Zhou Meifang, Struve David M
Water Quality Analysis Division, Environmental Monitoring & Assessment Department, South Florida Water Management Distract, Skees Road, West Palm Beach, FL 33411, USA.
Water Res. 2004 Nov;38(18):3893-8. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.06.031.
There are differences between the EPA Method 365 and the APHA-AWWA-WEF's Standard Method 4500 with respect to the post-digestion treatment procedures of the persulfate-digested water. The effects on total phosphorus analysis of different post-digestion treatment procedures, such as neutralization and reacidification, and shaking/settling, were investigated in this study using the total phosphorus measurements of water samples from the Everglades Round Robin (ERR) study and comparing the results with the ERR study. The effects of the insoluble particles or phosphorus adsorption/precipitation on/with Al and Fe hydroxides in different post-digestion treatment procedures adequately accounted for the differences between the most probable value and the higher or lower total phosphorus measurements reported in the ERR study. Based on the results of this investigation we recommend that a clearly defined set of digestion and post-digestion treatment procedures be adopted as the standard for total phosphorus analysis using the ascorbic acid method.
在过硫酸盐消解水的消解后处理程序方面，美国环境保护局（EPA）方法365与美国公共卫生协会（APHA）、美国自来水厂协会（AWWA）和水环境联合会（WEF）的标准方法4500存在差异。本研究利用大沼泽地循环试验（ERR）研究中的水样总磷测量结果，并将结果与ERR研究进行比较，调查了不同消解后处理程序（如中和与再酸化以及振荡/沉降）对总磷分析的影响。不同消解后处理程序中不溶性颗粒或磷与铝和铁的氢氧化物的吸附/沉淀作用，充分解释了ERR研究中报告的最可能值与较高或较低总磷测量值之间的差异。基于本调查结果，我们建议采用一套明确规定的消解和消解后处理程序，作为使用抗坏血酸法进行总磷分析的标准。
