AGLAE processes data from series of proficiency tests and draws in particular information about the analytical methods. These studies aim to inform laboratories and help them understand the differences they may also observe.
- Reliability of chloroacetamides metabolites measurement
- Uncertainties of measurements and zeta-scores
- Comparison ICP/MS and other methods for Fe, Ti and Hg
- Comparison of measurements of COD by classical method and small scale sealed-tube method
- Deviations between methods - analysis of metals in clean waters
- Comparison of mineralisation methods for Fe and Sn in waste waters
- Deviations between methods - analysis of micropollutants in clean waters
- Anionic surfactants index, comparison of analytical methods (spectrophotometry with or without flux)
In this technical note, we report the reliability evaluation of measurement of metabolites of chloroacetamides carried out in 2016. To achieve this, a proficiency test has been carried out by AGLAE upon request of the Heath Regional Agency of Aquitaine Limousin Poitou Charentes which was concerned by the question of sanitary control of water. This proficiency test focused on 6 metabolites of chloroacetamides in river water and Evian water with several concentration levels. We observed that values targeted by spiking were overall well recovered by participants.
Reproducibility values were also consistent for the concentration level targeted. Performances of laboratories are overall satisfactory.
This proficiency test enabled us to prove that dosage of these 6 molecules didn’t present more difficulties than pesticides dosage in general and that laboratories control the whole process (reliability of analyses, uncertainty estimation).
Download the study Reliability of chloroacetamide metabolites
|Family||Median relative expanded uncertainty (k=2)|
Download the report on Uncertainties of measurements and zeta-scores
This study aimed to check if there are deviations between results obtained by ICP/MS and those obtained with other methods currently used for the analysis of iron, titanium and mercury in clean waters (clear waters such as tap waters or bottled waters). Proficiciency tests organised by the Association since 2012 were processed for new data treatments by separating the participants’ results according to the method they used.
- No deviations were observed during tests organised since 2012 between results obtained by ICP/MS and those obtained with other methods for the analysis of Fe, Ti and Hg in clean waters.
- However, for Fe and Ti we could observe a statistically significant tendancy, results obtained by ICP/MS are higher than those obtained by ICP/AES (or ICP/OES). ICP/MS results are on average 1% higher for Fe and 2,6% higher for Ti.
Download the study Comparison ICP/MS and other techniques for Fe, Ti and Hg
For 5 years, AGLAE has been organising interlaboratory testing schemes in natural waters and waste waters for the chemical oxygen demand (COD) by classical method and by small scale sealed-tube method (ST-COD). In total, 27 test materials were analysed and for each one we could observe deviations between measurement results of the two analytical techniques:
- in natural waters the COD tends to give higher results than the ST-COD analysis whereas in waste waters the tendency is reversed
- there is no complete equivalence between precision values (variation coefficients of reproducibility and repeatability) of both methods according to the type of matrix: the ST-COD gives more repeatable and more reproducible results than COD in natural waters, the precision of both methods tends to be similar in waste waters
Download the study comparison of measurements of COD by classical and sealed-tube method
AGLAE has been organising proficiency tests for the metals analysis for in clean waters for about twenty years. During these tests we regularly observe deviations between participants' results obtained with different analytical techniques. We have studied and quantified these deviations by processing data obtained during several interlaboratory comparisons.
The global trend for the three major methods used (ICP-AES, ICP-MS and AAS-oven) is that results obtained with ICP-AES are lower than those obtained with ICP-MS and AAS-oven. Overall, these deviations are relatively small with an average difference of 5%. We also observed that results of laboratories which used ICP were overall more reproducible.
Download the study deviations between methods - analysis of metals in clean waters (only abstract in English)
All mineralisation methods carried out for iron and tin’s digestion in waste waters do not enable laboratories to analyse totally the elements. In general, results obtained without samples’ mineralisation are lower than the ones obtained with digestion. Mineralisation with an aqua regia (HNO3/HCl) is more efficient than digestion only with nitric acid (HNO3).
- For iron, we observed that deviations between mineralisation methods decrease if the metal is added by spiking or if the content of the suspended matters decreases.
- For tin, the higher the concentration level is, the less important the deviations between methods are.
Download the study Comparison of mineralisation methods for Fe and Sn in waste waters (only abstract in English)
Several deviations between methods were identified:
- For organochlorines and PCBs, results obtained by GC/MS tend to be higher than those obtained by GC/ECD.
- For volatile organohalogens and BTX, results obtained by static headspace are less reproducible than those obtained by purge and trap. We also observed that static headspace results are higher than purge and trap results for several volatile organohalogens.
- For PAHs (with the exception of anthracene), results’ reproducibility is better with LC/fluorimetry than with GC/MS. In the same way, results obtained with LC/fluorimetry tend to be higher than the ones obtained by GC/MS.
- For urons result’s reproducibility is better with LC/DAD than with LC/MS/MS, even if the deviation is significant only for isoproturon.
Download the study deviations between methods - analysis of micropollutants in clean waters (only abstract in English)
Anionic surfactants index, comparison of analytical methods (spectrophotometry with or without flux)
The determination of anionic surfactants index in accordance to different analytical methods does not always enable laboratories to quantify surfactants in water samples, to their entirety. During AGLAE’s proficiency tests (PTs), participants usually use two analytical approaches: spectrophotometry with or without flow. It has been found that results from laboratories using the flow tend to be consistently lower than ones from laboratories which analyse without the flow.
It appears that:
- in waste waters, deviations between the methods increased due to the content of suspended matters.
- in natural waters, the higher the concentration of surfactants, the lower the results obtained using the flow method.
Download the study Anionic surfactants index, comparison of analytical methods (spectrophotometry with or without flux) (only abstract in English)