Challenges in the Analysis of Novel Flame Retardants in Indoor Dust: Results of the INTERFLAB 2 Interlaboratory Evaluation
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2018 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.8b02715 |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b02715 |
| Keywords | POLYBROMINATED DIPHENYL ETHERS; TETRABROMOBISPHENOL-A; WITHIN-ROOM; LEGACY; PBDES; ENVIRONMENT; BIRMINGHAM; SAMPLES; HOUSE; SUITE |
| Description | The Interlaboratory Study of Novel Flame Retardants (INTERFLAB 2) was conducted by 20 laboratories in 12 countries to test the precision and accuracy of the analysis of 24 "novel" flame retardants (NFRs). Laboratories analyzed NFRs in injection-ready test mixtures, in extracts of residential dust, and in residential dust to evaluate the influence of dust handling and extraction. For test mixtures, mean reported concentrations of PBT, PBEB, EH-TBB, TBBPA, TBDP-TAZTO, TBOEP, alpha-TBCO, beta-DBE-DBCH, and total HBCDD differed by >25% relative to reference values. Coefficients of variation were higher in dusts/dust extracts than in test mixtures. Concentrations among laboratories ranged over 3-4 orders of magnitude for HBB, TBP-DBPE, TBP-AE, and TDCIPP in dust extracts and dusts. Most laboratories produced repeatable dust concentrations, but differences reported in the literature among laboratories of <70% could be due to analytical variability, and the attribution of such differences to other causes should be made with caution. Most variations in accuracy and precision were introduced by matrix effects and/or sample processing, rather than instrumental analysis. We recommend recovery correction to improve accuracy. There is a need to improve analytical methods and to validate methods on complex matrices such as standard reference materials for dust or spiked matrices. |
| Related projects: |