Filtern
Erscheinungsjahr
Dokumenttyp
- Zeitschriftenartikel (23)
- Sonstiges (1)
Sprache
- Englisch (24)
Schlagworte
- ICP-MS (3)
- Atomic Force Microscopy (2)
- Fluorescence (2)
- Imaging (2)
- LA-ICP-MS (2)
- Magnetic nanoparticles (2)
- NO2 (2)
- Nanoparticles (2)
- Passive sampling (2)
- Quality assurance (2)
Organisationseinheit der BAM
- 1 Analytische Chemie; Referenzmaterialien (7)
- 6 Materialchemie (5)
- 1.1 Anorganische Spurenanalytik (4)
- 6.1 Oberflächen- und Dünnschichtanalyse (3)
- 1.2 Biophotonik (2)
- 9 Komponentensicherheit (2)
- 9.5 Tribologie und Verschleißschutz (2)
- 1.8 Umweltanalytik (1)
- 4 Material und Umwelt (1)
- 4.3 Schadstofftransfer und Umwelttechnologien (1)
Paper des Monats
- ja (1)
This key comparison aims to assess the core capabilities of the participants in gas analysis. Such competences include, among others, the capabilities to prepare Primary Standard gas Mixtures (PSMs), perform the necessary purity analysis on the materials used in the gas mixture preparation, the verification of the composition of newly prepared PSMs against existing ones, and the capability of calibrating the composition of a gas mixture. According to the Strategy for Key Comparisons of the Gas Analysis Working Group, this key comparison is classified as an RMO track A key comparison.
The artefacts were binary mixtures of propane in nitrogen at a nominal amount-of-substance fraction level of 1000 μmol/mol. The values and uncertainties from the gravimetric gas mixture preparation were used as key comparison reference values (KCRVs). Each transfer standard had its own KCRV. The results are generally good. All results are within ± 1 % of the KCRV.
ISO 18516:2019 Surface chemical analysis—Determination of lateral resolution and sharpness in beam-based methods with a range from nanometres to micrometres revises ISO 18516:2006 Surface chemical analysis—Auger electron spectroscopy and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy—Determination of lateral resolution. It implements three different methods delivering parameters useful to express the lateral resolution: (1) the straight edge method, (2) the narrow line method and (3) the grating method. The theoretical background of these methods is introduced in ISO/TR 19319:2013 Surface chemical analysis—Fundamental approaches to determination of lateral resolution and sharpness in beam-based methods. The revised International Standard ISO 18516 delivers standardized procedures for the determination of the (1) effective lateral resolution by imaging of square-wave gratings, the (2) lateral resolution expressed as the parameter D12–88 characterizing the steepness of the sigmoidal edge spread function (ESF) determined by imaging a straight edge and (3) the lateral resolution expressed as the full width of half maximum of the line spread function (LSF), wLSF, determined by imaging a narrow line. The last method also delivers information on the shape of the LSF, which characterizes an individual imaging instrument. Finally, the implementation of all three standardized methods in the field of imaging laboratory X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) is shortly presented. This part of the letter is based on the use of a new test sample developed at ETH Zurich, Switzerland. This test sample displays a micrometre scaled pattern motivated by the resolving power of recent imaging XPS instruments.
In this work, a routinely applicable approach is presented to characterize metal NPs. Individual droplets generated from a microdroplet generator (MDG) were merged into an aerosol generated by a pneumatic nebulizer (PN) and introduced into an ICPMS. The MDG offers high transport efficiency of individual and discrete droplets and was therefore used to establish a calibration function for mass quantification of NPs which were introduced through the PN following the single particle procedure as described elsewhere. The major advantages of such a combined configuration include fast processing of large sample volumes, fast exchanges of different sample matrixes, and the calibration of the NP signal using traceable elemental standards, thus avoiding the need to use NP reference materials or other, not always thoroughly characterized, commercially available NPs. The transport efficiency of the sample introduction is calculated based on the fact that 100% of the calibrant reaches the plasma through the MDG, whereas for the PN a NP suspension containing a known number concentration is used. Alternatively, bulk analysis of the NP material allows transport efficiency determination without any additional information from reference NPs. With this method, we could determine the size of standard silver NPs at 60.4 ± 1.0 nm and 80.0 ± 1.4 nm, respectively, which agrees with the size ranges given by the supplier (60.8 ± 6.6 nm and 79.8 ± 5.4 nm). Furthermore, we were also able to determine the NPs number concentration of the sample (Ag/Au) with a deviation of 3.2% the expected value.
