Match the COA to the proposed material and lot, then compare every required result with the agreed specification. Identify gaps before acceptance.
View ashwagandha extract specifications ↗First, identify what the COA actually describes
A certificate of analysis records reported results for an identified material or batch. Start by matching the product name, botanical identity, plant part, grade and batch number with the specification and the material under discussion.
Check the issuer, issue date, manufacturing date and any stated retest or expiry date. If the supplier sends an older reference COA, use it to understand the proposed test scope; do not treat it as the result for a future shipment.
Read the assay as a complete statement
For withanolides, look for the specification limit, reported result, units, analytical method and reporting basis. Request the analyte definition and calculation details when the document does not make them clear. An “HPLC” label alone is not a complete method description.
| COA item | What to verify | Question to send if unclear |
|---|---|---|
| Identity & plant part | Withania somnifera; exact material and plant part | Does this COA apply to the offered root or whole-herb grade? |
| Batch / lot | Same identifier as the sample or proposed shipment | Which material does this lot number identify? |
| Withanolides | Limit, result, units, included analytes and basis | Please define the assay and provide its applicable method. |
| Physical parameters | Exact parameter names, limits and results | Is the ash item total ash or acid-insoluble ash? |
| Other test scope | Requested microbiology, contaminants and residual solvents | Which tests were performed, and what supporting records are available? |
Read each row against the agreed requirement. Do not substitute one parameter for another because its value looks similar.
Worked example: 5% is a limit; the result is separate
Illustrative example, not an actual batch certificate: a row says “Withanolides ≥5%”, reports “5.15%” and names HPLC. The reported value is above that stated minimum. This alone does not establish a match to your purchasing specification.
You still need to establish the plant part, analytes, reporting basis, applicable method and lot identity. Review the other required tests too. A result meeting one row does not show that every requirement has been checked.
Resolve missing tests before accepting the material
Compare the COA with your required test list. Identify absent results, unclear units, unspecified methods and generic “pass” statements that do not answer your requirement. Ask whether numerical results or supporting test reports can be provided where relevant.
State your required microbiological, contaminant and residual-solvent limits and methods. Do not infer that a test was performed because the COA contains a broad quality statement. Record unresolved items and obtain the source response before accepting the material.
Keep the specification, sample and shipment connected
Keep the approved specification version, sample identifier, relevant COA, supplier responses and order details together. If the shipment lot differs from the evaluated sample, request the relevant lot records and review any changes.
A COA does not by itself establish suitability for every application or destination. Your purchasing and technical teams should review the complete proposal for the intended use.
Need to clarify the plant part first? Read the selection guide ↗
A grade-matched document review record
Use the matching specification and method as the reference for every COA row. The checks below use the existing root and whole-herb reference scope; they do not add new test limits.
| Check | What the published references establish | What still needs confirmation |
|---|---|---|
| Plant part | Root references and a separate whole-herb 2.5% reference | Written identity for the offered material, sample and lot |
| Withanolides | HPLC is stated for each published grade reference | Included compounds, calculation basis and applicable procedure |
| Ash parameter | Root: acid-insoluble ash ≤5.0%; whole herb: ash ≤20.0% | Same named parameter, units and limit on the matching COA |
| Sieve requirement | Root: 95% through 80 mesh; whole herb: 95% through 40 mesh | Offered-grade requirement and sample result |
| Record status | Published supplier-document references | Current specification version and relevant sample/shipment lot records |
Illustrative document mismatch: an inquiry requires root-only extract, but the supplied COA identifies whole herb. A satisfactory assay result does not close that identity gap. Ask for a root-matched proposal and its records, or obtain technical approval of a specification change before proceeding.
Keep unresolved items in the purchasing record: the question, the supplier response, the document revision and your team’s decision. A generic “conforms” statement or an older reference COA cannot establish an unreported current-lot result.
Continue your purchasing review
Ashwagandha Root vs Root-and-Leaf Extract: A Buyer’s Guide ↗
Basis: the supplier-reference scope described on our product specification page. These notes explain document review; examples are illustrative and are not new test results or a current-stock statement.