English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  Laboratory inter-comparison of dissolved dimethyl sulphide (DMS) measurements using purge-and-trap and solid-phase microextraction techniques during a mesocosm experiment

Vogt, M., Turner, S., Yassaa, N., Steinke, M., Williams, J., & Liss, P. (2008). Laboratory inter-comparison of dissolved dimethyl sulphide (DMS) measurements using purge-and-trap and solid-phase microextraction techniques during a mesocosm experiment. Marine Chemistry, 108(1-2), 32-39. doi:10.1016/j.marchem.2007.10.001.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
BGC1077.pdf (Publisher version), 4MB
 
File Permalink:
-
Name:
BGC1077.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Restricted (Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, MJBK; )
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/octet-stream
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
-
Copyright Info:
-
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Vogt, M.1, Author           
Turner, S., Author
Yassaa, N., Author
Steinke, M., Author
Williams, J., Author
Liss, P., Author
Affiliations:
1Department Biogeochemical Synthesis, Prof. C. Prentice, Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry, Max Planck Society, ou_1497753              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: Dimethylsulphide Seawater Solid-phase microextraction Purge and trap Sample preparation Norwegian fjord mesocosm Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry Phytoplankton Sulfur Bloom Air
 Abstract: We compare dissolved dimethyl sulphide (DMS) measurements made by our independent laboratories during a mesocosm study of marine phytoplankton under different CO2 regimes in a Norwegian fjord. Sample preparation and analyses were conducted using headspace solid-phase microextraction (SPME) with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (Max-Planck Institute for Chemistry, MPIC), and purge-and-trap extraction (P&T) with gas chromatography and flame photometric detection (University of East Anglia, UEA). The two analytical systems were calibrated independently. During the evolution of the bloom (22 days) DMS concentrations ranged from 1-35 nM and 90 pairs of data were available for comparison. We found a small systematic difference between the two methods, with UEA measuring on average 8% more DMS than MPIC. Overall, there was good correlation between the datasets (r(2)=0.997, P=0.01), with higher correlation for concentrations greater than 5 nM (r(2)=0.998, P=0.01) and increased scatter at lower concentrations (r(2)=0.833, P=0.01). We discuss potential reasons for the differences between the measurements and address the treatment of natural samples for DMS analysis. We recommend SPME be considered for wider use and encourage full analytical comparisons in the low concentration range. (C) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. [References: 20]

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 2008
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: -
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: -
 Identifiers: DOI: 10.1016/j.marchem.2007.10.001
Other: BGC1077
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Marine Chemistry
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: Amsterdam : Elsevier
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 108 (1-2) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 32 - 39 Identifier: CoNE: https://pure.mpg.de/cone/journals/resource/954925512459
ISSN: 0304-4203