| Literature DB >> 31035734 |
Evgeny Legin1,2, Olesya Zadorozhnaya3,4, Maria Khaydukova5, Dmitry Kirsanov6,7, Vladimir Rybakin8, Anatoly Zagrebin9, Natalia Ignatyeva10, Julia Ashina11, Subrata Sarkar12, Subhankar Mukherjee13, Nabarun Bhattacharyya14,15, Rajib Bandyopadhyay16,17, Andrey Legin18,19.
Abstract
The paper describes a wide-range practical application of the potentiometric multisensor system (MS) (1) for integral safety evaluation of a variety of natural waters at multiple locations, under various climatic conditions and anthropogenic stress and (2) for close to real consistency evaluation of waste water purification processes at urban water treatment plants. In total, 25 natural surface water samples were collected around St. Petersburg (Russia), analyzed as is, and after ultrasonic treatment. Toxicity of the samples was evaluated using bioassay and MS. Relative errors of toxicity assessment with MS in these samples were below 20%. The system was also applied for fast determination of integral water quality using chemical oxygen demand (COD) values in 20 samples of water from river and ponds in Kolkata (India) and performed with an acceptable precision of 20% to 22% in this task. Furthermore, the MS was applied for fast simultaneous evaluation of COD, biochemical oxygen demand, inorganic phosphorous, ammonia, and nitrate nitrogen at two waste water treatment plants (over 320 samples). Reasonable precision (within 25%) of such analysis is acceptable for rapid water safety evaluation and enables fast control of the purification process. MS proved to be a practicable analytical instrument for various real-world tasks related to water safety monitoring.Entities:
Keywords: bioassay technique; cavitation ultrasound treatment; multisensor system; natural and waste water safety evaluation; water toxicity measurements
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31035734 PMCID: PMC6547355 DOI: 10.3390/s19092019
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Scheme of the ultrasound device. 1—ultrasound generator, 2—magnetostrictive transducer, 3—waveguide, 4—vessel with water.
Figure 2Potentiometric multisensor system. 1—multichannel digital mV-meter, 2—meter, 3—cell with sample, 4—magnet stirrer, 5—personal computer.
Toxicity values of the water samples evaluated by the Daphia magna bioassay before and after ultrasonic treatment (UST).
| No | The Site (River, Lake, Pond) | Toxicity before UST | Toxicity after UST |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pola | 10 | 0 |
| 2 | Shelon’ | 30 | 20 |
| 3 | Veryasha | 10 | 10 |
| 4 | Ilmen’ Lake | 40 | 0 |
| 5 | Volhov-2 | 80 | 10 |
| 6 | Volhov-Novgorod | 70 | 30 |
| 7 | Tigoda | 60 | 0 |
| 8 | Perehoda | 60 | 20 |
| 9 | Nisha | 10 | 10 |
| 10 | Msta | 20 | 20 |
| 11 | Park Pobedy pond | 100 | 10 |
| 12 | Big Pond | 0 | 10 |
| 13 | Volhov-Kotovitsy | 100 | 0 |
| 14 | Vytegra | 40 | 20 |
| 15 | Volhov-Kirishi | 50 | 30 |
| 16 | Volhov–upper power plant | 30 | 10 |
| 17 | Volhov–below power plant | 10 | 10 |
| 18 | Megra | 80 | 40 |
| 19 | Tuloksa | 10 | 60 |
| 20 | Mor’e | 10 | 70 |
The parameters of the “measured vs. predicted” plots for partial least squares (PLS) regression models predicting water toxicity in terms of Daphnia magna (death rate 0–100%) from the multisensor system response.
| Experimental Layout/Results | Slope | Offset | RMSE | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ultrasonic treatment (20 samples) | ||||
| Calibration | 0.95 | 2.2 | 7 | 0.95 |
| Segmented cross-validation | 0.76 | 9.3 | 21 | 0.65 |
| After ultrasonic treatment (20 samples) | ||||
| Calibration | 0.93 | 1.2 | 5 | 0.93 |
| Segmented cross-validation | 0.83 | 5.1 | 11 | 0.69 |
Figure 3Principal component analysis (PCA) score plot for samples from the Zelenogorsk water treatment plant.
Figure 4Measured vs. predicted plot of the PLS regression model for chemical oxygen demand (COD) based on three latent variables. Parameters of calibration/validation: slope 0.90/0.85; offset 5.0/7.4; RMSE 7.1/9.1; R2 0.90/0.85.
The parameters of “measured vs. predicted” plots for PLS models predicting the sodium hypochlorite content from the multisensor system response.
| Experimental Layout/Results | Slope | Offset | RMSE | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration | 0.99 | 0.00 | 0.05 | 0.99 |
| Full cross-validation | 0.99 | 0.01 | 0.12 | 0.95 |
Figure 5Regression coefficients for different sensors of the array in the PLS model for hypochlorite quantification.
The values of root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) for water parameter’s evaluation using the multisensor system.
| Parameter | The Range of the Parameter in the Calibration Samples, mg/L | RMSEP, mg/L |
|---|---|---|
| COD | 22–427 | 69 |
| Nitrate nitrogen | 0.1–9.5 | 1.7 |
| Ammonia nitrogen | 0.3–30.0 | 3.9 |
| Phosphorous | 0.02–44.00 | 8.4 |
| BOD | 2–185 | 26 |
The values of RMSEP for the determination of COD by the multisensor system employing two separate concentration ranges.
| Parameter | The Range of the Parameter in the Calibration Samples, mg/L | RMSEP, mg/L |
|---|---|---|
| COD at inlet | 230–590 | 52 |
| COD at outlet | 9–57 | 8 |
Figure 6Measured vs. predicted plot of the PLS regression model for COD of natural water samples collected in India. Parameters of calibration/validation: slope 0.94/0.90; offset 1.07/1.61; RMSE 3.1/4.7; R2 0.94/0.87. The model was based on four latent variables.