Advertisement

pp 1-35 | Cite as

Passive Sampling of Waterborne Contaminants

  • Branislav VranaEmail author
  • Foppe Smedes
  • Klára Hilscherová
Protocol
  • 17 Downloads
Part of the Methods in Pharmacology and Toxicology book series

Abstract

Passive sampling is a method that can conveniently be used for monitoring of organic contaminants in the aquatic environment comprising its various compartments. The time-integrating properties of passive sampling in combination with the application of a sampling matrix (polymers) with well-defined and constant properties make it possible to achieve a lower inherent variability of exposure information compared to traditional whole water grab sampling. This chapter provides a practical guidance on the selection and use of passive samplers for monitoring organic contaminants in the aquatic environment that should assist users of passive samplers who wish to implement passive sampling methods in their research or monitoring work according to the state of the art. It outlines principles of passive sampling, sampler preparation, field deployment, laboratory processing for chemical and toxicological analysis, calculation of aqueous concentrations and associated uncertainty considerations. Aspects of quality assurance are also addressed.

Keywords

Aquatic environment Exposure assessment Monitoring Organic contaminants Passive sampling 

Abbreviations

ACN

Acetonitrile

a-PSD

Adsorption-based passive sampling device

BCF

Bioconcentration factor

BDE

Brominated diphenyl ethers

CA

Chemical activity

Cw

Freely dissolved aqueous contaminant concentration

DCM

Dichloromethane

DEE

Diethyl ether

DEQ

Degree of equilibrium

Dp

Diffusion coefficient in polymer

DPS

Dynamic passive sampling

EQS

Environmental quality standards

GC/MS

Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry

HCB

Hexachlorobenzene

HOC

Hydrophobic organic compounds

IIS

Instrumental internal standard

Kpw

Polymer-water partition coefficient or sorbent-water distribution coefficient

LDPE

Low-density polyethylene

LOD

Limit of detection

LOQ

Limit of quantification

M

Molar mass

mp

Mass of polymer used as receiving phase in a passive sampler

N

Amount of a compound in a sampler at equilibrium with sampled water

Np

Amount of a compound accumulated in a passive sampler

PAH

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

PCB

Polychlorinated biphenyls

PDMS

Polydimethylsiloxane

PES

Polyethersulphone

POCIS

Polar organic chemical integrative sampler

p-PSD

Partitioning-based passive sampling device

PRC

Performance reference compound

PS

Passive sampling

PSD

Passive sampling device

QA/QC

Quality assurance/quality control

RIS

Recovery internal standard

Rs

Sampling rate

SPE

Solid phase extraction

SPMD

Semipermeable membrane device

TWA

Time-weighted average

WBL

Water boundary layer

WFD

Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the SOLUTIONS Project supported by the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7-ENV-2013-two-stage Collaborative project) and the Czech Science Foundation grant no. GACR 20-04676X “Holistic exposure and effect potential assessment of complex chemical mixtures in the aquatic environment”. The research activities were carried out in the RECETOX Research Infrastructure supported by the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (LM2018121) and the European Structural and Investment Funds, Operational Programme Research, Development and Education (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_013/0001761).