The lead authors failed to name two collaborators as co-authors. The authors listed should include:
Miss Claudia L. Compean-Gonzalez (ORCID:
0000-0002-2367-8450) and Dr. Giacomo Ceccone (ORCID:
0000-0003-4637-0771).
These co-authors participated in VAMAS project A27, provided data that were analyzed and presented in this publication (and supporting information), and reviewed the manuscript before submission.
We report the results of a Versailles Project on Advanced Materials and Standards interlaboratory study on the intensity scale calibration of x-ray photoelectron spectrometers using low-density polyethylene (LDPE) as an alternative material to gold, silver, and copper. An improved set of LDPE reference spectra, corrected for different instrument geometries using a quartz-monochromated Al Kα x-ray source, was developed using data provided by participants in this study. Using
these new reference spectra, a transmission function was calculated for each dataset that participants provided. When compared to a similar calibration procedure using the NPL reference spectra for gold, the LDPE intensity calibration method achieves an absolute offset of ∼3.0% and a systematic deviation of ±6.5% on average across all participants. For spectra recorded at high pass energies (≥90 eV), values of absolute offset and systematic deviation are ∼5.8% and ±5.7%, respectively, whereas for spectra collected at lower pass energies (<90 eV), values of absolute offset and systematic deviation are ∼4.9% and ±8.8%, respectively; low pass energy spectra perform worse than the global average, in terms of systematic deviations, due to diminished count rates and signal-to-noise ratio. Differences in absolute offset are attributed to the surface roughness of the LDPE induced by sample preparation. We further assess the usability of LDPE as a secondary reference material and comment on its performance in the presence of issues such as variable dark noise, x-ray warm up times, inaccuracy at low count rates, and underlying spectrometer problems. In response to participant feedback and the results of the study, we provide an updated LDPE intensity calibration protocol to address the issues highlighted in the interlaboratory study. We also comment on the lack of implementation of a consistent and traceable intensity calibration method across the community of x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) users and, therefore, propose a route to achieving this with the assistance of instrument manufacturers, metrology laboratories, and experts leading to an international standard for XPS intensity scale calibration.
The analytical potential of a nanosecond laser ablation coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ns-LA-ICP-SFMS)system is investigated for fast and highly spatially resolved (~µm) elemental distribution within single cells. The size, morphology and overlapping of laser-induced craters has been investigated with Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM).
The analytical potential of a nanosecond laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometer (ns-LA-ICP-SFMS) system, equipped with an ultra-fast wash-out ablation chamber, is critically investigated for fast and highly spatially resolved (∼μm) qualitative elemental distribution within single cells. Initially, a low surface roughness (< 10 nm) thin In–SnO2 layer (total coating thickness ∼200 nm) deposited on glass is employed to investigate the size, morphology and overlapping of laser-induced craters obtained at different laser repetition rates, making use of Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). Conical craters with a surface diameter of about 2 µm and depths of about 100 nm were measured after a single laser shot. Furthermore, the influence of the sampling distance (i.e. distance between the sample surface and the inner sniffer of the ablation chamber) on the LA-ICP-MS ion signal wash-out time is evaluated. A significant decrease of the transient 120Sn+ ion signal is noticed after slight variations (±200 μm) around the optimum sampling position. Ultra-fast wash-outs (< 10 ms) are achieved reducing the aerosol mixing from consecutive laser shots even when operating the laser at high repetition rates (25 – 100 Hz). Fast and highly spatially resolved images of elemental distribution within mouse embryonic fibroblast cells (NIH/3T3 fibroblast cells) and human cervical carcinoma cells (HeLa cells), incubated with gold nanoparticles (Au NPs) and Cd-based quantum dots (QDs), respectively, are determined at the optimized operating conditions. Elemental distribution of Au and Cd in single cells is achieved using a high scanning speed (50 µm/s) and high repetition rate (100 Hz). The results obtained for the distribution of fluorescent Cd-based QDs within the HeLa cells are in good agreement with those obtained by confocal microscopy. The size, morphology and overlapping of laser-induced craters in the fixed cells are also investigated using AFM, observing conical craters with a surface diameter of about 2.5 µm and depths of about 800 nm after a single laser shot.
Supplementary comparison study - measurement capabilities for the quantification of ethanol in water
(2022)
The accurate quantification of ethanol in water is essential for forensic applications such as blood and breath alcohol testing and for commercial applications such as the assessment of alcoholic beverages.
