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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Sampling for representative micropollutant loads in sewer systems
Ort, C., & Gujer, W. (2006) · Water Science and Technology · doi:10.2166/wst.2006.591 · Cited by 65
Self-citation
Cited by
Petrie, B., Barden, R., & Kasprzyk-Hordern, B. (2015) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2014.08.053 · Cited by 2,614
Wastewater-based epidemiology biomarkers: Past, present and future
Choi, P. M., Tscharke, B. J., Donner, E., O'Brien, J. W., Grant, S. C., Kaserzon, S. L., Mackie, R., O'Malley, E., Crosbie, N. D., Thomas, K. V., et al. (2018) · TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.trac.2018.06.004 · Cited by 486
Self-citationCritical review on the stability of illicit drugs in sewers and wastewater samples
McCall, A.-K., Bade, R., Kinyua, J., Lai, F. Y., Thai, P. K., Covaci, A., Bijlsma, L., van Nuijs, A. L. N., & Ort, C. (2016) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2015.10.040 · Cited by 311
Self-citationIllicit drugs and the environment — A review
Pal, R., Megharaj, M., Kirkbride, K. P., & Naidu, R. (2013) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.086 · Cited by 288
Kay, P., Hughes, S. R., Ault, J. R., Ashcroft, A. E., & Brown, L. E. (2017) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2016.10.087 · Cited by 147
“…grab sampling of receiving waters it is unlikely that such variation has so far been adequately captured in existing monitoring datasets and they may therefore currently give an inaccurate description of the occurrence of pharmaceuticals in rivers (Ort and Gujer, 2006; Ort et al., 2010a, b).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Ort, C., Lawrence, M. G., Reungoat, J., & Mueller, J. F.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- 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
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.