Literature DB >> 19708370

Field performance of seven passive sampling devices for monitoring of hydrophobic substances.

Ian J Allan1, Kees Booij, Albrecht Paschke, Branislav Vrana, Graham A Mills, Richard Greenwood.   

Abstract

The performance of seven passive sampling devices for the monitoring of dissolved concentrations of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), hexachlorobenzene, and p,p'-DDE was evaluated through simultaneous field exposures of 7-28 days in the River Meuse (The Netherlands). Data from the Chemcatcher, low density polyethylene membranes, two versions of the membrane-enclosed sorptive coating (MESCO) sampler, silicone rods, silicone strips and semipermeable membrane devices (SPMD) was assessed through rate of dissipation of performance reference compounds (PRCs), mass of analyte absorbed by the samplers and time-weighted average concentration (C(TWA)) data. Consistent PRC data throughout the range of samplers tested here confirmed the transition from membrane- to boundary layer-controlled exchange at log K(ow) 4.5-5.0. The comparison of sampler surface area-normalized masses absorbed for analytes under boundary layer-control showed some variability between samplers that can be attributed to the conformation and deployment of the various samplers and to the uncertainty associated with the analysis conducted in different laboratories. Despite different modes of calculation, relatively consistent C(TWA) were obtained for the different samplers. The observed variability is likely to be due to the uncertainty of sampler-water partition coefficients and the extrapolation of analyte uptake rates at the high log K(ow) range (under boundary layer-controlled exchange) from a narrow PRC data range, and these issues require further work. Finally, the usefulness of passive sampler-generated contaminant concentrations is demonstrated through the comparison with institutional monitoring and with European Water Framework Directive Environmental Quality Standards (EQS).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19708370     DOI: 10.1021/es900608w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  18 in total

1.  Use of passive sampling devices for monitoring and compliance checking of POP concentrations in water.

Authors:  Rainer Lohmann; Kees Booij; Foppe Smedes; Branislav Vrana
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  In vivo contaminant partitioning to silicone implants: Implications for use in biomonitoring and body burden.

Authors:  Steven G O'Connell; Nancy I Kerkvliet; Susan Carozza; Diana Rohlman; Jamie Pennington; Kim A Anderson
Journal:  Environ Int       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 9.621

3.  An approach for calculating a confidence interval from a single aquatic sample for monitoring hydrophobic organic contaminants.

Authors:  Melissa M Matzke; Sarah E Allan; Kim A Anderson; Katrina M Waters
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2012-10-20       Impact factor: 3.742

4.  Characterization and Application of Passive Samplers for Monitoring of Pesticides in Water.

Authors:  Lutz Ahrens; Atlasi Daneshvar; Anna E Lau; Jenny Kreuger
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 1.355

5.  Development of quantitative structure-property relationship model for predicting the field sampling rate (Rs) of Chemcatcher passive sampler.

Authors:  Yaqi Wang; Huihui Liu; Xianhai Yang
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2020-01-14       Impact factor: 4.223

6.  Estimating risk at a Superfund site using passive sampling devices as biological surrogates in human health risk models.

Authors:  Sarah E Allan; Gregory J Sower; Kim A Anderson
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2011-07-08       Impact factor: 7.086

Review 7.  Methods to assess bioavailability of hydrophobic organic contaminants: Principles, operations, and limitations.

Authors:  Xinyi Cui; Philipp Mayer; Jay Gan
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2012-10-16       Impact factor: 8.071

8.  Bridging environmental mixtures and toxic effects.

Authors:  Sarah E Allan; Brian W Smith; Robert L Tanguay; Kim A Anderson
Journal:  Environ Toxicol Chem       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 3.742

Review 9.  Critical review of factors governing data quality of integrative samplers employed in environmental water monitoring.

Authors:  Isaac B Roll; Rolf U Halden
Journal:  Water Res       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 11.236

10.  Improvements in pollutant monitoring: optimizing silicone for co-deployment with polyethylene passive sampling devices.

Authors:  Steven G O'Connell; Melissa A McCartney; L Blair Paulik; Sarah E Allan; Lane G Tidwell; Glenn Wilson; Kim A Anderson
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 8.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.