Evaluation of in-situ calibration of Chemcatcher passive samplers for 322 micropollutants in agricultural and urban affected rivers

Overview of the Chemcatcher® for the passive sampling of various pollutants in aquatic environments Part A: Principles, calibration, preparation and analysis of the sampler

“…Sampling rates are calculated from the amounts accumulated in samplers and from time average water concentrations. This procedure has been successfully applied by Moschet et al [39] for the calibration of 87 compounds (mainly pesticide and pharmaceutical residues) over the 322 that were analyzed. In situ sampling rates were considered as robust because several quality criteria were applied (number of detections in grab water samples and distribution of data points) and samplers were deployed in five streams under various conditions (temperature, flow velocity, and contamination level).…”

Pesticide impact on aquatic invertebrates identified with Chemcatcher® passive samplers and the SPEARpesticides index

“…An SDB-RPS Empore disk modified with sulfonic acid groups was applied as receiving phase to detect hydrophilic and semi-hydrophilic chemicals with log K OW b 4 (Gunold et al, 2008;Moschet et al, 2015;Sanchez-Bayo and Hyne, 2014;Stephens et al, 2005;Vermeirssen et al, 2008). An overlaying diffusion-limiting membrane made from hydrophilic polyethersulfone (PES) with a pore size of 0.2 μm was used.…”

“…Very recently, in a large field study in Switzerland, Moschet et al (2015) showed the feasibility of the in-situ calibration of Chemcatchers. However, they also stated that their resultant field sampling rates for compounds that originate from sources with a changing release pattern (e.g., pesticides from fields) need to be used with much more caution than those for substances with only moderately fluctuating concentrations (e.g., pharmaceuticals originating from wastewater effluents).…”

“…In-situ R S values were reported for a flow velocity range of 0.05-0.8 m s −1 and could hence be applied to all sampling sites within our study. For substances not investigated by Moschet et al (2015), the median R S value of the study (0.07 L d −1 ) was chosen. Application to our field data yielded no superior results compared to our approach of using a flow-adjusted generic R S value.…”

Improving Toxicity Assessment of Pesticide Mixtures: The Use of Polar Passive Sampling Devices Extracts in Microalgae Toxicity Tests

“…Chemcatcher® was first developed for non-polar contaminants (Kingston et al, 2000), and was then adapted for metals (Björklund Persson et al, 2001), organo metallic compounds (Aguilar-Martínez et al, 2011), and a wide range of polar contaminants (Moschet et al, 2015). It was the object of recent and extensive reviews (Charriau et al, 2016; Lissalde et al, 2016).…”