Sample preparation soils

LAB / Laboratory for sample preparation (soil and sediment samples). Geological Survey of the Slovak Republic. 

Sample preparation Soil was extracted with methanol, the suspension was filtered, and the filtrate was concentrated. 

Sample preparation Soil was extracted with methanol— 0.01 M calcium chloride dihydrate (4 1), and the extract was filtered and cleaned up on a C-18 cartridge water samples were eluted directly through the cartridge. 

Preparation of soil—sediment of water samples for herbicide analysis generally has consisted of solvent extraction of the sample, followed by cleanup of the extract through Uquid—Uquid or column chromatography, and finally, concentration through evaporation (285). This complex but necessary series of procedures is time-consuming and is responsible for the high cost of herbicide analyses. The advent of soUd-phase extraction techniques in which the sample is simultaneously cleaned up and concentrated has condensed these steps and thus gready simplified sample preparation (286). 

Thus, it is shown, that use of ultrasonic at the stage of sample preparation or different type soils allows considerably to reduce time of extracts obtaining for determination of soil forms of heavy metals and realization of full decomposing for an estimation of the gross contents. 

The performance of microwave-assisted decomposition of most difficult samples of organic and inorganic natures in combination with the microwave-assisted solution preconcentration is illustrated by sample preparation of carbon-containing matrices followed by atomic spectroscopy determination of noble metals. Microwave-assisted extraction of most dangerous contaminants, in particular, pesticides and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, from soils have been developed and successfully used in combination with polarization fluoroimmunoassay (FPIA) and fluorescence detection. 

Analysis of soils is an important task in the environmental researches. Reliability of ICP-MS results of soil analysis mainly depends on chemical sampling. Recently microwave systems are widely used for preparation of different samples. Influence of microwave radiation on sample ensures a complete decomposition of sample, greatly increases the mineralization, and allows possible losses of volatile elements to be minimized. In the given study to intensify decomposition of soils we applied the microwave sample preparation system MULTIWAVE (Anton Paar, Austria and Perkin-Elmer, USA) equipped with rotor from 6 autoclaves with TEM reaction chambers of 50 ml volume. 

Analysis of methyl parathion in sediments, soils, foods, and plant and animal tissues poses problems with extraction from the sample matrix, cleanup of samples, and selective detection. Sediments and soils have been analyzed primarily by GC/ECD or GC/FPD. Food, plant, and animal tissues have been analyzed primarily by GC/thermionic detector or GC/FPD, the recommended methods of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC). Various extraction and cleanup methods (AOAC 1984 Belisle and Swineford 1988 Capriel et al. 1986 Kadoum 1968) and separation and detection techniques (Alak and Vo-Dinh 1987 Betowski and Jones 1988 Clark et al. 1985 Gillespie and Walters 1986 Koen and Huber 1970 Stan 1989 Stan and Mrowetz 1983 Udaya and Nanda 1981) have been used in an attempt to simplify sample preparation and improve sensitivity, reliability, and selectivity. A detection limit in the low-ppb range and recoveries of 100% were achieved in soil and plant and animal tissue by Kadoum (1968). GC/ECD analysis following extraction, cleanup, and partitioning with a hexane-acetonitrile system was used. 

Sample preparation for analyses Introduces some possibilities for errors. Vegetation, sod, or other non-soil material must be removed from the sample. This Is followed by grinding or mixing the sample In some way, sieving It, and then drying It when necessary. 

How critically interdependent matrix and analytical methods can be is illustrated in the example of the analysis of a soil sample. Table 7.1 shows the method dependent certified values for some common trace elements. The soil had been subjected to a multi-national, multi-laboratory comparison on a number of occasions (Houba et al. 1995) which provided extensive data. The data was subjected to a rigorous statistical program, developed for the USEPA by Kadafar (1982). This process allowed the calculation of certified values for a wide range of inorganic analytes. Uniquely, for the soil there are certified values for four very different sample preparation methods, as follows ... 

Frankenberger, Jr., and Muhammad Arshad Handbook of Weed Management Systems, edited by Albert E. Smith Soil Sampling, Preparation, and Analysis, Kim H. Tan Soil Erosion, Conservation, and Rehabilitation, edited by Menachem Agassi Plant Roots The Hidden Half, Second Edition, Revised and Expanded, edited by Yoav Waisel, Amram Eshel, and Uzi Kafkafi Photoassimilate Distribution in Plants and Crops Source-Sink Relationships, edited by Eli Zamski and Arthur A. Schaffer Mass Spectrometry of Soils, edited by Thomas W. Boutton and Shinichi Yamasaki... 

Because of the complexity of sample preparation, backscatter measurement geometry (see Fig. 3.19) is the choice for an in situ planetary Mossbauer instrument [36, 47 9]. No sample preparation is required, because the instmment is simply presented to the sample for analysis. On MER, the MIMOS II SH is mounted on a robotic arm that places it in physical contact with the analysis target (e.g., rock or soil) [36, 37]. 

LC/MS/MS is the preferred means of detection, quantitation, and confirmation of sulfonylurea herbicides in biological and environmental matrices. Therefore, recommendations for establishing and optimizing LC/MS/MS analyses common to all matrices are given first, followed by specific rationales for methods and sample preparation techniques for plant, soil, and water matrices. 

