Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
7611719 | Journal of Chromatography A | 2015 | 11 Pages |
Abstract
Five different passive sampler devices were characterized under laboratory conditions for measurement of 124 legacy and current used pesticides in water. In addition, passive sampler derived time-weighted average (TWA) concentrations were compared to time-integrated active sampling in the field. Sampling rates (RS) and passive sampler-water partition coefficients (KPW) were calculated for individual pesticides using silicone rubber (SR), polar organic chemical integrative sampler (POCIS)-A, POCIS-B, Chemcatcher® SDB-RPS and Chemcatcher® C18. The median RS (L dayâ1) decreased as follows: SR (0.86) > POCIS-B (0.22) > POCIS-A (0.18) > Chemcatcher® SDB-RPS (0.05) > Chemcatcher® C18 (0.02), while the median log KPW (L kgâ1) decreased as follows: POCIS-B (4.78) > POCIS-A (4.56) > Chemcatcher® SDB-RPS (3.17) > SR (3.14) > Chemcatcher®Â C18 (2.71). The uptake of the selected compounds depended on their physicochemical properties, i.e. SR showed a better uptake for more hydrophobic compounds (log octanol-water partition coefficient (KOW) > 5.3), whereas POCIS-A, POCIS-B and Chemcatcher® SDB-RPS were more suitable for hydrophilic compounds (log KOW < 0.70). Overall, the comparison between passive sampler and time-integrated active sampler concentrations showed a good agreement and the tested passive samplers were suitable for capturing compounds with a wide range of KOW's in water.
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Chemistry
Analytical Chemistry
Authors
Lutz Ahrens, Atlasi Daneshvar, Anna E. Lau, Jenny Kreuger,