Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Improvement of analytical methods for arsenic in soil using ICP-AES
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Analytical Science and Technology
  • Volume 28, Issue 6,  2015, pp.409-416
  • Publisher : The Korean Society of Analytical Science
  • DOI : 10.5806/AST.2015.28.6.409
 Title & Authors
Improvement of analytical methods for arsenic in soil using ICP-AES
Lee, Hong-gil; Kim, Ji In; Kim, Rog-young; Ko, Hyungwook; Kim, Tae Seung; Yoon, Jeong Ki;
  PDF(new window)
ICP-AES has been used in many laboratories due to the advantages of wide calibration range and multi-element analysis, but it may give erroneous results and suffer from spectral interference due to the large number of emission lines associated with each element. In this study, certified reference materials (CRMs) and field samples were analyzed by ICP-AES and HG-AAS according to the official Korean testing method for soil pollution to investigate analytical problems. The applicability of HG-ICP-AES was also tested as an alternative method. HG-AAS showed good accuracies (90.8~106.3%) in all CRMs, while ICP-AES deviated from the desired range in CRMs with low arsenic and high Fe/Al. The accuracy in CRM030 was estimated as below 39% at the wavelength of 193.696 nm by ICP-AES. Significant partial overlaps and sloping background interferences were observed near to 193.696 nm with the presence of 50 mg/L Fe and Al. Most CRMs were quantified with few or no interferences of Fe and Al at 188.980 nm. ICP-AES properly assessed low and high level arsenic for field samples, at 188.980 nm and 193.696 nm, respectively. The importance of the choice of measurement wavelengths corresponding to relative arsenic level should be noted. Because interferences were affected by the sample matrix, operation conditions and instrument figures, the analysts were required to consider spectral interferences and compare the analytical performance of the recommended wavelengths. HG-ICP-AES was evaluated as a suitable alternative method for ICP-AES due to improvement of the detection limit, wide calibration ranges, and reduced spectral interferences by HG.
arsenic;soil;ICP-AES;hydride-generation (HG);AAS;
 Cited by
WHO, 'arsenic and arsenic compounds, Environmental health criteria 224', 2nd Ed., Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.

Alina Kabata-Pendias, In ‘Trace Elements in Soils and Plants’, 4th Ed., p353-355, CRC Press. Taylor & Francis group, 2011.

NIER, 'Evaluation and establishment of the soil pollution standards(II)', 2005.

Ministry of Environment, 'Annual report of soil monitoring network and soil contamination survey in 2013', 2014.

M. Tighe, P. Lockwood, S. Wilson and L. Lisle, Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal., 35(9&10), 1369-1385 (2004). crossref(new window)

Geological Survey of Finland publication - Arsenic,, Assessed 7 Oct 2015.

Ministry of Environment Notification No. 2013-113 (2013.09.12), Republic of Korea.

M. Csuros and C. Csuros, In ‘Environmental sampling and analysis for metals’, p153-157, CRC Press, 2002.

UK Environment Agency, 'The determination of metals in solid environmental samples', 2006.

USEPA method 6010C,, Assessed 4 May 2015.

K. A. Hudson-Edwards, S. L. Houghton and A. Osborn, Trends Analyt Chem., 23(10-11), 745-752 (2004). crossref(new window)

Ministry of Environment Notification No. 2015-76 (2015. 6. 3), Republic of Korea.

J. Dedina and D. L. Tsalev, In ‘Hydride Generation Atomic Absorption Spectrometry’, J. D. p182, Winefordner Ed., Wiley, Chichester, West Sussex, UK, 1995.

ISO Reference No. 22036:2008(E), 1st Ed., 2008.

S. D. Chapnick, L. C. Pitts and N. C. Rothman, Remediat. J., 20(4), 39-59 (2010). crossref(new window)