How to report a triplet of septets in NMR tabulation?How to construct NMR spectra from chemical shift tensors?1H NMR proton coupling1H NMR Broad peaks1H (proton) NMR spectra for alkanesIs there a consensus how to report coupling patterns greater than quartets?Interpretation of an H NMRUnusual triplet in 13C-NMRFind NMR equivalent atomsNMR Spectra OdditiesNMR spectrum of 3-hexylthiophene: why is the methyl group not a triplet?

"which" command doesn't work / path of Safari?

Patience, young "Padovan"

Why is the design of haulage companies so “special”?

Compute hash value according to multiplication method

What defenses are there against being summoned by the Gate spell?

Why don't electromagnetic waves interact with each other?

Why doesn't Newton's third law mean a person bounces back to where they started when they hit the ground?

I probably found a bug with the sudo apt install function

What typically incentivizes a professor to change jobs to a lower ranking university?

Why CLRS example on residual networks does not follows its formula?

How to add power-LED to my small amplifier?

How is the claim "I am in New York only if I am in America" the same as "If I am in New York, then I am in America?

declaring a variable twice in IIFE

Awk syntax, strange variable?

Can I interfere when another PC is about to be attacked?

TGV timetables / schedules?

Representing power series as a function - what to do with the constant after integration?

Theorems that impeded progress

If Manufacturer spice model and Datasheet give different values which should I use?

Why are 150k or 200k jobs considered good when there are 300k+ births a month?

What is the offset in a seaplane's hull?

GPS Rollover on Android Smartphones

Underlining section titles

Example of a relative pronoun



How to report a triplet of septets in NMR tabulation?


How to construct NMR spectra from chemical shift tensors?1H NMR proton coupling1H NMR Broad peaks1H (proton) NMR spectra for alkanesIs there a consensus how to report coupling patterns greater than quartets?Interpretation of an H NMRUnusual triplet in 13C-NMRFind NMR equivalent atomsNMR Spectra OdditiesNMR spectrum of 3-hexylthiophene: why is the methyl group not a triplet?













5












$begingroup$


Does anyone know the proper format to report an iso-butyl group, eg. $ceR-CH2-CcolorredH(CH3)2$, in $ce^1H$ NMR tabulation? The proton in red should be a triplet of septets, so I've written:



δ 2.72 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 2H), 1.80 (tsep, J = 5.5, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 1.02 (d, J = 5.3 Hz, 6 H).



Is the use of "tsep" acceptable here?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$
















    5












    $begingroup$


    Does anyone know the proper format to report an iso-butyl group, eg. $ceR-CH2-CcolorredH(CH3)2$, in $ce^1H$ NMR tabulation? The proton in red should be a triplet of septets, so I've written:



    δ 2.72 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 2H), 1.80 (tsep, J = 5.5, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 1.02 (d, J = 5.3 Hz, 6 H).



    Is the use of "tsep" acceptable here?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.







    $endgroup$














      5












      5








      5





      $begingroup$


      Does anyone know the proper format to report an iso-butyl group, eg. $ceR-CH2-CcolorredH(CH3)2$, in $ce^1H$ NMR tabulation? The proton in red should be a triplet of septets, so I've written:



      δ 2.72 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 2H), 1.80 (tsep, J = 5.5, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 1.02 (d, J = 5.3 Hz, 6 H).



      Is the use of "tsep" acceptable here?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.







      $endgroup$




      Does anyone know the proper format to report an iso-butyl group, eg. $ceR-CH2-CcolorredH(CH3)2$, in $ce^1H$ NMR tabulation? The proton in red should be a triplet of septets, so I've written:



      δ 2.72 (d, J = 5.5 Hz, 2H), 1.80 (tsep, J = 5.5, 5.3 Hz, 1H), 1.02 (d, J = 5.3 Hz, 6 H).



