You are here:
COMPARISON OF THE METHODS FOR COLLECTING INTERSTITIAL WATER FOR TRACE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS AND METAL ANALYSES
Citation:
Shults, D., S. Ferraro, L. Smith, F. Roberts, AND C. Poindexter. COMPARISON OF THE METHODS FOR COLLECTING INTERSTITIAL WATER FOR TRACE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS AND METAL ANALYSES. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., EPA/600/J-93/196 (NTIS PB93199552).
Description:
Several common materials and methods used to collect interstitial water were evaluated to determine their effect on the accuracy and precision of measured concentrations of selected organic compounds and metals. e compared the concentration of pollutants in doses seawater before and after exposure to stainless steel and Teflon centrifuge tubes, glass fiber and Nuclepore filters, cellulose dialysis membranes and gritted glass tubes. xposure to most hardware materials did not significantly affect the concentrations of four metals (Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb) but there was significant loss (up to 79%) of two organic compounds (fluoranthene, p,p'-DDE) to almost all the hardware materials tests. f five commonly used IW collection methods (centrifuging, centrifugal drainage or basal cup, squeezing, vacuum filtration and dialysis) investigated, the centrifuge method was judged the most accurate and precise for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and PCBs. ll IW collection methods tested showed high variability for the metals. s a result, with one exception (Cu), there was no significant difference detected in the accuracy of the methods for metals.