Advertisement

Journal of Radioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 69, Issue 1–2, pp 117–129 | Cite as

Analytical evaluation of comparative data on trace elements in biological materials

  • L. Kosta
  • A. R. Byrne
Analytical Studies by NAA and Other Methods

Abstract

Large bodies of data on a given material from different sources appear a major advantage of intercomparison experiments and a sound basis for a straight statistical evaluation (as is the usual approach in the assignment of recommended or consensus values). On closer inspection of the results, however, it is usually found that only one or two techniques are represented in statistically significant numbers, most frequently AAS and NAA, and their distribution may not be normal. Correct results are sometimes hidden among laboratory means in the lower or upper part of the frequency distribution plots. Conventional statistics neglecting procedural details and the chemistry behind a procedure may result in incorrect assignment from the reported data, which can be affected by unidentified systematic effects. Generally, in the lowest concentration range contamination predominates as the systematic error determining the accuracy of results. Activation analysis being the least vulnerable to this type of error, it is, if applicable, in principle the most likely to give correct answers. Follow-up work was carried out in this laboratory on the IAEA reference samples of Milk Powder A-11, Muscle Tissue H-4, Fish Flesh MA-A-2 and the Soil-5, clearly demonstrating the potential of activation analysis as verification technique. By determining the same element in the destructive and nondestructive mode, and on the basis of two different isotopes, virtually independent approaches are achieved, often allowing the disclosure of different types of errors. Results are also reported for nickel by a new voltammetric technique enabling its determination at the microgram per kilogram level.

Keywords

Analytical Evaluation Fish Flesh Anodic Strip Voltammetry Biological Reference Material Marine Radioactivity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S. GLADNEY, Anal. Chim. Acta, 118 (1980) 385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. A. URIANO, C. C. GRAVATT, CRC Crit. Revs Anal. Chem., 6 (1977) 361.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. S. DYBCZYNSKI, Anal. Chim. Acta, 117 (1980) 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    International Laboratory of Marine Radioactivity, Intercalibration of Analytical Methods on Marine Environmental Samples, Progress Report No. 18, IAEA, Monaco, Oct. 1978.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    International Laboratory of Marine Radioactivity, Intercalibration of Analytical methods on Marine Environmental Samples, Progress Report No. 20, IAEA, Monaco, Oct. 1978.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. B. DEAN, W. J. DIXON, Anal. Chem., 23 (1951) 636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. De SOETE, R. GIJBELS, J. HOSTE, Neutron Activation Analysis, Chemical Analysis Monotrgraphy Series, Vol. 34, Wiley-Interscience, London, 1972, p. 505.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. ABBEY, R. A. MEEDS, P. G. BELANGER, Geostandards Newsl. 3 (1979) 121.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    F. E. GRUBBS, Technometrics, 11 (1969) 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    R.S. DYBCZYNSKI, A. VEGLIA, O. SUCHNY, Report on the Intercomparison Run A-11, International Atomic Energy Agency Report IAEA/RL/68, Vienna, July 1980.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    R. S. DYBCZYNSKI, A. TUGSAVUL, O. SUSCHNY, Intercomparison of Trace and Other Elements in IAEA Soil-5, Report IAEA/RL/46, Vienna, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    L. KOSTA, A. R. BYRNE, Talanta, 16 (1969) 1297; 21 (1974) 1083.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    R.M. PARR, Report No. 2: Intercomparison of Minor and Trace Elements in IAEA Animal Muscle H-4), International Atomic Energy Agency Report IAEA/RL/69, Vienna, Oct. 1980.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. D. LUCKEY, B. VENUGOPAL, Metal Toxicity in Mammals, Plenum Press, 2nd ed., London 1979, p. 196.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    F. W. SUNDERMAN, Jr., Pure Appl. Chem., 52 (1980) 529.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, Reference Method for Analysis of Nickel in Serum and Urine by Electrothermal Atomic Absorption Spectrometry, Pure Appl. Chem., 53 (1981) 773.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nickel Toxicology, S. S. BROWN, F. W. SUNDERMAN (Eds), Academic Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    B. PIHLAR, P. VALENTA, H. W. NÜRNBERG J. Electroanal. Chem., (in press).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. PIHLAR, P. VALENTA, H. W. NÜRNBERG, Z. Anal. Chem., (in press).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. PIHLAR, personal communication, 1981.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. M. PARR, The Reliability of Trace Element Analysis as Revealed by Analytical Reference, Materials. Paper presented at the First International Workshop on Trace Element Analytical Chemistry in Medicine and Biology, Neuherberg, FRG, April 1980.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry, Commission on Analytical Radiochemistry and Nuclear Materials: Reference Material for Trace Analysis by Radioanalytical Methods: Bowen's Kale, Pure Appl. Chem., 51 (1979) 1183.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Kosta
    • 1
  • A. R. Byrne
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryFaculty of Natural Sciences and TechnologyLjubljana(Yugoslavia)
  2. 2.“Jožef Stefan” InstituteE. Kardelj UniversityLjubljana(Yugoslavia)

Personalised recommendations