References

  1. 1.
    Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR et al (2018) The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. Lancet 391:462–512Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Di Toro DM, Zarba CS, Hansen DJ et al (1991) Technical basis for establishing sediment quality criteria for nonionic organic chemicals using equilibrium partitioning. Environ Toxicol Chem 10:1541–1583.  https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.5620101203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reichenberg F, Mayer P (2006) Two complementary sides of bioavailability: accessibility and chemical activity of organic contaminants in sediments and soils. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:1239–1245Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cornelissen G, Breedveld GD, Næs K et al (2006) Bioaccumulation of native polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from sediment by a polychaete and a gastropod: freely dissolved concentrations and activated carbon amendment. Environ Toxicol Chem 25:2349.  https://doi.org/10.1897/06-026R.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vignati DAL, Valsecchi S, Polesello S et al (2009) Pollutant partitioning for monitoring surface waters. Trends Anal Chem 28:159–169.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2008.10.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vrana B, Rusina T, Okonski K et al (2019) Chasing equilibrium passive sampling of hydrophobic organic compounds in water. Sci Total Environ 664:424–435.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.01.242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Booij K, Vrana B, Huckins JN (2007) Theory, modelling and calibration of passive samplers used in water monitoring. In: Greenwood R, Mills G, Vrana B (eds) Comprehensive analytical chemistry 48. Passive sampling techniques in environmental monitoring. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 141–169Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Booij K, Sleiderink HM, Smedes F (1998) Calibrating the uptake kinetics of semipermeable membrane devices using exposure standards. Environ Toxicol Chem 17:1236–1245Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huckins JN, Petty JD, Booij K (2006) Monitors of organic chemicals in the environment: semipermeable membrane devices. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lohmann R, Booij K, Smedes F, Vrana B (2012) Use of passive sampling devices for monitoring and compliance checking of POP concentrations in water. Environ Sci Pollut Res 19:1885–1895.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-012-0748-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rusina T, Smedes F, Koblizkova M, Klanova 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/es900938rCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rusina T, Smedes F, Klanova J et al (2007) Polymer selection for passive sampling: a comparison of critical properties. Chemosphere 68:1344–1351Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    ISO (2011) ISO 5667-23:2011. Water quality—sampling—part 23: guidance on passive sampling in surface watersGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Booij K, Smedes F (2010) An improved method for estimating in situ sampling rates of nonpolar passive samplers. Environ Sci Technol 44:6789–6794Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Apell JN, Tcaciuc AP, Gschwend PM (2015) Understanding the rates of nonpolar organic chemical accumulation into passive samplers deployed in the environment: guidance for passive sampler deployments. Integr Environ Assess Manag.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1697
  16. 16.
    Greenwood R, Mills GA, Vrana B (2006) Passive sampling techniques in environmental monitoring. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burgess RM (2012) Guidelines for using passive samplers to monitor organic contaminants at superfund sediment sites. EPA/600/R-11/115. Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alvarez DA (2010) Guidelines for the use of the semipermeable membrane device (SPMD) and the polar organic chemical integrative sampler (POCIS) in environmental monitoring studies. In: Collection of water data by direct measurementtechniques and methods. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, p 28Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smedes F, Booij K (2012) Guidelines for passive sampling of hydrophobic contaminants in water using silicone rubber samplers.  https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.5077. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhagen
  20. 20.
    Bäuerlein PS, Mansell JE, Ter Laak TL, De Voogt P (2012) Sorption behavior of charged and neutral polar organic compounds on solid phase extraction materials: which functional group governs sorption? Environ Sci Technol 46:954–961.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es203404xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harman C, Allan IJ, Bäuerlein PS (2011) The challenge of exposure correction for polar passive samplers—the PRC and the POCIS. Environ Sci Technol 45:9120–9121.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es2033789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    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.2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Miège C, Mazzella N, Allan I et al (2015) Position paper on passive sampling techniques for the monitoring of contaminants in the aquatic environment—achievements to date and perspectives. Trends Environ Anal Chem 8:20–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teac.2015.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    EU (2009) Commission Directive 2009/90/EC of 31 July 2009 laying down, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, technical specifications for chemical analysis and monitoring of water status. Off J Eur Union L 201:36–38Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chen C-E, 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/c2em30091eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Urik J, Vrana B (2019) An improved design of a passive sampler for polar organic compounds based on diffusion in agarose hydrogel. Environ Sci Pollut Res:1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-04843-6
  27. 27.
    Charriau A, Lissalde S, Poulier G et al (2016) 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.2015.06.064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Morin N, Miège C, Coquery M, Randon J (2012) Chemical calibration, performance, validation and applications of the polar organic chemical integrative sampler (POCIS) in aquatic environments. Trends Anal Chem 36:144–175.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2012.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lissalde S, Charriau A, Poulier G et al (2016) Overview of the Chemcatcher® for the passive sampling of various pollutants in aquatic environments part B: field handling and environmental applications for the monitoring of pollutants and their biological effects. Talanta 148:572–582.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TALANTA.2015.06.076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
    Altec Products Ltd. http://www.altecweb.com/
  32. 32.
    Smedes F, Geertsma RW, Van Der Zande T, Booij K (2009) Polymer-water partition coefficients of hydrophobic compounds for passive sampling: application of cosolvent models for validation. Environ Sci Technol 43:7047–7054Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gilbert D, Witt G, Smedes F, Mayer P (2016) Polymers as reference partitioning phase: polymer calibration for an analytically operational approach to quantify multimedia phase partitioning. Anal Chem 88:5818–5826.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Smedes F (2019) SSP silicone–, lipid– and SPMD–water partition coefficients of seventy hydrophobic organic contaminants and evaluation of the water concentration calculator for SPMD. Chemosphere 223:748–757.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE.2019.01.164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Allan IJ, Christensen G, Bæk K, Evenset A (2016) Photodegradation of PAHs in passive water samplers. Mar Pollut Bull 105:249–254.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.02.018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
  37. 37.
    Baltussen E, Cramers CA, Sandra PJF (2002) Sorptive sample preparation—a review. Anal Bioanal Chem 373:3–22Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ouyang G, Pawliszyn J (2006) SPME in environmental analysis. Anal Bioanal Chem 386:1059–1073.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-006-0460-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    David F, Sandra P (2007) Stir bar sorptive extraction for trace analysis. J Chromatogr A 1152:54–69.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.01.032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rusina T, Smedes F, Klanova J (2010) Diffusion coefficients of polychlorinated biphenyls and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in polydimethylsiloxane and low-density polyethylene polymers. J Appl Polym Sci 116:1803–1810Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Narváez Valderrama JF, Baek K, Molina FJ, Allan IJ (2016) Implications of observed PBDE diffusion coefficients in low density polyethylene and silicone rubber. Environ Sci Process Impacts 18:87–94.  https://doi.org/10.1039/c5em00507hCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    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.2016.01.040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Megoulas NC, Koupparis MA (2005) Twenty years of evaporative light scattering detection. Crit Rev Anal Chem 35:301–316Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brack W, Ait-Aissa S, Burgess RM et al (2016) Effect-directed analysis supporting monitoring of aquatic environments—an in-depth overview. Sci Total Environ 544:1073–1118.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.11.102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vrana B, Smedes F, Allan I et al (2018) Mobile dynamic passive sampling of trace organic compounds: evaluation of sampler performance in the Danube River. Sci Total Environ 636:1597–1607Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Jonker MTO, van der Heijden SA, Kotte M, Smedes F (2015) Quantifying the effects of temperature and salinity on partitioning of hydrophobic organic chemicals to silicone rubber passive samplers. Environ Sci Technol.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b00286
  47. 47.
    Muijs B, Jonker MTO (2009) Temperature-dependent bioaccumulation of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Environ Sci Technol 43:4517–4523Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Whitehouse P, Paya-Perez A (2011) Common Implementation Strategyfor the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance Document No. 27 Technical Guidance For Deriving Environmental Quality Standards, Technical. European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    EU (2013) Directive 2013/39/EU of the European Parlament and of the Council of 12 August 2013 amending Directives 2000/60/EC and 2008/105/EC as regards priority substances in the field of water policy. Off J Eur Union L226:1–17Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Booij K, van Bommel R, Mets A, Dekker R (2006) Little effect of excessive biofouling on the uptake of organic contaminants by semipermeable membrane devices. Chemosphere 65:2485–2492.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.04.033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Alvarez DA, Petty JD, Huckins JN et al (2004) Development of a passive, in situ, integrative sampler for hydrophilic organic contaminants in aquatic environments. Environ Toxicol Chem 23:1640.  https://doi.org/10.1897/03-603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Li H, Helm PA, Paterson G, Metcalfe CD (2011) The effects of dissolved organic matter and pH on sampling rates for polar organic chemical integrative samplers (POCIS). Chemosphere 83:271–280.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2010.12.071CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Greenwood R, Mills GA, Vrana B et al (2007) Monitoring of priority pollutants in water using Chemcatcher passive sampling devices. In: Greenwood R, Mills G, Vrana B (eds) Comprehensive analytical chemistry, vol 48. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 199–229Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Miller TH, Baz-Lomba JA, Harman C et al (2016) The first attempt at non-linear in silico prediction of sampling rates for polar organic chemical integrative samplers (POCIS). Environ Sci Technol 50:7973–7981.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b01407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vermeirssen E, Dietschweiler C, Escher B et al (2012) Transfer kinetics of polar organic compounds over polyethersulfone membranes in the passive samplers POCIS and Chemcatcher. Environ Sci Technol 46:6759–6766Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Charlestra L, Amirbahman A, Courtemanch DL et al (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.2012.05.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Poulier G, Lissalde S, Charriau A et al (2014) Can POCIS be used in Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) monitoring networks? A study focusing on pesticides in a French agricultural watershed. Sci Total Environ 497:282–292.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Moschet C, Vermeirssen ELM, Singer H et al (2015) Evaluation of in-situ calibration of Chemcatcher passive samplers for 322 micropollutants in agricultural and urban affected rivers. Water Res 71:306–317.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.12.043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Harman C, Reid M, Thomas KV (2011) In situ calibration of a passive sampling device for selected illicit drugs and their metabolites in wastewater, and subsequent year-long assessment of community drug usage. Environ Sci Technol 45:5676–5682.  https://doi.org/10.1021/es201124jCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Petrie B, Gravell A, Mills GA et al (2016) In situ calibration of a New Chemcatcher configuration for the determination of polar organic micropollutants in wastewater effluent. Environ Sci Technol acs.est.6b02216.  https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b02216
  61. 61.
    Kaserzon SL, Hawker DW, Booij K et al (2014) Passive sampling of perfluorinated chemicals in water: in-situ calibration. Environ Pollut 186:98–103.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.11.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Carpinteiro I, Schopfer A, Estoppey N et al (2016) Evaluation of performance reference compounds (PRCs) to monitor emerging polar contaminants by polar organic chemical integrative samplers (POCIS) in rivers. Anal Bioanal Chem 408:1067–1078.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-015-9199-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Booij K, Vrana B, Huckins JN (2007) Chapter 7 theory, modelling and calibration of passive samplers used in water monitoring. Compr Anal Chem 48:141–169Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Novák J, Vrana B, Rusina T et al (2018) Effect-based monitoring of the Danube River using mobile passive sampling. Sci Total Environ 636:1608–1619Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Website of the European Ferrybox Community (2014) http://www.ferrybox.org/
  66. 66.
    Vrana B, Smedes F, Rusina T et al (2015) Passive sampling: chemical analysis and toxicological profiling. In: Liška I, Wagner F, Sengl M et al (eds) Joint Danube Survey 3. ICPDR – International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, Vienna, pp 304–315Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Allan IJ, Nilsson HC, Tjensvoll I et al (2011) Mobile passive samplers: concept for a novel mode of exposure. Environ Pollut 159:2393–2397.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2011.06.039CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Vrana B, Popp P, Paschke A, Schuurmann G (2001) Membrane-enclosed sorptive coating. An integrative passive sampler for monitoring organiccontaminants in water. Anal Chem 73:5191–5200Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Horwitz W, Kamps LR, Boyer KW (1980) Quality assurance in the analysis of foods and trace constituents. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 63:1344–1354Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Booij K, Smedes F, Crum S (2017) Laboratory performance study for passive sampling of nonpolar chemicals in water. Environ Toxicol Chem 36:1156–1161.  https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.3657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Difilippo EL, Eganhouse RP (2010) Assessment of PDMS-water partition coefficients: implications for passive environmental sampling of hydrophobic organic compounds. Environ Sci Technol 44:6917–6925Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Booij K, Smedes F, Allan IJ (2017) Guidelines for determining polymer-water and polymer-polymer partition coefficients of organic compounds. ICES Techniques in Marine Environmental Sciences. No. 61.  https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.3285
  73. 73.
    Smedes F (2018) Silicone–water partition coefficients determined by cosolvent method for chlorinated pesticides, musks, organo phosphates, phthalates and more. Chemosphere 210:662–671.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE.2018.07.054CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Smedes F (2018) Corrigendum to “Silicone–water partition coefficients determined by cosolvent method for chlorinated pesticides, musks, organo phosphates, phthalates and more” [Chemosphere 210 (2018) 662–671] (Chemosphere (2018) 210 (662–671), (S0045653518313122), (10.10. Chemosphere 212:1180Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Yates K, Davies I, Webster L et al (2007) Passive sampling: partition coefficients for a silicone rubber reference phase. J Environ Monit 9:1116–1121Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Müller JF, Manomanii K, Mortimer MR, McLachlan MS (2001) Partitioning of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the polyethylene/water. Fresenius J Anal Chem 371:816–822Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Adams RG, Lohmann R, Fernandez LA et al (2007) Polyethylene devices: passive samplers for measuring dissolved hydrophobic organic compounds in aquatic environments. Environ Sci Technol 41:1317–1323Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Fernandez LA, MacFarlane JK, Tcaciuc AP, Gschwend PM (2009) Measurement of freely dissolved PAH concentrations in sediment beds using passive sampling with low-density polyethylene strips. Environ Sci Technol 43:1430–1436Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Hale SE, Martin TJ, Goss K-U et al (2010) Partitioning of organochlorine pesticides from water to polyethylene passive samplers. Environ Pollut 158:2511–2517.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2010.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Agilent_Technologies. What are the common contaminants in my GCMS. https://www.agilent.com/cs/library/Support/Documents/FAQ232 F05001.pdf
  81. 81.
    Dulio V, Carere M, Hanke G et al (2010) Guidance document No. 25 Guidance on chemical monitoring of sediment and biota under the Water Framework Directive. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance document no. 33 on analytical methods for biota monitoring under the Water Framework Directive. https://circabc.europa.eu/sd/a/9cf535ba-14f2-4f0f-b75e-e334ad506caf/Guidance No 33—Analytical Methods for Biota Monitoring.pdf

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Branislav Vrana
    • 1
    Email author
  • Foppe Smedes
    • 1
  • Klára Hilscherová
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Science, Centre RECETOXMasaryk UniversityBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations