A comparison of reproducibility of inductively coupled spectrometric techniques in soil metal analyses

Joan Nyika, Ednah Onyari, Megersa Olumana Dinka, Shivani Bhardwaj Mishra

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Precise estimation of metals in samples remains a challenge as a result of analytical biases and errors, which occur at sample collection, preparation, and measurement stages. A poor understanding of the nature and occurrence of these errors further aggravates this challenge. This study aimed at comparing the effectiveness of inductively coupled plasma (ICP) mass spectrometry (MS) and optical emission spectrometry (OES) techniques in quantifying metals from contaminated soils of Roundhill landfill vicinity. Using statistical tools, the study evaluated biases of the 2 methods. High coefficients of variation were realized for V, Cr, and Pb concentrations varied at various sampling sites. Concentrations of elements obtained using the 2 methods had no significant differences using t-test analysis. Definitive agreement for the 2 methods was observed for V, Cr, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Sr, and Pb concentrations, whereas the concentrations of Mg, Ca, Ti, Mn, and Fe showed some deviations in their regression lines. Spectral, systematic, memory, and carry over errors could be attributable to these deviations. The errors promote chelation and adsorption of ions in samples to form insoluble compounds that cannot be quantified. Overall, ICP-MS had greater sensitivity than ICP-OES in trace elements analysis compared with major elements.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAir, Soil and Water Research
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • Bias
  • Errors
  • Metals
  • Reproducibility
  • Soils
  • Spectrometry

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Environmental Science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of reproducibility of inductively coupled spectrometric techniques in soil metal analyses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this