Advertisement

An improved design of a passive sampler for polar organic compounds based on diffusion in agarose hydrogel

  • Jakub Urík
  • Branislav VranaEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

Passive samplers based on diffusive gradients in thin hydrogel films (DGT) were recently modified for sampling of polar organic compounds in water. However, since the sampling rates of the commonly used DGT design with the surface area of 3.1 cm2 are low, we propose to increase them by applying a two-sided design with a larger sampling surface area of 22.7 cm2. The sampler design consists of two sorptive hydrogel disks compressed between two diffusive hydrogel disk layers strengthened by nylon netting and held together by two stainless steel rings. Sorbent/water distribution coefficients (KSW) were determined, and the sampler was calibrated for monitoring 11 perfluoroalkyl substances and 12 pharmaceuticals and personal care products in water at laboratory conditions using a closed system with artificial flow generated by submersible pumps. A field performance test was conducted at five locations in the Morava River basin in Czech Republic. The median value of laboratory-derived sampling rates was 43 mL day−1 with extreme values of 2 mL day−1 and 90 mL day−1 for perfluorotridecanoic and perfluoroheptanoic acids, respectively. The log KSW values of tested compounds ranged from 3.18 to 5.47 L kg−1, and the estimated halftime to attain sampler-water equilibrium ranged from 2 days to more than 28 days, which is the maximum recommended exposure period, considering potential issues with the stability of hydrogel. The sampler can be used for assessment of spatial trends as well as estimation of aqueous concentration of investigated polar compounds.

Keywords

Hydrogel Passive sampling Polar organic compounds Diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT) Water monitoring 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the SOLUTIONS Project supported by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage collaborative project) under grant agreement 603437. The research activities were carried out in the RECETOX Research Infrastructure supported by the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (LM2015051), and the European Structural and Investment Funds, Operational Programme “Research, Development, Education” (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_013/0001761). We thank Foppe Smedes for his valuable pieces of advice during our research; Petra Přibylová, Jitka Bečanová and Pavlína Karásková for the instrumental analysis of the samples; Barbara Kubíčková and Ondřej Sáňka for their assistance in the preparation of Figures S1 and S9 (SI); Roman Prokeš for the assistance in the field testing; Kateřina Švecová and Vendula Greéová for the assistance in the laboratory experiments; and David Konečný for his advice on the scientific writing (all from RECETOX, Masaryk University).

Supplementary material

11356_2019_4843_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.7 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 2721 kb)

