quantification comparison using oxytocin compares analytical approaches in a particular study. Our measurement case study discusses what the abstract reports and what it does not establish. This is an external published study, not a FIG customer case study. Full-paper review is still required before expanding the discussion beyond the verified abstract.
How this library chooses and updates material
We prioritize the original source, identify whether it is a glossary, guidance document, manufacturer explanation or experimental paper, and keep conclusions within that scope. For an experimental paper, useful notes include the material, model, method, endpoint and limitations. Product claims require their own supporting records.
If a source changes, is corrected or is retracted, the related explanation should be reviewed. If a link stops working, its absence should be investigated instead of replacing it with an unsupported paraphrase. Contact FIG Peptides to flag a factual concern.
Directory prepared October 5, 2026. External materials retain their own publication and revision dates.
This library discusses laboratory research and published methods. It does not provide medical advice or establish the suitability of any product for human or veterinary use.