Measurement uncertainty from physical sample preparation: estimation including systematic error

被引:48
作者
Lyn, JA [1 ]
Ramsey, MH
Fussell, RJ
Wood, R
机构
[1] Univ Sussex, Sch Chem Phys & Environm Sci, Environm Res Ctr, Brighton BN1 9QJ, E Sussex, England
[2] Cent Sci Lab, York YO41 1LZ, N Yorkshire, England
[3] Food Stand Agcy, Inst Food Res, Norwich NR4 7UA, Norfolk, England
关键词
D O I
10.1039/b307581h
中图分类号
O65 [分析化学];
学科分类号
070302 ; 081704 ;
摘要
A methodology is proposed, which employs duplicated primary sampling and subsequent duplicated physical preparation coupled with duplicated chemical analyses. Sample preparation duplicates should be prepared under conditions that represent normal variability in routine laboratory practice. The proposed methodology requires duplicated chemical analysis on a minimum of two of the sample preparation duplicates. Data produced from the hierarchical design is treated with robust analysis of variance (ANOVA) to generate uncertainty estimates, as standard uncertainties ('u' expressed as standard deviation), for primary sampling (s(samp)), physical sample preparation (s(prep)) and chemical analysis (s(anal)). The ANOVA results allow the contribution of the sample preparation process to the overall uncertainty to be assessed. This methodology has been applied for the first time to a case study of pesticide residues in retail strawberry samples. Duplicated sample preparation was performed under ambient conditions on two consecutive days. Multi-residue analysis (quantification by GC-MS) was undertaken for a range of incurred pesticide residues including those suspected of being susceptible to loss during sample preparation procedures. Sampling and analytical uncertainties dominated at low analyte concentrations. The sample preparation process contributed up to 20% to the total variability and had a relative uncertainty (U-prep%) of up to 66% (for bupirimate at 95% confidence). Estimates of systematic errors during physical sample preparation were also made using spike recovery experiments. Four options for the estimation of measurement uncertainty are discussed, which both include and exclude systematic error arising from sample preparation and chemical analysis. A holistic approach to the combination and subsequent expression of uncertainty is advised.
引用
收藏
页码:1391 / 1398
页数:8
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]  
Akiyama Y, 1998, J FOOD HYG SOC JPN, V39, P303, DOI 10.3358/shokueishi.39.5_303
[2]  
*AMC, 2002, 1 AMC ROYAL SOC CHEM
[3]  
*AMC, 2001, ANALYST, V126, P256
[4]  
Analytical Methods Committee (AMC), 1989, ANALYST, V114, P1699, DOI [10.1039/AN9891401699, DOI 10.1039/AN9891401699]
[5]  
[Anonymous], 4032012 WST
[6]   DETERMINATION OF THE PESTICIDES DIFLUBENZURON AND CLOFENTEZINE IN PLUMS, STRAWBERRIES AND BLACK-CURRANT-BASED FRUIT DRINKS BY HIGH-PERFORMANCE LIQUID-CHROMATOGRAPHIC ATMOSPHERIC-PRESSURE CHEMICAL-IONIZATION MASS-SPECTROMETRY [J].
BARNES, KA ;
FUSSELL, RJ ;
STARTIN, JR ;
THORPE, SA ;
REYNOLDS, SL .
RAPID COMMUNICATIONS IN MASS SPECTROMETRY, 1995, 9 (14) :1441-1445
[7]  
Barwick VJ, 1999, ANALYST, V124, P981, DOI 10.1039/a901845j
[8]  
*CAC, 1993, REC METH SAMPL DET P, V2, P369
[9]   Experimental sensitivity analysis applied to sample preparation uncertainties: are ruggedness tests enough for measurement uncertainty estimates? [J].
Cowles, JR ;
Daily, S ;
Ellison, SLR ;
Hardcastle, WA ;
Williams, C .
ACCREDITATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE, 2001, 6 (08) :368-371
[10]  
da Silva RJNB, 2003, ANAL CHIM ACTA, V477, P169