      Is the use of "tsep" acceptable here?







      organic-chemistry nmr-spectroscopy notation






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 5 hours ago









      orthocresol

      40k7115246




      40k7115246






      New contributor




      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 5 hours ago









      WahWah

      283




      283




      New contributor




      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Wah is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          5












          $begingroup$

          I personally use a space, so "t sep" as long as both "t" and "sep" are defined. I think it's slightly clearer than "tsep", but I don't think there's any official adjudication on what's a good or bad acronym.



          Also, of some interest to me is how you manage to distinguish 5.5 and 5.3 Hz. If it looks quite like an nonet, I would probably prefer reporting it as an apparent nonet, although different people may have different opinions... I know some groups will have "in-house" rules / guidelines for reporting NMR spectra, so it might be a good idea to check with your supervisor on this front.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago












          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "431"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );






          Wah is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112314%2fhow-to-report-a-triplet-of-septets-in-nmr-tabulation%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          5












          $begingroup$

          I personally use a space, so "t sep" as long as both "t" and "sep" are defined. I think it's slightly clearer than "tsep", but I don't think there's any official adjudication on what's a good or bad acronym.



          Also, of some interest to me is how you manage to distinguish 5.5 and 5.3 Hz. If it looks quite like an nonet, I would probably prefer reporting it as an apparent nonet, although different people may have different opinions... I know some groups will have "in-house" rules / guidelines for reporting NMR spectra, so it might be a good idea to check with your supervisor on this front.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago
















          5












          $begingroup$

          I personally use a space, so "t sep" as long as both "t" and "sep" are defined. I think it's slightly clearer than "tsep", but I don't think there's any official adjudication on what's a good or bad acronym.



          Also, of some interest to me is how you manage to distinguish 5.5 and 5.3 Hz. If it looks quite like an nonet, I would probably prefer reporting it as an apparent nonet, although different people may have different opinions... I know some groups will have "in-house" rules / guidelines for reporting NMR spectra, so it might be a good idea to check with your supervisor on this front.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$












          • $begingroup$
            I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago














          5












          5








          5





          $begingroup$

          I personally use a space, so "t sep" as long as both "t" and "sep" are defined. I think it's slightly clearer than "tsep", but I don't think there's any official adjudication on what's a good or bad acronym.



          Also, of some interest to me is how you manage to distinguish 5.5 and 5.3 Hz. If it looks quite like an nonet, I would probably prefer reporting it as an apparent nonet, although different people may have different opinions... I know some groups will have "in-house" rules / guidelines for reporting NMR spectra, so it might be a good idea to check with your supervisor on this front.






          share|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          I personally use a space, so "t sep" as long as both "t" and "sep" are defined. I think it's slightly clearer than "tsep", but I don't think there's any official adjudication on what's a good or bad acronym.



          Also, of some interest to me is how you manage to distinguish 5.5 and 5.3 Hz. If it looks quite like an nonet, I would probably prefer reporting it as an apparent nonet, although different people may have different opinions... I know some groups will have "in-house" rules / guidelines for reporting NMR spectra, so it might be a good idea to check with your supervisor on this front.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered 5 hours ago









          orthocresolorthocresol

          40k7115246




          40k7115246











          • $begingroup$
            I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago

















          • $begingroup$
            I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago











          • $begingroup$
            Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
            $endgroup$
            – Mathew Mahindaratne
            2 hours ago










          • $begingroup$
            @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
            $endgroup$
            – orthocresol
            2 hours ago
















          $begingroup$
          I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
          $endgroup$
          – Mathew Mahindaratne
          2 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          I used to call it heptet, but nowadays, those have changed. For example, now they call all pentets as quintets. :-) About 5.5 vs 5.3, I think OP has been using $pu400 MHz$ or bigger machine so they can measure up to $pu0.01 Hz$.
          $endgroup$
          – Mathew Mahindaratne
          2 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago





          $begingroup$
          @MathewMahindaratne, it's not realistically possible to measure couplings to an accuracy of 0.01 Hz. If you take a 400 MHz machine, a spectral width of 20 ppm (= 8000 Hz), and 64k data points during acquisition (32k real + 32k complex), then the resolution is ~0.25 Hz. Even this is not enough to accurately distinguish a coupling of 5.5 and 5.3 Hz, you can see this for yourself at this website, or using e.g. MestReNova - it is indistinguishable from a perfect nonet.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago













