Abstract
The bias and the precision of the analytical method used were initially assessed using reagent blanks and duplicate analyses of each sample. Furthermore, a sampling and analytical quality control scheme (SAX) was conducted and robust analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to estimate the proportions of random errors introduced by sampling and analytical procedures. The results show that the precision of measurement and analysis, though worse than the traditional target of 10%, was good enough for a clear description of geochemical variation between sample sites. The effect of Al contamination seemed to be more sensitive in the chemical analysis than in sampling procedure. Moreover, the application of SAX to the study suggests that the analytical precision required must be judged by comparison with both sampling precision and true geochemical variation.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call