1995
DOI: 10.1007/bf00323340
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Statistical evaluation of the influence of several sample pretreatment methods on the mercury content detectable by chemical analysis of contaminated soil samples under practical conditions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Additionally the influence of sample pretreatment and time between sampling and analysis were also assessed because it has been reported that common pretreatment procedures such as air-drying, homogenization, sieving, or storage in plastic bags can be sources of error, particularly in the case of volatile Hg 0 that can easily be lost (Rasemann et al, 1995).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally the influence of sample pretreatment and time between sampling and analysis were also assessed because it has been reported that common pretreatment procedures such as air-drying, homogenization, sieving, or storage in plastic bags can be sources of error, particularly in the case of volatile Hg 0 that can easily be lost (Rasemann et al, 1995).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…98 Sample pretreatment contributed substantially to the variance in results and was of the same order as the contribution from sample inhomogeneity. Welz et al 283 and Baxter et al 284 have conducted speciation studies on mercury in soils.…”
Section: Miscellaneous Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 97%