The International Measurement Evaluation Programme (IMEP) IMEP-6: "Trace elements in water"

Nevel, L. Van; Taylor, Philip; Örnemark, Ulf; Moody, John R.; Heumann, Klaus G.; Bièvre, Paul De

doi:10.1007/s007690050187

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regulatory agencies such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) require methods of chemical analysis to be fully validated, providing comprehensive method descriptions together with reliable uncertainty estimates. However, achieving good quality measurements is often difficult and this is demonstrated when inconsistent results are achieved by different laboratories [4]. Quality in analytical measurements can only be defined in terms of the relative performance of a method.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of linear and non-linear equations for univariate calibration

Kirkup

Mulholland

2004

Journal of Chromatography A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of linear and non-linear equations for univariate calibration

Kirkup

Mulholland

2004

Journal of Chromatography A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Significant variations are reported in recent studies for boron concentrations in biological samples when the boron concentration drops below the mg/kg level. Round-robin studies independently conducted by the Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM) [4] and U.S. Borax [5] have shown that most of the laboratories (>100 total) from around the world experienced difficulties during controlled comparisons involving boron analysis. The samples ranged from moderate concentrations (<0.3 mg-B/kg) in water to <0.05 mg-B/kg in the biological materials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analytical challenges of low level boron analysis in biological matrices

Downing¹,

Strong²

1999

J. Trace Elem. Exp. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Since 1988 the International Measurement Evaluation Programme (IMEP) comparisons have concentrated mainly on amount content determinations of minor and trace elements in various matrices such as water [1,2,3], polyethylene [4,5,6,7] and blood serum [8,9,10]. The IMEP-8 comparison was the first focused on stable isotope ratio gas measurements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The International Measurement Evaluation Programme, IMEP-8: carbon and oxygen isotope ratios in CO 2

Nørgaard

Valkiers

Nevel

et al. 2002

Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In IMEP-8, two samples of high purity CO(2)(g), with different carbon and oxygen isotope ratios were distributed to 27 participants, originating from 14 countries and from various isotopic measurement domains (geochemistry, atmospheric and food chemistry), but particularly set up for food laboratories. In total 19 laboratories reported results. The outcome of this comparison exercise shows that the laboratories reported carbon and oxygen isotope results in good agreement with the reference values across the domains. The reported results for delta(13)C(VPDB) (carbon) for both materials are within 1 per thousand. However, for the reported results of delta(18)O(VPDB) (oxygen) for both materials the overall spread of the reported results is about 11 per thousand. Within this spread two distinct groups of participants can be identified, where the results within each group vary about 2 per thousand. The latter seems to be caused by calculation errors by participants of the reporting delta(18)O(VPDB) values. As requested, participants also reported the isotope amount ratio for carbon and oxygen in the CO(2) samples. For carbon, all reported results for both materials agree with the isotope ratio value, which can be traced back to the value reported by Craig. For oxygen, all results are in good agreement and deviate by a maximum of 0.5% from the reference values measured at IRMM. Work carried out indicates the carbon isotope ratio, for both samples IMEP-8A and IMEP-8B, differ from those reported by Craig by as much as 1.2%. In the case of oxygen, this deviation is far smaller. Both data sets, i.e. the one realised by Craig and the one realised at IRMM, demonstrate traceability to SI. It is clear that both values significantly disagree.

show abstract

The International Measurement Evaluation Programme (IMEP) IMEP-6: "Trace elements in water"

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 publications

Comparison of linear and non-linear equations for univariate calibration

Comparison of linear and non-linear equations for univariate calibration

Analytical challenges of low level boron analysis in biological matrices

The International Measurement Evaluation Programme, IMEP-8: carbon and oxygen isotope ratios in CO 2

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About