Sedimentation sample preparation

Batch tests (i. e., tests on individual waste materials) are conducted with the provided solid suspensions (e.g., soils such as Woodburn, Sagehill, and Olyic, as well as two bottom sediment samples) prepared with previously air-dried solids (i. e., soils and bottom sediments), ground to a uniform powdery texture for mixing with the eluates from the 24-h batch leaching test of the different SWMs/COMs. The concentrations of eluates in solution were designed to evaluate the capability of different environmental solids to adsorb available contaminants. The solid particles were fully dispersed with the aqueous phase to achieve complete adsorption. Common practice is to use a solid solution ratio of 1 g 4 ml [ 1 ], together with proper tumbling of the samples at a constant temperature (e.g., at least 24 h in a constant temperature environment of 20°C). 

Methods for lake sediment sample preparation for cellulose carbon and oxygen isotope analyses have been developed at the University ofWaterloo - Environmental Isotope Laboratory (UW-EIL), (Heemskerk Diebolt, 1994 Edwards et al, 1997 Elgood et al., 1997). 

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). 

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. 

A procedure has been developed for the analysis of a- and (3-endosulfan and endosulfan sulfate in fish, water, and sediments (Chau and Terry 1972 Musial et al. 1976). This procedure involves the acetylation of endosulfan residues into their diacetates and subsequent quantification by GC/ECD. Detection limits of low-ppb levels of endosulfan were reported. This approach is rapid and simple, and minimum sample preparation is required (Chau and Terry 1972 Musial et al. 1976). 

In addition to instrumental improvements, various approaches have been used to improve the purity or geometry of sources of natural samples for gamma spectrometric measurement. For example, improvements in source preparation for " Th measurement in water and sediment samples by gamma spectrometry are discussed in Cochran and Masque (2003). It should be emphasized that one of the main advantages of gamma spectrometry is ease of use, since in many cases samples may be analyzed directly or with significantly reduced sample preparation compared to alpha, beta, or mass spectrometric techniques. 

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. 

Implementation Samples of the river water, sediments, and even some of the dead fish are taken to the contract lab where their chemists use GC-MS, after appropriate sample preparation, to determine that there are no toxic compounds at significant levels i.e., high enough to harm the fish. Your own results for heavy metals are also negative—nothing above safe limits was detected. 

Tan [71] devised a rapid simple sample preparation technique for analysing polyaromatic hydrocarbons in sediments. Polyaromatic hydrocarbons are removed from the sediment by ultrasonic extraction and isolated by solvent partition and silica gel column chromatography. The sulphur removal step is combined into the ultrasonic extraction procedure. Identification of polyaromatic hydrocarbon is carried by gas chromatography alone and in conjunction with mass spectrometry. Quantitative determination is achieved by addition of known amounts of standard compounds using flame ionization and multiple ion detectors. 

Onuska and Terry [14] have described a method for the determination of chlorinated benzenes in bottom sediment deposits. Sample preparation methods using Soxhlet extraction, ultrasonic extraction or steam distillation were compared. The chlorinated benzenes were characterized by open tubular column gas chromatography with electron capture detection. In recovery studies using sediments with different organic matter contents, the steam distillation method was the most efficient. Detection limits were in the range 0.4-10pg kgy1. 

Namiesnik et al. [33] have reviewed the analysis of soils and sediments for organic contaminants. They discuss methods of sample preparation and isolation-preconcentration prior to instrumental determination. Compound classes discussed include volatile organic compounds, polychlorobiphenyls, polyaromatic compounds, pesticides and polychlorodibenzo-p-dioxins and polychlorodibenzofurans. 

Nowicki et al. [51] point out that in the development of a Soxhlet sample preparation technique for sediment samples, the empty paper Soxhlet thimbles contained organic contaminants which adversely affected results. Glass thimbles were tried and found to be satisfactory. The authors detail the identification of organics solvent-extracted from paper and glass Soxhlet thimbles, and discuss the stability for multiple use of the two materials for trace organic sample preparation. 