The intercomparison EURAMET.QM-S14 is part of a capacity building project named ALCOREF “Certified forensic alcohol reference materials”
that is running within the European Metrology Programme for Innovation and Research (EMPIR). The intercomparison should allow project partners and other interested National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) and Designated Institutes (DIs) to benchmark their analytical methods for the quantification of ethanol in water. The study plan was agreed by the European Association of National Metrology Institutes (EURAMET) Subcommittee Bio- and Organic Analysis (SCBOA) and the Organic Analysis Working Group (OAWG) of the Comité Consultatif pour la Quantité de Matière (CCQM) in February and April 2019, respectively. The intercomparison was coordinated by BAM. Two concentration levels relevant for the calibration and verification of evidential breath alcohol analysers were distributed to study participants. Fifteen institutes from 15 countries registered for the intercomparison and returned results. Participants mostly applied gas chromatography with flame ionisation detection (GC-FID) or mass spectroscopy (GC-MS), one participant used titrimetry and one participant employed a test bench for breath analyser calibration (“bubble train”). Participants did either in-house purity assessment of their commercial ethanol calibrants by Karl-Fischer titration, chromatographic methods, quantitative nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (qNMR) and/or density measurements; or they used ethanol/water Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) from NMIs/DIs for calibration.
CCQM OAWG agreed to use a consensus value from participants results that utilizes the reported uncertainties as Key Comparison Reference Value (KCRV). The Gaussian Random effects model with Hierarchical Bayesian solution (HB-REM) is a reasonable approach in this case. The KCRVs and Degrees of Equivalence (DoEs) were calculated with the NIST consensus builder version 1.2 Hierarchical Bayes procedure.
Successful participation in the interlaboratory comparison has demonstrated the capabilities in determining the mass fraction of ethanol in aqueous matrices in the range 0.1 mg/g to 8 mg/g. Fourteen out of 15 participants have successfully quantified both samples, one participant successfully quantified only the lower-level (0.6 mg/g) sample.
A modern day light microscope has evolved from a tool devoted to making primarily empirical observations to what is now a sophisticated, quantitative device that is an integral part of both physical and life science research. Nowadays, microscopes are found in nearly every experimental laboratory. However, despite their prevalent use in capturing and quantifying scientific phenomena, neither a thorough understanding of the principles underlying quantitative imaging techniques nor appropriate knowledge of how to calibrate, operate and maintain microscopes can be taken for granted. This is clearly demonstrated by the well-documented and widespread difficulties that are routinely encountered in evaluating acquired data and reproducing scientific experiments. Indeed, studies have shown that more than 70% of researchers have tried and failed to repeat another scientist’s experiments, while more than half have even failed to reproduce their own experiments1. One factor behind the reproducibility crisis of experiments published in scientific journals is the frequent underreporting of imaging methods caused by a lack of awareness and/or a lack of knowledge of the applied technique2,3. Whereas quality control procedures for some methods used in biomedical research, such as genomics (e.g., DNA sequencing, RNA-seq) or cytometry, have been introduced (e.g. ENCODE4), this issue has not been tackled for optical microscopy instrumentation and images. Although many calibration standards and protocols have been published, there is a lack of awareness and agreement on common Standards and guidelines for quality assessment and reproducibility5.
In April 2020, the QUality Assessment and REProducibility for instruments and images in Light Microscopy (QUAREP-LiMi) initiative6 was formed. This initiative comprises imaging scientists from academia and industry who share a common interest in achieving a better understanding of the performance and limitations of microscopes and improved quality control (QC) in light microscopy. The ultimate goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to establish a set of common QC standards, guidelines, metadata models7,8, and tools9,10, including detailed protocols, with the ultimate aim of improving reproducible advances in scientific research.
This White Paper 1) summarizes the major obstacles identified in the field that motivated the launch of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative; 2) identifies the urgent need to address these obstacles in a grassroots manner, through a community of Stakeholders including, researchers, imaging scientists11, bioimage analysts, bioimage informatics developers, corporate partners, Funding agencies, standards organizations, scientific publishers, and observers of such; 3) outlines the current actions of the QUAREPLiMi initiative, and 4) proposes future steps that can be taken to improve the dissemination and acceptance of the proposed guidelines to manage QC.
To summarize, the principal goal of the QUAREP-LiMi initiative is to improve the overall quality and reproducibility of light microscope image data by introducing broadly accepted standard practices and accurately captured image data metrics.