Search

Your search keyword '"Devillers, Delphine"' showing total 7 results
Start Over Author "Devillers, Delphine"
7 results on '"Devillers, Delphine"'

4. Diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT): A suitable tool for metals/metalloids monitoring in continental waterbodies at the large network scale

Author

Rougerie, Juliette, Martins de Barros, Rachel, Buzier, Rémy, Devillers, Delphine, Fondanèche, Patrice, Lissalde, Sophie, Leblanc, Julie, Saüt, Margaux, Rebillard, Jean-Pierre, Mazzella, Nicolas, Guibaud, Gilles, PEIRENE (PEIRENE), Institut Génomique, Environnement, Immunité, Santé, Thérapeutique (GEIST), Université de Limoges (UNILIM)-Université de Limoges (UNILIM), Agence de l'Eau Adour-Garonne, Ecosystèmes aquatiques et changements globaux (UR EABX), and Institut National de Recherche pour l’Agriculture, l’Alimentation et l’Environnement (INRAE)

Subjects
Passive sampling, Water quality network, Field sampling, MetalsMetalloids, [SDE]Environmental Sciences
Abstract

International audience; The contribution of Diffusive Gradients in Thin films (DGT) passive sampling to continental water quality monitoring was assessed in a real measurement network (6 sampling campaigns, 17 stations). Ten metals/metalloids (Al, Zn, Ni, Cd, Cu, Pb, Cr, As, Se and Sb) were studied using the control laboratory's working conditions with grab and DGT passive sampling. The DGT field deployments were robust, with a 3% sampler loss rate and a

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

5. Increasing the reliability of the DGT technique for quantifying cationic and anionic trace elements in natural water

Author

Devillers, Delphine, Groupement de Recherche Eau, Sol, Environnement (GRESE), Université de Limoges (UNILIM), Université de Limoges, Gilles Guibaud, Rémy Buzier, and Adeline Charriau

Subjects
Passive sampling, Biofouling, Encrassement, Élution, Biofilm, [SDU.STU]Sciences of the Universe [physics]/Earth Sciences, Fouling, DGT, Spéciation, Elution factors, Échantillonnage passif
Abstract

The passive sampling DGT technique (Diffusive Gradients in Thin Films) has a lot of benefits (time-weighted average concentrations, low limits of quantification) and would therefore be a useful tool for monitoring studies to quantify trace elements in natural water. However, there are still some limitations and grey areas that put the brakes on the development of the method for regulatory applications. The aim of this work is to identify potential biases and contribute to increase the method reliability. This study shows that a minimized uncertainty on results can be obtained only if elution factors are experimentally determined; however, standard values of 0.8 for Cr(III) and 0.85 for Al(III), Cd(II), Co(II), Cu(II), Ni(II), Pb(II) and Zn(II) are suggested to reduce manipulations while keeping reasonable uncertainty (

Published
2017

7. Diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT): A suitable tool for metals/metalloids monitoring in continental waterbodies at the large network scale.

Author

Rougerie J, Martins de Barros R, Buzier R, Devillers D, Fondanèche P, Lissalde S, Leblanc J, Saüt M, Rebillard JP, Mazzella N, and Guibaud G

Abstract

The contribution of Diffusive Gradients in Thin films (DGT) passive sampling to continental water quality monitoring was assessed in a real measurement network (6 sampling campaigns, 17 stations). Ten metals/metalloids (Al, Zn, Ni, Cd, Cu, Pb, Cr, As, Se and Sb) were studied using the control laboratory's working conditions with grab and DGT passive sampling. The DGT field deployments were robust, with a 3% sampler loss rate and a <65% average relative deviation between duplicates. Compared to grab sampling, DGT showed a similar quantification frequency for half of the targeted elements but showed a higher frequency for the other half (e.g., Cd quantification at 20% with grab sampling vs. 97% with DGT). Similar concentration trends were established using DGT and grab sampling at most sites throughout the year. Notably, for some elements, trends were only provided by DGT sampling. A study of several DGT blanks showed that the device contamination was occasional and originated primarily from cross-contamination during the disassembly step. Considering this contamination, the operational sensitivity by DGT was at least between 1 and 5 times greater in comparison to that by grab sampling. Estimations of the economic cost revealed that measurement networks cost 2 to 3 times more when monitored by DGT compared to standard grab monitoring. However, the information obtained based on each type of sampling method is different. Grab sampling is easy to implement and can highlight high contamination peaks. The DGT concentrations are averaged over time and are relevant to chronic exposure evaluations. Considering the good performance of the DGT sampling highlighted in this study and its complementarity with grab sampling in terms of water quality assessments, a combination of these two types of sampling, which can be affordable, should improve the water quality evaluation within monitoring networks., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results