References

  1. Alvarez DA, Petty JD, Huckins JN, Jones-Lepp TL, Getting DT, Goddard JP, Manahan SE (2004) Development of a passive, in situ, integrative sampler for hydrophilic organic contaminants in aquatic environments. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:1640–1648.  https://doi.org/10.1897/03-603 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarez DA, Stackelberg PE, Petty JD, Huckins JN, Furlong ET, Zaugg SD, Meyer MT (2005) Comparison of a novel passive sampler to standard water-column sampling for organic contaminants associated with wastewater effluents entering a New Jersey stream. Chemosphere 61:610–622.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.03.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belles A, Alary C, Aminot Y, Readman JW, Franke C (2017) Calibration and response of an agarose gel based passive sampler to record short pulses of aquatic organic pollutants. Talanta 165:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2016.12.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Booij K, Maarsen NL, Theeuwen M, van Bommel R (2017) A method to account for the effect of hydrodynamics on polar organic compound uptake by passive samplers. Environ Toxicol Chem 36:1517–1524.  https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3700 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Booij K, Robinson CD, Burgess RM, Mayer P, Roberts CA, Ahrens L, Allan IJ, Brant J, Jones L, Kraus UR, Larsen MM, Lepom P, Petersen J, Pröfrock D, Roose P, Schäfer S, Smedes F, Tixier C, Vorkamp K, Whitehouse P (2016) Passive sampling in regulatory chemical monitoring of nonpolar organic compounds in the aquatic environment. Environ Sci Technol 50:3–17.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b04050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Booij K, Smedes F (2010) An improved method for estimating in situ sampling rates of nonpolar passive samplers. Environ Sci Technol 44:6789–6794.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es101321v CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Booij K, Vrana B, Huckins JN (2007) Chapter 7. Theory, modelling and calibration of passive samplers used in water monitoring. In: Greenwood R, Mills G, Vrana B (eds) Comprehensive analytical chemistry. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 141–169Google Scholar
  8. Buzier R, Charriau A, Mazzella N, Guibaud G, Poulier G, Lissalde S (2015) Overview of the Chemcatcher® for the passive sampling of various pollutants in aquatic environments. Part A: principles, calibration, preparation and analysis of the sampler. Talanta 148:556–571.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2015.06.064 Google Scholar
  9. Buzier R, Lissalde S, Guibaud G, Guibal R, Charriau A (2017) Passive sampling of anionic pesticides using the diffusive gradients in thin films technique (DGT). Anal Chim Acta 966:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2017.02.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Challis JK, Hanson ML, Wong CS (2016) Development and calibration of an organic-diffusive gradients in thin films aquatic passive sampler for a diverse suite of polar organic contaminants. Anal Chem 88:10583–10591.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b02749 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charlestra L, Amirbahman A, Courtemanch DL, Alvarez DA, Patterson H (2012) Estimating pesticide sampling rates by the polar organic chemical integrative sampler (POCIS) in the presence of natural organic matter and varying hydrodynamic conditions. Environ Pollut 169:98–104.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2012.05.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chen CE, Zhang H, Jones KC (2012) A novel passive water sampler for in situ sampling of antibiotics. J Environ Monit 14:1523–1530.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c2em30091e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chen CE, Zhang H, Ying GG, Jones KC (2013) Evidence and recommendations to support the use of a novel passive water sampler to quantify antibiotics in wastewaters. Environ Sci Technol 47:13587–13593.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es402662g CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen W, Pan S, Cheng H, Sweetman AJ, Zhang H, Jones KC (2018) Diffusive gradients in thin-films (DGT) for in situ sampling of selected endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in waters. Water Res 137:211–219.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.03.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cherwell Scientific Ltd (2000) Model Maker:4Google Scholar
  16. Davison W, Zhang H (1994) In situ speciation measurements of trace components in natural waters using thin-film gels. Nature 367:546–548.  https://doi.org/10.1038/367546a0
  17. European Commission, Directorate-General for Environment (2012) Guidance Document No: 19. Guidance on chemical monitoring of sediment and biota under the Water Framework Directive. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.  https://doi.org/10.2779/72701 Google Scholar
  18. Greenwood R, Mills GA, Vrana B, Allan I, Aguilar-Martínez R, Morrison G (2007) Chapter 9. Monitoring of priority pollutants in water using chemcatcher passive sampling devices. In: Greenwood R, Mills G, Vrana B (eds) Comprehensive analytical chemistry. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 199–229Google Scholar
  19. Guan DX, Li YQ, Yu NY, Yu GH, Wei S, Zhang H, Davison W, Cui XY, Ma LQ, Luo J (2018) In situ measurement of perfluoroalkyl substances in aquatic systems using diffusive gradients in thin-films technique. Water Res 144:162–171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.07.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guo C, Zhang T, Hou S, Lv J, Zhang Y, Wu F, Hua Z, Meng W, Zhang H, Xu J (2017) Investigation and application of a new passive sampling technique for in situ monitoring of illicit drugs in waste waters and rivers. Environ Sci Technol 51:9101–9108.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00731 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harman C, Allan IJ, Vermeirssen ELM (2012) Calibration and use of the polar organic chemical integrative sampler—a critical review. Environ Toxicol Chem 31:2724–2738.  https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.2011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hilscherová K, Dušek L, Kubík V, Čupr P, Hofman J, Klánová J, Holoubek I (2007) Redistribution of organic pollutants in river sediments and alluvial soils related to major floods. J Soils Sediments 7:167–177.  https://doi.org/10.1065/jss2007.04.222
