having a remarkably simple form. In short, equation (30) says that the relative asymmetry of a peak in the mobilogram equals precisely its electropherogram relative width with respect to its migration time. The latter will normally be low anyway, if we are to have a separation between the different analytes at all. Except for compounds of extremely high mobility (and thus short migration times), the impact of the transformation on peak shape should not affect peak integration. However, as we can see in case A2 in Figure , the asymmetry will also shift the position of the peak's maximum away from the correct value. While a 5% asymmetry originating from a 5% relative peak width will not be a problem for the detection of the peak shape, a potential 5% shift in peak position would definitely render the advantages of the transformation useless. On the other hand, the centre of mass of the peak seems to be roughly in the same place, as the asymmetry gives a slightly heavier tail on the right side of the mobilogram. Let us quantify this effect.