There are various methods for the determination of the size distribution of organic pigment particles, the most common are sedimentation techniques in ultracentrifuges and specialized disk centrifuges as well as electron microscopy. These methods require considerable experimental skill, since the results depend largely on sample preparation and especially on the quality of the dispersion. 

Chlorotrifluoromethyl aniline (no. 73.) was found in the sediment samples. This compound is used as a reactant with chloro-aniline (no. 72) in the preparation of 4,4 -dichloro-3-(trifluoromethyl)-carbanilide, a disinfectant. Two other related compounds also found in some of the sediments were chlorophenyl isocyanate (no. 74) and chloro(-trifluoromethyl)phenyl isocyanate (no. 75). This suggests that some of the 4,4 -dichloro-3-(trifluoromethyl)-carbanilide may, in fact, exist in the sediment extracts but is decomposed in the injection port of the gas chromatograph, since it is very doubtful that the easily hydrolyzable isocyanates exist as such in the sediments. To strengthen this hypothesis some 3,4,4 -trichlorocarbanilide [none of the 4,4 -dichloro-3-(trifluorome-thyl)-carbanilide was available] was analyzed by GCMS. The injection port temperature was 300°C. As expected, none of the parent compound eluted from the column. However, mass spectra were obtained for chlorophenyl isocyanate, dichlorophenyl isocyanate, chloroaniline, and dichloroaniline. The presence of the carbanilides themselves (no. 76, 77, 78) was confirmed with the help of HPLC and mass spectral identification. 

Measurement of trace metals, including nickel in seawater can be completed using an in-line system with stripping voltammetry or chronopotentiometry (van den Berg and Achterberg 1994). These methods provide rapid analysis (1-15 minutes) with little sample preparation. The detection limit of these methods for nickel was not stated. Recommended EPA methods for soil sediment, sludge, and solid waste are Methods 7520 (AAS) and 6010 (ICP-AES). Before the widespread use of AAS, colorimetric methods were employed, and a mrmber of colorimetric reagents have been used (Stoeppler 1980). 

Phase 2. In the seeond phase of the study, the partieipants were asked to analyze three extraeted and cleaned sediment samples using the DR CALUX bioassay. Sediments used for extraetion and cleanup were freshwater sediments from the Western Seheldt, The Netherlands. The sediment extracts were prepared by the Royal Institute for Fishery Research (RIVODLO), IJmuiden, The Netherlands, aeeording to the protoeol given here. Dilutions of the supplied sediment extracts were prepared by the partieipants in DMSO and tested for dioxin and/or dioxinlike content. On each 96-well mierotiter plate, a 2,3,7,8-TCDD standard ealibration curve was analyzed. Raw data as well as eonverted data were used for statistieal evaluation. 

The interlaboratory results obtained from the analysis of defined standard solutions, but also from the analysis of sediment extracts prepared either by the coordinator of the study or by the participants themselves, also provide a measure of the variation between laboratories. The results show that the interlaboratory reproducibility ranges from 6.5% for the defined dioxin sample to 27.9% for the sediment sample extracted by the participants themselves. As was mentioned before, the reproducibility for this last sample is relatively high and most presumably due to the introduction of extra handlings (extraction and cleanup) to the total procedure. In addition, the fact that not all the participants had prior experience with the extraction protocol to be used could have added to the increase in variability of the process. Furthermore, the dilution factor was not dictated. This also introduces a certain degree of variation. For the reproducibility of the DR CALUX bioassay itself and not caused by differences in operating extraction conditions, the maximum variation between laboratories was observed to be 18.0%. The results for the sediment extract samples can also be used to estimate the method variability for extracts, that is, based on samples of unknown composition. Again, given the intra-as well as the interlaboratory variations observed in this study, it appears justified to conclude that the standard deviation of the means provides a reasonable estimate of the method variability, based on the overall aver-... 

GC, gas chromatography FID, flame ionization detector MS, mass spectrometry EQL, estimated quantitation limit (the EQL of Method 8270 for determining an individual compound is approximately 660 qg/kg (wet weight) for soil/sediment samples, 1-200 mg/kg for wastes (dependent on matrix and method of preparation), and 10 J,g/L for groundwater samples) NR, not reported... 

---