Comparison
Both track cultures by vessel and scan a label with a phone. The difference a lab feels first is where the free line sits, and whether the record is built around a vessel or around a lot.
Free plan to start. No card needed.
Read from their published pages rather than inferred, so you can check every row yourself.
| Compared | VitrOS | xPlant Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Free | VitrOS30-day free trial, no card. Paid after that. | xPlant ProA free plan with no time limit, no card. Paid plans when a lab needs more seats or records. |
| Published prices | VitrOSYes — Solo $49, Growth $99, Pro $199 a month, Enterprise on request. | xPlant ProYes, on the plans page. |
| The unit the record is built on | VitrOSThe vessel: vessels per plan tier, from 500 to unlimited. | xPlant ProThe lot: lab code and cut week, with tubs and plants counted separately per stage. |
| Scanning | VitrOSBarcode scanning from a phone, no dedicated hardware. | xPlant ProQR labels printed for jars, trays and batches, scanned on a phone at the hood. |
| Contamination | VitrOSContamination tracking, trend analysis and alerts on higher tiers. | xPlant ProContamination observations logged where they were seen, on every plan. |
| Written guides | VitrOSBlog present, no posts published. | xPlant Pro21 guides, a history series, public media recipes and a supplies catalog. |
| Languages | VitrOSEnglish. | xPlant ProSeven, in the application. |
An honest reading. Both are real products; they are built around different units and different first months.
You think in vessels and want per-vessel analytics — contamination correlation by hood and station, backward scheduling, ZPL label printing — and a 30-day trial is a comfortable way to evaluate. Their pricing is clear and their tiers are easy to place yourself in.
You want to start free and stay free while the lab is small, you plan by cut week rather than by date, you count in tubs and plants at once, or somebody outside the lab — an inspector, an exporter, a customer — asks you for the record.
The record is built on the lot, a lab code and a cut week, and every stage adds to it. When somebody asks, the history is already assembled.
Initiation
The lot starts under its lab code and cut week.
Lab code and cut week
Multiplication
Transfers add to the same lot.
Tubs and plants counted at the stage
QR labels for jars, trays and batches
Rooting
Observations land where they were made.
Contamination logged where it was seen
Acclimatization
The lot's history reads end to end.
Reported by lot, crop and stage
An overview of what the record keeps, not a protocol.
Three moments a lab usually recognises.
A customer, an exporter or an inspector wants the history of a batch. Open the lot by lab code and cut week and it is already there: each stage, the tubs and plants counted at it, and the contamination seen along the way.
Contamination is logged where it was seen and reported by lot, crop and stage, so a rise at one stage shows up as a pattern you can point at rather than a feeling at the end of the season.
Bring the export and the import reads it. Start one crop on the free plan, run it beside the sheet until you trust it, and move the rest when you know.
A vessel-first record answers “where is this jar and what has happened to it” very well. A lot-first record answers that too, and also answers “what did week 34 of this lab code produce, across every tub and every stage” without adding the rows up by hand. Which one fits you is a question about how your bench already writes things down, not about which product is better built.
The other difference is the first month. A trial asks you to decide by a date; a free plan lets you keep one crop in it for a season and decide when you actually know. Neither is generous or mean — they are different bets about when a lab can tell.
Is xPlant Pro a VitrOS alternative?
It is an alternative in the sense that a lab choosing one would consider the other, and the table above is the honest version of that choice. It is not a clone: the record is built on lots and cut weeks rather than on vessels, and the free line sits in a different place.
Can I move from VitrOS to xPlant Pro?
Bring an export as a spreadsheet and the import reads it. The guide on the tissue culture spreadsheet lists the columns the import expects, and the free plan is enough to try one crop before you move anything else.
Is xPlant Pro cheaper?
For a small lab it starts at nothing and stays there. Above that, compare the plans page against theirs — both are published, so the comparison is arithmetic rather than a sales call.
Do you do the per-vessel analytics they do?
Not all of it. Contamination correlation by hood and station, and backward scheduling from a delivery date, are theirs today. We record contamination where it was seen and report by lot, crop and stage.
Longer thinking on the same problem, from the xPlant Pro company page.
On the moment a lab's plants, explants, transfers, contamination notes and recipes end up living in different tabs, notebooks and photo folders.
Why accurate records kept in separate places still make a quality question hard to answer months later, and what following an explant back through its history changes.
The free plan takes a lab code, a cut week and the columns you already keep. Put one line in both and see which record answers your questions.
Free plan to start. No card needed.
Every row about VitrOS was read from vitroslabs.com on 16 September 2026. Plans and prices move; if a row is out of date, it is our mistake and we would like to know. Check any row yourself at vitroslabs.com. VitrOS is their name, not ours, and they do not endorse this page.