  23. Huckins JN, Petty JD, Lebo JA, Almeida FV, Booij K, Alvarez DA, Cranor WL, Clark RC, Mogensen BB (2002) Development of the permeability/performance reference compound approach for in situ calibration of semipermeable membrane devices. Environ Sci Technol 36:85–91.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es010991w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jeong Y, Schäffer A, Smith K (2017) Equilibrium partitioning of organic compounds to OASIS HLB® as a function of compound concentration, pH, temperature and salinity. Chemosphere 174:297–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.01.116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karásková P, Venier M, Melymuk L, Bečanová J, Vojta Š, Prokeš R, Diamond ML, Klánová J (2016) Perfluorinated alkyl substances (PFASs) in household dust in Central Europe and North America. Environ Int 94:315–324.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.05.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kingston JK, Greenwood R, Mills GA, Morrison GM, Persson LB (2000) Development of a novel passive sampling system for the time-averaged measurement of a range of organic pollutants in aquatic environments. J Environ Monit 2:487–495.  https://doi.org/10.1039/b003532g CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kot A, Zabiegała B, Namieśnik J (2000) Passive sampling for long-term monitoring of organic pollutants in water. TrAC - Trends Anal Chem 19:446–459.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-9936(99)00223-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lissalde S, Mazzella N, Mazellier P (2014) Polar organic chemical integrative samplers for pesticides monitoring: impacts of field exposure conditions. Sci Total Environ 488–489:188–196.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.04.069 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Martin H, Patterson BM, Davis GB, Grathwohl P (2003) Field trial of contaminant groundwater monitoring: comparing time-integrating ceramic dosimeters and conventional water sampling. Environ Sci Technol 37:1360–1364.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es026067z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Montero N, Banks A, Mueller JF, Fauvelle V, Kaserzon SL, Mazzella N (2017) Glyphosate and AMPA passive sampling in freshwater using a microporous polyethylene diffusion sampler. Chemosphere 188:241–248.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.08.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Brien D, Komarova T, Mueller JF (2012) Determination of deployment specific chemical uptake rates for SPMD and PDMS using a passive flow monitor. Mar Pollut Bull 64:1005–1011.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Prokeš R, Vrana B, Klánová J (2012) Levels and distribution of dissolved hydrophobic organic contaminants in the Morava River in Zlín district, Czech Republic as derived from their accumulation in silicone rubber passive samplers. Environ Pollut 166:157–166.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2012.02.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rapčanová V (2015) Study of the application of passive sampling for the measurement of fluorinated surfactants in water. (Master Thesis). Masaryk University. https://is.muni.cz/th/wzqke/ (in Slovak)
  34. Raub KB, Vlahos P, Whitney M (2015) Comparison of marine sampling methods for organic contaminants: passive samplers, water extractions, and live oyster deployment. Mar Environ Res 109:148–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rusina TP, Smedes F, Koblížková M, Klánová J (2010) Calibration of silicone rubber passive samplers: experimental and modeled relations between sampling rate and compound properties. Environ Sci Technol 44:362–367.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es900938r
  36. Sara O’Brien D, Chiswell B, Mueller JF (2009) A novel method for the in situ calibration of flow effects on a phosphate passive sampler. J Environ Monit 11:212–219.  https://doi.org/10.1039/b809901d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schäfer RB, Paschke A, Vrana B, Mueller R, Liess M (2008) Performance of the Chemcatcher® passive sampler when used to monitor 10 polar and semi-polar pesticides in 16 Central European streams, and comparison with two other sampling methods. Water Res 42:2707–2717.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2008.01.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Škodová A, Prokeš R, Šimek Z, Vrana B (2016) In situ calibration of three passive samplers for the monitoring of steroid hormones in wastewater. Talanta 161:405–412.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2016.08.068 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Škopíková I (2014) Study of uptake parameters of passive samplers used for monitoring of polar organic pollutants from water. (Master Thesis). Masaryk University. https://is.muni.cz/auth/th/i8dsy/ (in Czech)
  40. Smedes F, Booij K (2012) Guidelines for passive sampling of hydrophobic contaminants in water using silicone rubber samplers. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhagen http://ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/Techniques%20in%20Marine%20Environmental%20Sciences%20(TIMES)/times52/120621%20TIMES%2052%20Final.pdf (Accessed 7 March 2019Google Scholar
  41. Stroski KM, Challis JK, Wong CS (2018) The influence of pH on sampler uptake for an improved configuration of the organic-diffusive gradients in thin films passive sampler. Anal Chim Acta 1018:45–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2018.02.074 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Togola A, Budzinski H (2007) Development of polar organic integrative samplers for analysis of pharmaceuticals in aquatic systems. Anal Chem 79:6734–6741.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac070559i CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vermeirssen ELM, Dietschweiler C, Escher BI, Van Der Voet J, Hollender J (2012) Transfer kinetics of polar organic compounds over polyethersulfone membranes in the passive samplers pocis and chemcatcher. Environ Sci Technol 46:6759–6766.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es3007854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Vrana B, Komancová L, Sobotka J (2016) Calibration of a passive sampler based on stir bar sorptive extraction for the monitoring of hydrophobic organic pollutants in water. Talanta 152:90–97.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2016.01.040 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vrana B, Smedes F, Allan I, Rusina T, Okonski K, Hilscherová K, Novák J, Tarábek P, Slobodník J (2018) Mobile dynamic passive sampling of trace organic compounds: evaluation of sampler performance in the Danube River. Sci Total Environ 636:1597–1607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhang H, Chen W, Jones KC, Ying G-G, Chen C-E (2014) In situ measurement of solution concentrations and fluxes of sulfonamides and trimethoprim antibiotics in soils using o-DGT. Talanta 132:902–908.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2014.08.048 Google Scholar
  47. Zhang H, Davison W (1995) Performance characteristics of diffusion gradients in thin films for the in situ measurement of trace metals in aqueous solution. Anal Chem 67:3391–3400.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00115a005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Science, Research Centre for Toxic Compounds in the Environment (RECETOX)Masaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations