Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 391

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sampling for PPCPs in Wastewater Systems: Comparison of Different Sampling Modes and Optimization Strategies

Ort, Christoph, Lawrence, Michael G., Reungoat, Julien, Mueller, Jochen F.·2010·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess uncertainties associated with different sampling modes when evaluating loads of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) in sewers and influents to sewage treatment plants (STPs). The study demonstrates that sampling uncertainty can range from "not significant" to "far greater than the uncertainty due to chemical analysis", which is site- and compound-specific and depends on the (in)accuracy of the analytical method. Conventional sampling devices operated in common time- or flow-proportional sampling modes, and applying traditional sampling intervals of 30 min or longer can result in the collection of nonrepresentative samples. At the influent of a STP, wastewater may appear as a continuous stream, but it is actually composed of a number of intermittently discharged, individual wastewater packets from household appliances, industries, or subcatchments in pressurized sewer systems. The resulting heterogeneity can cause significant short-term variations of pollutant loads. We present different experimental results and a modeling approach showing that the magnitude of sampling uncertainty depends mainly on the number of pollutant peaks and the sampling frequency; sampling intervals of 5 min or shorter may be required to properly account for temporal PPCP variations in influents of STPs. A representative sample is a prerequisite for providing meaningful analytical results and cannot be compensated with a large number of samples, accurate chemical analysis, or sophisticated statistical evaluation. This study highlights that generalizing from one case to another is difficult and hence a careful systems analysis of the catchment under investigation, or precautionary choice for a sophisticated sampling mode, is necessary to prove reproducibility.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es100778d

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 391

Metadata

Authors
Ort, C., Lawrence, M. G., Reungoat, J., & Mueller, J. F.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2010-07-15
Volume
44
Issue
16
Pages
6289-6296
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2002519757
Cited by
391
References
1
FWCI
21.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sampling for PPCPs in Wastewater Systems: Comparison of Different Sampling Modes and Optimization Strategies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es100778d
The paper
Ort, C., Lawrence, M. G., Reungoat, J., & Mueller, J. F. (2010). Sampling for PPCPs in Wastewater Systems: Comparison of Different Sampling Modes and Optimization Strategies. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es100778d

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.