Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous AbstractDistribution of legacy and emerging semivolatile organic compounds in five indoor matrices in a residential environment    Next AbstractBioprospection of Native Antagonistic Rhizobacteria From the Peruvian Coastal Ecosystems Associated with Phaseolus vulgaris »

Environ Sci Policy


Title:Global intercomparison of polyurethane foam passive air samplers evaluating sources of variability in SVOC measurements
Author(s):Melymuk L; Nizzetto PB; Harner T; White KB; Wang X; Tominaga MY; He J; Li J; Ma J; Ma WL; Aristizabal BH; Dreyer A; Jimenez B; Munoz-Arnanz J; Odabasi M; Dumanoglu Y; Yaman B; Graf C; Sweetman A; Klanova J;
Address:"RECETOX, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. NILU - Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Kjeller, Norway. Air Quality Processes Research Section, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Toronto, Canada. Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences (QAEHS), The University of Queensland, Australia. CETESB - Sao Paulo State Environmental Company, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, University of Nottingham Ningbo China, Ningbo, China. State Key Laboratory of Organic Geochemistry, Guangzhou Institute of Geochemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China. College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China. International Joint Research Center for Persistent Toxic Substances (IJRC-PTS), Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin, China. Hydraulic Engineering and Environmental Research Group (GTAIHA), Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Manizales, Colombia. Eurofins GfA GmbH (Now Operating Under the Name ANECO Institut fur Umweltschutz GmbH & Co), Germany. Department of Instrumental Analysis and Environmental Chemistry, IQOG-CSIC, Madrid, Spain. Department of Environmental Engineering, Dokuz Eylul University, Buca-Izmir, Turkey. Lancaster Environment Centre, Lancaster University, UK"
Journal Title:Environ Sci Policy
Year:2021
Volume:125
Issue:
Page Number:1 - 9
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.003
ISSN/ISBN:1462-9011 (Print) 1873-6416 (Electronic) 1462-9011 (Linking)
Abstract:"Polyurethane foam passive air samplers (PUF-PAS) are the most common type of passive air sampler used for a range of semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), including regulated persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and emerging contaminants (e.g., novel flame retardants, phthalates, current-use pesticides). Data from PUF-PAS are key indicators of effectiveness of global regulatory actions on SVOCs, such as the Global Monitoring Plan of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. While most PUF-PAS use similar double-dome metal shielding, there is no standardized dome size, shape, or deployment configuration, with many different PUF-PAS designs used in regional and global monitoring. Yet, no information is available on the comparability of data from studies using different PUF-PAS designs. We brought together 12 types of PUF-PAS used by different research groups around the world and deployed them in a multi-part intercomparison to evaluate the variability in reported concentrations introduced by different elements of PAS monitoring. PUF-PAS were deployed for 3 months in outdoor air in Kjeller, Norway in 2015-2016 in three phases to capture (1) the influence of sampler design on data comparability, (2) the influence of analytical variability when samplers are analyzed at different laboratories, and (3) the overall variability in global monitoring data introduced by differences in sampler configurations and analytical methods. Results indicate that while differences in sampler design (in particular, the spacing between the upper and lower sampler bowls) account for up to 50 % differences in masses collected by samplers, the variability introduced by analysis in different laboratories far exceeds this amount, resulting in differences spanning orders of magnitude for POPs and PAHs. The high level of variability due to analysis in different laboratories indicates that current SVOC air sampling data (i.e., not just for PUF-PAS but likely also for active air sampling) are not directly comparable between laboratories/monitoring programs. To support on-going efforts to mobilize more SVOC data to contribute to effectiveness evaluation, intercalibration exercises to account for uncertainties in air sampling, repeated at regular intervals, must be established to ensure analytical comparability and avoid biases in global-scale assessments of SVOCs in air caused by differences in laboratory performance"
Keywords:Global air monitoring PUF disk Passive air sampling Persistent organic pollutants Semi-volatile organic compounds Stockholm Convention;
Notes:"PubMed-not-MEDLINEMelymuk, Lisa Nizzetto, Pernilla Bohlin Harner, Tom White, Kevin B Wang, Xianyu Tominaga, Maria Yumiko He, Jun Li, Jun Ma, Jianmin Ma, Wan-Li Aristizabal, Beatriz H Dreyer, Annekatrin Jimenez, Begona Munoz-Arnanz, Juan Odabasi, Mustafa Dumanoglu, Yetkin Yaman, Baris Graf, Carola Sweetman, Andrew Klanova, Jana eng England 2021/11/05 Environ Sci Policy. 2021 Nov; 125:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2021.08.003"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 26-06-2024