Efficiency of five samplers to trap suspended particulate matter and microplastic particles of different sizes

Le résumé fourni par la source

Suspended particulate matter (SPM) plays a major role in nutrient cycles and for the transport of pollutants within local and transboundary water catchments. Obtaining representative SPM samples from rivers, lakes, inland and coastal waters is crucial for quantitative and qualitative chemical analyses to correctly describe the chemical status of a water body. However, a representative sampling of SPM over time is challenging due to the heterogeneity of SPM particles sizes, their non-uniform distribution in rivers, and a variety of sampling devices being in use. Therefore, we investigated the efficiencies of five different sampling devices commonly used in national and international monitoring programs to collect representative SPM samples. We tested three passive sedimentation-based samplers (SBSs: sedimentation box, SB; sedimentation tank, ST; Raetz Sampler, RS), and two active separation techniques (continuous flow centrifuge, CFC; vacuum filtration, VF) in an experimental laboratory setup using in-house SPM standard suspensions (mineral, organic, and microplastic particles) with defined particle sizes. The mass-based efficiencies of the three examined SBSs were 0-66% for the mineral and organic particles <75 μm, where the mean particle sizes of collected samples were always shifted to bigger sizes compared to the initial suspensions. The efficiencies of the three SBSs to collect microplastic particles <80 μm were <20% due to the lower densities of microplastic compared to organic and mineral particles. In contrast to the SBSs, VF and CFC units showed excellent efficiencies >86% for all tested materials, with similar particle size distributions of the sampled material compared to those of the inlet suspensions. In conclusion, SPM sampling efficiencies of sampling units have to be carefully considered and compared to the respective aims of the monitoring approaches, especially when statements are derived from quantitative results on SPM.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.