Measurement uncertainty from physical sample preparation of moss samples: Estimation of mechanical cleaning vs. rinsing |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Biological Sciences Rutgers University, 195 University Ave, Newark, NJ 07102, United States;2. Department of Landscape Architecture, Urban Forestry Laboratory, Rutgers University, 93 Lipman Dr., New Brunswick, NJ 08901, United States;3. Department of Entomology, PE Marucci Blueberry and Cranberry Center, Rutgers University, 125A Lake Oswego Rd, Chatsworth, NJ 08019, United States;1. “Torre Flavia” LTER (Long Term Ecological Research) Station, Protected area Service, Città Metropolitana di Roma Capitale, via Tiburtina, 691, 00159 Rome, Italy;2. Laboratorio di Aerobiologia, Dipartimento di Biologia, Seconda Università di Roma Tor Vergata, via della Ricerca Scientifica, 00133 Rome, Italy;3. Regione Lazio, Direzione Ambiente e sistemi naturali, via del Pescaccio, 96-00166 Rome, Italy;1. Department of Zoology, Animal Ecology and Wildlife Management, Poland;2. Institute of Animal Nutrition and Bromatology, Faculty of Biology, Animal Sciences and Bioeconomy, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, Akademicka 13, 20-950 Lublin, Poland;1. Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust, Truro, Cornwall, TR1 3LJ, UK;2. Pollard Systems Ltd, Mevagissey, Cornwall, PL26 6TL, UK;3. European Centre for the Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, Truro, TR1 3HD, UK;4. University of Exeter, Camborne School of Mines, Penryn, Cornwall, TR10 9EZ, UK;5. Public Health Dept, Fakulta Zdravotnictva a Socialnej Prace, University of Trnava, Slovakia;6. Geosense, Den Ham, The Netherlands;7. NERC Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, Penicuik, Midlothian, EH26 0QB, UK;8. Institute of Mineralogy, Russian Academy of Science, Miass, Russia;9. Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Flemington Road, Parkville, Melbourne, Australia;10. Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | Next to sampling, the physical sample preparation step is a second large source of uncertainty. To assess the level of uncertainty from sampling, sample preparation and analysis of moss material, 27 combined and duplicate samples of moss species Pleurozium schreberi (Brid.) Mitt were collected and prepared for analysis using two different treatment methods After sampling had been done, samples were dried at an ambient temperature and then each primary and duplicate sample was divided into two sub-samples for preparation. The first sub-sample was manually cleaned whereas the second one was triple rinsed with deionized water and left to dry. Subsequently, the samples were milled and digested in a close microwave system with 8 mL of HNO3 (1:1) and 1 mL of 30% H2O2. In all samples Cu, Fe and Zn were determined using GFAAS and FAAS techniques. Each sample was analyzed twice. Sampling, sample preparation and analytical uncertainty were calculated using ANOVA, RANOVA, modified RANOVA and range statistics methods. Sampling and sample preparation uncertainty varied from 3.8 to 19.8% and from 3.6 to 11.2%, respectively. For all the elements examined analytical uncertainty was below 1.1%. The comparison of element concentrations in manually cleaned and rinsed samples showed that rinsed samples were enriched in Cu and Zn, as opposed to manually cleaned that in turn displayed raised levels of Fe. However, except for Zn, these differences were not statistically significant. |
| |
| Keywords: | Uncertainty Sampling Sample preparation Analysis Mosses Trace elements |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
