james_edin said:The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.
There is a second half to this that has not been said yet. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
One concrete data point for the thread. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.
One thing that is still open after james_edin’s answer:
Was that from a primary source or from a summary of one?
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardslucas_SP_BR said:Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.
I do not accept the framing. The question has been narrowed to the version that has a tidy answer, and the part that was dropped is the part the OP actually asked about.
Reporting back.
Update — I was wrong in the opening post, specifically about the direction. Correcting it here rather than editing it away.