Status: this preprint is currently under review for the journal AMT.
An interlaboratory comparison to quantify oxidative potential measurement in aerosol particles: challenges and recommendations for harmonisation
Pamela A. Dominutti,Jean-Luc Jaffrezo,Anouk Marsal,Takoua Mhadhbi,Rhabira Elazzouzi,Camille Rak,Fabrizia Cavalli,Jean-Philippe Putaud,Aikaterini Bougiatioti,Nikolaos Mihalopoulos,Despina Paraskevopoulou,Ian S. Mudway,Athanasios Nenes,Kaspar R. Daellenbach,Catherine Banach,Steven J. Campbell,Hana Cigánková,Daniele Contini,Greg Evans,Maria Georgopoulou,Manuella Ghanem,Drew A. Glencross,Maria Rachele Guascito,Hartmut Herrmann,Saima Iram,Maja Jovanović,Milena Jovašević-Stojanović,Markus Kalberer,Ingeborg M. Kooter,Suzanne E. Paulson,Anil Patel,Esperanza Perdrix,Maria Chiara Pietrogrande,Pavel Mikuška,Jean-Jacques Sauvain,Aikaterina Seitanidi,Pourya Shahpoury,Eduardo J. S. Souza,Sarah Steimer,Svetlana Stevanovic,Guillaume Suarez,P. S. Ganesh Subramanian,Battist Utinger,Marloes F. van Os,Vishal Verma,Xing Wang,Rodney J. Weber,Yuhan Yang,Xavier Querol,Gerard Hoek,Roy M. Harrison,and Gaëlle Uzu
Abstract. This paper presents the findings from a collaborative interlaboratory comparison exercise designed to assess oxidative potential (OP) measurements conducted by 20 laboratories worldwide. This study represents an innovative effort as the first exercise specifically aimed at harmonising this type of OP assay, setting a new benchmark in the field.
Over the last decade, there has been a noticeable increase in OP studies, with numerous research groups investigating the effects of exposure to air pollution particles through the evaluation of OP levels. However, the absence of standardised methods for OP measurements has resulted in variability in results across different groups, rendering meaningful comparisons challenging. To address this issue, this study engages in an international effort to compare OP measurements using a simplified method (with a dithiothreitol (DTT) assay).
Here, we quantify the OP in liquid samples to focus on the protocol measurement itself, while future ILCs should aim to assess the full-chain process, including the sample extraction. We analyse the similarities and discrepancies observed in the results, identifying the critical parameters (such as the instrument used, the use of a simplified protocol, the delivery and analysis time) that could influence OP measurements, and provide recommendations for future studies and interlaboratory comparisons. Even if other crucial aspects, such as sampling PM methods, sample storage, extraction methods and conditions, and the evaluation of other OP assays, still need to be standardised. This collaborative approach enhances the robustness of the OP-DTT assay and paves the way for future studies to build on a unified framework. This pioneering work concludes that interlaboratory comparisons provide essential insights into the OP metric and are crucial to move toward the harmonisation of OP measurements.
Received: 13 Jun 2024 – Discussion started: 24 Jul 2024
Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.
Institute for Environmental Research and Sustainable Development, National Observatory of Athens, Lofos Koufou, P. Penteli, Athens, 15236, Greece
Ian S. Mudway
MRC Centre for Environment and Health, and the National Institute of Health Research, Health Protection Research Unit in Environmental Exposures and Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
Center for the Study of Air Quality and Climate Change, Institute of Chemical Engineering Sciences, Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Patras, Greece 26504
Laboratory of Atmospheric Processes and their Impacts, Institute of Environmental Engineering, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland, 1015
Kaspar R. Daellenbach
Laboratory of Atmospheric Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, 5232 Villigen PSI, Switzerland
Catherine Banach
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of California at Los Angeles, 520 Portola Plaza, Los Angeles, California, 90095, United States
Steven J. Campbell
MRC Centre for Environment and Health, Environmental Research Group, Imperial College London, 86 Wood Lane, London W12 0BZ, UK
Hana Cigánková
Department of Environmental Analytical Chemistry, Institute of Analytical Chemistry, Czech Academy of Sciences, Veveří 97, 60200 Brno, Czech Republic
Southern Ontario Centre for Atmospheric Aerosol Research, University of Toronto, Toronto, M5S 3E5, Canada
Maria Georgopoulou
Center for the Study of Air Quality and Climate Change, Institute of Chemical Engineering Sciences, Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Patras, Greece 26504
Manuella Ghanem
Department of Pollutant Metrology, Institut National de Recherche et de Sécurité (INRS), 54500 Vandœuvrelès-Nancy, France
MRC Centre for Environment and Health, and the National Institute of Health Research, Health Protection Research Unit in Environmental Exposures and Health, Imperial College London, London, UK
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of California at Los Angeles, 520 Portola Plaza, Los Angeles, California, 90095, United States
Anil Patel
Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, Stockholm, 11418, Sweden
Bolin Centre for Climate Research, Stockholm, 11418, Sweden
now at: Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1565, USA
Esperanza Perdrix
IMT Nord Europe, Institut Mines-Télécom, Univ. Lille, Centre for Energy and Environment, F-59000 Lille, France
Maria Chiara Pietrogrande
Department of Chemical, Pharmaceutical and Agricultural Sciences, University of Ferrara, Via Fossato di Mortara 17/19, 44121 Ferrara, Italy
Pavel Mikuška
Department of Environmental Analytical Chemistry, Institute of Analytical Chemistry, Czech Academy of Sciences, Veveří 97, 60200 Brno, Czech Republic
Jean-Jacques Sauvain
Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Department of Occupational and Environment Health (DSTE), University of Lausanne, Switzerland
Aikaterina Seitanidi
Center for the Study of Air Quality and Climate Change, Institute of Chemical Engineering Sciences, Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Patras, Greece 26504
Pourya Shahpoury
Environmental and Life Sciences, Trent University, Peterborough, Canada
Center for Primary Care and Public Health (Unisanté), Department of Occupational and Environment Health (DSTE), University of Lausanne, Switzerland
P. S. Ganesh Subramanian
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 205 North Mathews Avenue, Urbana, IL, 61801, United States
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 205 North Mathews Avenue, Urbana, IL, 61801, United States
Xing Wang
Southern Ontario Centre for Atmospheric Aerosol Research, University of Toronto, Toronto, M5S 3E5, Canada
Division of Environmental Health and Risk Management, School of Geography Earth and Environmental Sciences, Edgbaston, Birmingham, UK, B15 2TT, United Kingdom
Department of Environmental Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
In this work, 20 labs worldwide collaborated to evaluate the measurement of air pollution's oxidative potential (OP), a key indicator of its harmful effects. The study aimed to identify disparities in the widely used OP DTT assay and assess the consistency of OP among labs using the same protocol. The results showed that half of the labs achieved acceptable results. However, variability was also found, highlighting the need for standardization in OP procedures.
In this work, 20 labs worldwide collaborated to evaluate the measurement of air pollution's...