Patterns of microparticles in blank samples: A study to inform best practices for microplastic analysis.

Autor: Munno K; Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: keenan.munno@mail.utoronto.ca., Lusher AL; Norwegian Institute for Water Research (NIVA), Oslo, Norway; University of Bergen, Department of Biological Sciences, Bergen, Norway., Minor EC; Large Lakes Observatory and Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, MN, USA., Gray A; Department of Environmental Sciences, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA., Ho K; US Environmental Protection Agency, Atlantic Coastal Environmental Sciences Division, Narragansett, RI, 02882, USA., Hankett J; BASF Corporation, 1609 Biddle Ave., Wyandotte, MI, 48192, USA., T Lee CF; Water Quality Laboratory, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, La Verne, CA, 91750, United States., Primpke S; Alfred-Wegener-Institute Helmholtz Centre for Polar and Marine Research, Biologische Anstalt Helgoland, Kurpromenade 201, 27498, Helgoland, Germany., McNeish RE; Department of Biology, California State University, 9001 Stockdale Hwy, Bakersfield, CA, 93311, USA., Wong CS; Southern California Coastal Water Research Project Authority, 3535 Harbor Blvd, Costa Mesa, CA, 92656, USA., Rochman C; Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Electronic address: chelsea.rochman@utoronto.ca.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Chemosphere [Chemosphere] 2023 Aug; Vol. 333, pp. 138883. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 May 09.
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138883
Abstrakt: Quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) techniques are critical to analytical chemistry, and thus the analysis of microplastics. Procedural blanks are a key component of QA/QC for quantifying and characterizing background contamination. Although procedural blanks are becoming increasingly common in microplastics research, how researchers acquire a blank and report and/or use blank contamination data varies. Here, we use the results of laboratory procedural blanks from a method evaluation study to inform QA/QC procedures for microplastics quantification and characterization. Suspected microplastic contamination in the procedural blanks, collected by 12 participating laboratories, had between 7 and 511 particles, with a mean of 80 particles per sample (±SD 134). The most common color and morphology reported were black fibers, and the most common size fraction reported was 20-212 μm. The lack of even smaller particles is likely due to limits of detection versus lack of contamination, as very few labs reported particles <20 μm. Participating labs used a range of QA/QC techniques, including air filtration, filtered water, and working in contained/'enclosed' environments. Our analyses showed that these procedures did not significantly affect blank contamination. To inform blank subtraction, several subtraction methods were tested. No clear pattern based on total recovery was observed. Despite our results, we recommend commonly accepted procedures such as thorough training and cleaning procedures, air filtration, filtered water (e.g., MilliQ, deionized or reverse osmosis), non-synthetic clothing policies and 'enclosed' air flow systems (e.g., clean cabinet). We also recommend blank subtracting by a combination of particle characteristics (color, morphology and size fraction), as it likely provides final microplastic particle characteristics that are most representative of the sample. Further work should be done to assess other QA/QC parameters, such as the use of other types of blanks (e.g., field blanks, matrix blanks) and limits of detection and quantification.
Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE