Measurement uncertainty from physical sample preparation: estimation including systematic error.

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 (ssamp), physical sample preparation (sprep) and chemical analysis (sanal). 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 (Uprep%) 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.

[1]  R. Wood,et al.  Multi-analyte optimisation of uncertainty in infant food analysis. , 2003, The Analyst.

[2]  R. B. D. Silva,et al.  Evaluation of sample processing and sub-sampling performance , 2003 .

[3]  R. Wood,et al.  Optimised uncertainty in food analysis: application and comparison between four contrasting 'analyte-commodity' combinations. , 2002, The Analyst.

[4]  M. Wilson,et al.  Assessment of the stability of pesticides during cryogenic sample processing. 1. Apples. , 2002, Journal of agricultural and food chemistry.

[5]  R. Wood,et al.  Optimised uncertainty at minimum overall cost to achieve fitness-for-purpose in food analysis. , 2001, The Analyst.

[6]  J. C. Taylor,et al.  Determination of residues of pirimicarb and its desmethyl and desmethylformamido metabolites in fruits and vegetables by liquid chromatography-electrospray/mass spectrometry. , 2000, Journal of AOAC International.

[7]  Michael H. Ramsey,et al.  Estimation of measurement uncertainty from field sampling: implications for the classification of contaminated land , 1997 .

[8]  M. Hale,et al.  Objective evaluation of precision requirements for geochemical analysis using robust analysis of variance , 1992 .

[9]  J. Rouchaud,et al.  Fate of the fungicide tolylfluanid in the pear cold stored in controlled or non controlled atmosphere , 1991, Bulletin of environmental contamination and toxicology.

[10]  Michael H. Ramsey,et al.  Sampling proficiency test for the estimation of uncertainty in the spatial delineation of contamination , 2000 .

[11]  Vicki J. Barwick,et al.  Measurement uncertainty: Approaches to the evaluation of uncertainties associated with recovery† , 1999 .

[12]  M. Ramsey,et al.  Synthetic reference sampling target for the estimation of measurement uncertainty , 1999 .

[13]  Michael H. Ramsey,et al.  Sampling as a source of measurement uncertainty: techniques for quantification and comparison with analytical sources , 1998 .