          $begingroup$
          You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago





          $begingroup$
          You would also need to take into consideration linewidth contributions from e.g. field inhomogeneity and relaxation. It's very, very difficult to distinguish two couplings differing by 0.2 Hz.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago













          $begingroup$
          Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
          $endgroup$
          – Mathew Mahindaratne
          2 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          Sure, but computer gives your peak picking to 4 decimal places, so I think OP might think it's okay to report that way without concerning the uncertainty. Nonetheless, I wouldn't report that way in a journal article.
          $endgroup$
          – Mathew Mahindaratne
          2 hours ago












          $begingroup$
          @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago





          $begingroup$
          @MathewMahindaratne, sorry, I think I might have misunderstood you, actually; I think it's fair to say that you can measure 5.5 and 5.3 for two different multiplets, i.e. the CH2 and the (CH3)2 signals, although the uncertainty is definitely still there. I was more concerned about the CH peak, where the shape of that multiplet (on its own) won't allow you to extract two different couplings of 0.2 Hz difference from that one multiplet.
          $endgroup$
          – orthocresol
          2 hours ago











          Wah is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          Wah is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Wah is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











          Wah is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














          Thanks for contributing an answer to Chemistry Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fchemistry.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f112314%2fhow-to-report-a-triplet-of-septets-in-nmr-tabulation%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Best approach to update all entries in a list that is paginated?Best way to add items to a paginated listChoose Your Country: Best Usability approachUpdate list when a user is viewing the list without annoying themWhen would the best day to update your webpage be?What should happen when I add a Row to a paginated, sorted listShould I adopt infinite scrolling or classical pagination?How to show user that page objects automatically updateWhat is the best location to locate the comments section in a list pageBest way to combine filtering and selecting items in a listWhen one of two inputs must be updated to satisfy a consistency criteria, which should you update (if at all)?

          Вунгтау (аеропорт) Загальні відомості | Див. також | Посилання | Навігаційне меню10°22′00″ пн. ш. 107°05′00″ сх. д. / 10.36667° пн. ш. 107.08333° сх. д. / 10.36667; 107.0833310°22′00″ пн. ш. 107°05′00″ сх. д. / 10.36667° пн. ш. 107.08333° сх. д. / 10.36667; 107.083337731608Vinh AirportVinh airport facelift improves serviceвиправивши або дописавши їївиправивши або дописавши їїр

          Тонконіг бульбистий Зміст Опис | Поширення | Екологія | Господарське значення | Примітки | Див. також | Література | Джерела | Посилання | Навігаційне меню1114601320038-241116202404kew-435458Poa bulbosaЭлектронный каталог сосудистых растений Азиатской России [Електронний каталог судинних рослин Азіатської Росії]Малышев Л. Л. Дикие родичи культурных растений. Poa bulbosa L. - Мятлик луковичный. [Малишев Л. Л. Дикі родичи культурних рослин. Poa bulbosa L. - Тонконіг бульбистий.]Мятлик (POA) Сем. Злаки (Мятликовые) [Тонконіг (POA) Род. Злаки (Тонконогові)]Poa bulbosa Linnaeus, Sp. Pl. 1: 70. 1753. 鳞茎早熟禾 lin jing zao shu he (Description from Flora of China) [Poa bulbosa Linnaeus, Sp. Pl. 1: 70. 1753. 鳞茎早熟禾 lin jing zao shu he (Опис від Флора Китаю)]Poa bulbosa L. – lipnice cibulkatá / lipnica cibulkatáPoa bulbosa в базі даних Poa bulbosa на сайті Poa bulbosa в базі даних «Global Biodiversity Information Facility» (GBIF)Poa bulbosa в базі даних «Euro + Med PlantBase» — інформаційному ресурсі для Євро-середземноморського розмаїття рослинPoa bulbosa L. на сайті «Плантариум»