Literature DB >> 24705895

Study of different Chemcatcher configurations in the monitoring of nonylphenol ethoxylates and nonylphenol in aquatic environment.

Heidi Ahkola1, Sirpa Herve, Juha Knuutinen.   

Abstract

The main aim of the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC) is to protect rivers, lakes, coastal waters and groundwaters (EC 2000). The implementation of the WFD requires monitoring the concentration levels of several priority pollutants such as nonylphenol ethoxylates (NPEOs) and nonylphenol (NP) in the area of EU. The present practices for determining the concentration levels of various pollutants are, in many respects, insufficient, and there is an urgent need to develop more cost-effective sampling methods. A passive sampling tool named Chemcatcher was tested for monitoring NPEOs and NP in aqueous media. These environmentally harmful substances have been widely used in different household and industrial applications, and they affect aquatic ecosystems, for example, by acting as endocrine disrupting compounds. The suitability of different receiving phases which were sulfonated styrene-divinylbenzene reversed phase polymer (SDB-RPS), standard styrene-divinyl benzene polymer (SDB-XC) and C-18 (octadecyl) was assessed in laboratory and field trials. The effect of a diffusion membrane on the accumulation of studied compounds was also investigated. The SDB-XC and C-18 receiving phases collected the NPEOs and NP most effectively. The water flow affected the accumulation factor of the studied substances in the field trials, and the water concentrations calculated using sampling rates were tenfold lower than those measured with conventional spot sampling. The concentration of the analytes in spot samples taken from the sampling sites might be higher because in that case, the particle-bound fraction is also measured. The NPEOs readily attach to suspended matter, and therefore, the total concentration of such compounds in water is much higher. Also, the spot samples were not taken daily but once a week, while the passive samplers collected the compounds continuously for 2- or 4-week time periods. This may cause differences when comparing the results of those two methods as well. Both techniques can be applied for monitoring the concentration levels at different sampling sites, but the calculated and measured analyte concentrations in surrounding water are not necessarily comparable with each other. More experiments are still needed to study the effect of hydrological issues and humic substances on the accumulation of chemicals. However, the Chemcatcher passive sampler gives valuable information about the mean concentration levels of studied compounds during 2- or 4-week sampling period. This is important for comparison of annual monitoring results, especially in sampling sites with rapidly fluctuating concentrations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24705895     DOI: 10.1007/s11356-014-2828-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int        ISSN: 0944-1344            Impact factor:   4.223


  19 in total

1.  Performance of an in situ passive sampling system for metals in stormwater.

Authors:  Lena Björklund Blom; Gregory M Morrison; Jenny Kingston; Graham A Mills; Richard Greenwood; Thomas J R Pettersson; Sebastien Rauch
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2002-04

2.  Determination of the uptake and release rates of multifamilies of endocrine disruptor compounds on the polar C18 Chemcatcher. Three potential performance reference compounds to monitor polar pollutants in surface water by integrative sampling.

Authors:  J Camilleri; N Morin; C Miège; M Coquery; C Cren-Olivé
Journal:  J Chromatogr A       Date:  2012-03-14       Impact factor: 4.759

3.  Calibration of the Chemcatcher passive sampler for the monitoring of priority organic pollutants in water.

Authors:  Branislav Vrana; Graham A Mills; Ewa Dominiak; Richard Greenwood
Journal:  Environ Pollut       Date:  2005-12-15       Impact factor: 8.071

4.  Performance optimisation of a passive sampler for monitoring hydrophobic organic pollutants in water.

Authors:  Branislav Vrana; Graham Mills; Richard Greenwood; Jesper Knutsson; Katarina Svensson; Gregory Morrison
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2005-04-29

5.  Calibration and field application of Chemcatcher® passive samplers for detecting amitrole residues in agricultural drain waters.

Authors:  Francisco Sánchez-Bayo; Ross V Hyne; Golam Kibria; Philip Doble
Journal:  Bull Environ Contam Toxicol       Date:  2013-03-24       Impact factor: 2.151

6.  Evaluation of the aquatic passive sampler Chemcatcher for the monitoring of highly hydrophobic compounds in water.

Authors:  A de la Cal; M Kuster; M Lopez de Alda; E Eljarrat; D Barceló
Journal:  Talanta       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 6.057

7.  Application of Chemcatcher passive sampler for monitoring levels of mercury in contaminated river water.

Authors:  Rocío Aguilar-Martínez; M Milagros Gómez-Gómez; Richard Greenwood; Graham A Mills; Branislav Vrana; María A Palacios-Corvillo
Journal:  Talanta       Date:  2008-09-30       Impact factor: 6.057

Review 8.  Overview of passive Chemcatcher sampling with SPE pretreatment suitable for the analysis of NPEOs and NPs.

Authors:  Heidi Ahkola; Sirpa Herve; Juha Knuutinen
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2012-09-15       Impact factor: 4.223

9.  Evaluation of biodegradation of nonylphenol ethoxylate and lignin by combining toxicity assessment and chemical characterization.

Authors:  P Pessala; J Keränen; E Schultz; T Nakari; M Karhu; H Ahkola; J Knuutinen; S Herve; J Paasivirta; J Ahtiainen
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2009-04-02       Impact factor: 7.086

10.  Calibration and use of the Chemcatcher passive sampler for monitoring organotin compounds in water.

Authors:  R Aguilar-Martínez; M A Palacios-Corvillo; R Greenwood; G A Mills; B Vrana; M M Gómez-Gómez
Journal:  Anal Chim Acta       Date:  2008-05-02       Impact factor: 6.558

View more
  2 in total

1.  Suitability of passive sampling for the monitoring of pharmaceuticals in Finnish surface waters.

Authors:  Petra C Lindholm-Lehto; Heidi S J Ahkola; Juha S Knuutinen; Jaana Koistinen; Kirsti Lahti; Heli Vahtera; Sirpa H Herve
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2016-06-03       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Presence of active pharmaceutical ingredients in the continuum of surface and ground water used in drinking water production.

Authors:  Heidi Ahkola; Sirkku Tuominen; Sanja Karlsson; Noora Perkola; Timo Huttula; Sami Saraperä; Aki Artimo; Taina Korpiharju; Lauri Äystö; Päivi Fjäder; Timo Assmuth; Kirsi Rosendahl; Taina Nysten
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 4.223

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.