Literature DB >> 21833733

Assessment of sampling and analytical uncertainty of trace element contents in arable field soils.

Uwe Buczko1, Rolf O Kuchenbuch, Walter Ubelhör, Ludwig Nätscher.   

Abstract

Assessment of trace element contents in soils is required in Germany (and other countries) before sewage sludge application on arable soils. The reliability of measured element contents is affected by measurement uncertainty, which consists of components due to (1) sampling, (2) laboratory repeatability (intra-lab) and (3) reproducibility (between-lab). A complete characterization of average trace element contents in field soils should encompass the uncertainty of all these components. The objectives of this study were to elucidate the magnitude and relative proportions of uncertainty components for the metals As, B, Cd, Co, Cr, Mo, Ni, Pb, Tl and Zn in three arable fields of different field-scale heterogeneity, based on a collaborative trial (CT) (standardized procedure) and two sampling proficiency tests (PT) (individual sampling procedure). To obtain reference values and estimates of field-scale heterogeneity, a detailed reference sampling was conducted. Components of uncertainty (sampling person, sampling repetition, laboratory) were estimated by variance component analysis, whereas reproducibility uncertainty was estimated using results from numerous laboratory proficiency tests. Sampling uncertainty in general increased with field-scale heterogeneity; however, total uncertainty was mostly dominated by (total) laboratory uncertainty. Reproducibility analytical uncertainty was on average by a factor of about 3 higher than repeatability uncertainty. Therefore, analysis within one single laboratory and, for heterogeneous fields, a reduction of sampling uncertainty (for instance by larger numbers of sample increments and/or a denser coverage of the field area) would be most effective to reduce total uncertainty. On the other hand, when only intra-laboratory analytical uncertainty was considered, total sampling uncertainty on average prevailed over analytical uncertainty by a factor of 2. Both sampling and laboratory repeatability uncertainty were highly variable depending not only on the analyte but also on the field and the sampling trial. Comparison of PT with CT sampling suggests that standardization of sampling protocols reduces sampling uncertainty, especially for fields of low heterogeneity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21833733     DOI: 10.1007/s10661-011-2282-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Monit Assess        ISSN: 0167-6369            Impact factor:   2.513


  10 in total

1.  Quantifying uncertainty of the reference sampling procedure used at Dornach under different soil conditions.

Authors:  P Lischer; R Dahinden; A Desaules
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2001-01-08       Impact factor: 7.963

2.  Measurement uncertainty from physical sample preparation: estimation including systematic error.

Authors:  Jennifer A Lyn; Michael H Ramsey; Richard J Fussell; Roger Wood
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 4.616

3.  Spatial contaminant heterogeneity: quantification with scale of measurement at contrasting sites.

Authors:  Paul D Taylor; Michael H Ramsey; Philip J Potts
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2005-10-25

4.  The duplicate method of uncertainty estimation: are eight targets enough?

Authors:  Jennifer A Lyn; Michael H Ramsey; D Stephen Coad; Andrew P Damant; Roger Wood; Katy A Boon
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2007-08-13       Impact factor: 4.616

5.  Soil sampling strategies: evaluation of different approaches.

Authors:  Paolo de Zorzi; Sabrina Barbizzi; Maria Belli; Renzo Mufato; Giuseppe Sartori; Giulia Stocchero
Journal:  Appl Radiat Isot       Date:  2008-04-29       Impact factor: 1.513

6.  The effect of short-range spatial variability on soil sampling uncertainty.

Authors:  Marcel Van der Perk; Paolo de Zorzi; Sabrina Barbizzi; Maria Belli; Ales Fajgelj; Umberto Sansone; Zvonka Jeran; Radojko Jaćimović
Journal:  Appl Radiat Isot       Date:  2008-04-11       Impact factor: 1.513

7.  Estimating precision using duplicate measurements.

Authors:  Nicole Pauly Hyslop; Warren H White
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.235

8.  Improved evaluation of measurement uncertainty from sampling by inclusion of between-sampler bias using sampling proficiency testing.

Authors:  Michael H Ramsey; Bastiaan Geelhoed; Roger Wood; Andrew P Damant
Journal:  Analyst       Date:  2011-01-31       Impact factor: 4.616

9.  Analytical aspects of the CEEM soil project.

Authors:  H Muntau; A Rehnert; A Desaules; G Wagner; S Theocharopoulos; P Quevauviller
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2001-01-08       Impact factor: 7.963

10.  Thallium in French agrosystems--I. Thallium contents in arable soils.

Authors:  A Tremel; P Masson; T Sterckeman; D Baize; M Mench
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 8.071

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Heterogeneous areas-identification of outliers and calculation of soil sampling uncertainty using the modified RANOVA method.

Authors:  Sabina Dołęgowska; Agnieszka Gałuszka; Zdzisław M Migaszewski
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 2.513

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.