Specifically for triazines in water, multi-residue methods incorporating SPE and LC/MS/MS will soon be available that are capable of measuring numerous parent compounds and all their relevant degradates (including the hydroxytriazines) in one analysis. Continued increases in liquid chromatography/atmospheric pressure ionization tandem mass spectrometry (LC/API-MS/MS) sensitivity will lead to methods requiring no aqueous sample preparation at all, and portions of water samples will be injected directly into the LC column. The use of SPE and GC or LC coupled with MS and MS/MS systems will also be applied routinely to the analysis of more complex sample matrices such as soil and crop and animal tissues. However, the analyte(s) must first be removed from the sample matrix, and additional research is needed to develop more efficient extraction procedures. Increased selectivity during extraction also simplifies the sample purification requirements prior to injection. Certainly, miniaturization of all aspects of the analysis (sample extraction, purification, and instrumentation) will continue, and some of this may involve SEE, subcritical and microwave extraction, sonication, others or even combinations of these techniques for the initial isolation of the analyte(s) from the bulk of the sample matrix. 

Wheat samples should be sampled and prepared for analysis according to the general instructions provided in the Pesticide Analytical Manual , Vol. 1. Soil samples should be prepared for analysis by homogenization with a hammer mill or knife mill. Water samples are used without sample preparation. 

Sample preparation techniques vary depending on the analyte and the matrix. An advantage of immunoassays is that less sample preparation is often needed prior to analysis. Because the ELISA is conducted in an aqueous system, aqueous samples such as groundwater may be analyzed directly in the immunoassay or following dilution in a buffer solution. For soil, plant material or complex water samples (e.g., sewage effluent), the analyte must be extracted from the matrix. The extraction method must meet performance criteria such as recovery, reproducibility and ruggedness, and ultimately the analyte must be in a solution that is aqueous or in a water-miscible solvent. For chemical analytes such as pesticides, a simple extraction with methanol may be suitable. At the other extreme, multiple extractions, column cleanup and finally solvent exchange may be necessary to extract the analyte into a solution that is free of matrix interference. 

Sample preparation consists of homogenization, extraction, and cleanup steps. In the case of multiresidue pesticide analysis, different approaches can have substantially different sample preparation procedures but may employ the same determinative steps. For example, in the case of soil analysis, the imidazolinone herbicides require extraction of the soil in 0.5 M NaQH solution, whereas for the sulfonylurea herbicides, 0.5M NaOH solution would completely decompose the compounds. However, these two classes of compounds have the same determinative procedure. Some detection methods may permit fewer sample preparation steps, but in some cases the quality of the results or ruggedness of the method suffers when short cuts are attempted. For example, when MS is used, one pitfall is that one may automatically assume that all matrix effects are eliminated because of the specificity and selectivity of MS. 

An internal standard method gives more reliable results when elaborate sample preparation is required, as in extraction of a drug substance from biological fluids, or extraction of pesticides and herbicides from soil and plant matter. The addition of internal standard (IS) to the sample and standard acts as a marker to give accurate values of the recovery of the desired compound(s). Since the determination of wt% involves the ratio of the detector responses in the two chromatograms, the injection volume is not critical as in an external standard method. 

Isolation of the products from complex matrixes (e.g. polymer and water, air, or soil) is often a demanding task. In the process of stability testing (10 days at 40 °C, 1 h at reflux temperature) of selected plastic additives (DEHA, DEHP and Irganox 1076) in EU aqueous simulants, the additive samples after exposure were simply extracted from the aqueous simulants with hexane [63]. A sonication step was necessary to ensure maximum extraction of control samples. Albertsson et al. developed several sample preparation techniques using headspace-GC-MS [64], LLE [65] and SPE [66-68]. A practical guide to LLE is available [3]. 

Krishnamurty, K. V. et al., At. Abs. Newslett., 1976, 15, 68-70 When preparing soil and sediment samples for atomic absorption spectral analysis for trace metals, pre-oxidation with nitric acid before addition of hydrogen peroxide eliminates the danger of explosion. 

A chloric acid digestion was used by Backer 2 391 for the preparation of tissue samples. The digest is simply diluted to determine iron, zinc, and copper. The tantalum sampling boat technique was used by Emmermann and Luecke 2531 to measure lead, zinc, and silver in prepared soil solutions. White 1S81 treated ashed plants with hydroxylamine in IN hydrochloric acid to reduce and dissolve oxides of manganese, prior to its determination by atomic absorption spectroscopy. 

CF-IRMS provides reliable data on micromoles or even nanomoles of sample without the need for cryogenic concentration because more of the sample enters the ion source than in DI-IRMS. CF-IRMS instruments accept solid, liquid, or gaseous samples such as leaves, soil, algae, or soil gas, and process 100-125 samples per day. Automated sample preparation and analysis takes 3-10 min per sample. The performance of CF-IRMS systems is largely determined by the sample preparation technology. A variety of inlet and preparation systems is available, including GC combustion (GC/C), elemental analyzer, trace gas pre-concentrator and other. The novel... 

---