Results
(9 Answers)

Expert consensus shows most agree (6 out of 9) that best practices exist for minimizing analyte-like responses in procedural blanks, while 3 experts disagree.

Agreed best practices include:

  • Using high-purity reagents and ultra-pure/distilled solvents
  • Thorough cleaning of labware
  • Controlling the sample preparation environment (clean benches, laminar flow hoods)
  • Using complementary analytical methods for verification
  • Treating samples as sterile to avoid contamination
  • Using materials different from the analyte for procedural equipment
  • For PY-GC/MS specifically, using thermal extraction steps before pyrolysis

Points of disagreement:

  • Expert 8 argues blanks should reflect what samples experienced without trying to eliminate contamination
  • Expert 9 believes this area is "currently under explored"
  • Expert 4 is "not aware of such practices"
Summary Generated by AI

Answer Explanations

  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 3
    This requires targeted QA/QC strategies, such as blank characterization (FTIR, Raman...), double verification (dual methods, whenever possible). These contribute to ensure that microplastics are true positives, and not artifacts of contamination or misidentification.
  • No
    Expert 9
    I think this is an area that is currently under explored. Development of open access spectral libraries of MNP-free matrices, derived from analysis of archived historical MNP-free biological tissues would be one avenue to explore to minimise matrix effects.
  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 2
    Yes, there are several practices  that could be used in order to  minimize or eliminate the analyte-like responses in procedural blanks. One of the most important step is to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the trace-level analytical work such as environmental testing, food safety, or pharmaceutical analysis. Procedural or method blanks normally should not  contain any detectable analyte. For this to be accurate  it is essential to use high-purity reagents and solvents that are known to be contaminant free and were previously  properly filtered. More than that all the reagents used need to be ultra-pure or distilled, especially for trace metals analysis. For a better changes in the minimizing and elimination of analyte like response, all the labware should be thoroughly cleaned, due to the fact that both glassware and plasticware can leach or adsorb analytes. This could be done using  acid washing , thorough rinsing with ultra-pure water, and, when possible, using dedicated or certified clean containers, particularly for ultra-trace work. Another important aspect is the ability to control the sample preparation environment. For this purpose, clean benches or laminar flow hoods should be used. Also, the airborne contamination needs to be monitored properly, and the personnel that works in the lab should wear powder-free gloves and try to avoid personal care products containing potential analytes. The procedural blanks should be run alongside samples and include solvent blanks, reagent blanks, and instrument blanks to identify contamination sources throughout the workflow.  Also, the ongoing monitoring of potential sources of laboratory contamination is also very important. This could be performed by assessing the quality of the lab air, which may carry  either phthalates or hydrocarbons; plastic components such as tubing and seals, which can leach DEHP or BPA; as well as cleaning agents and gloves.
  • No
    Expert 4
    I am not aware of such practices.
  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 1
    Pyrolysis GCMS methods may not have issues related to analyte-like responses in procedural blanks.  My suggestion would be to perform two different methods of analysis (complementary methods) to confirm your results.  
  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 5
    For Optical spectroscopy, treat  your sample as a sterile sample, going to great lengths to avoid any contamination.
    For PY-GC/MS, non-polymeric material can be eliminated with a thermal extraction step before pyrolysis. Usually thermally extracting at 280 °C - 300 °C eliminates natural contaminants such as limonene, benzene, naphthalene, long chain organic acids/amides, etc.
  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 6
    To minimizing/eliminating analyte-like response in procedural blank, one should consider using procedural equipment, device, and consumables that are material-wise different from analyte. Sometimes it is difficult as plastics due it inner, cheat, safe, and stable features has been widely used in lab settings.  
  • No
    Expert 8
    This shouldnt be minimized.  The blanks should reflect what the samples experienced without trying to eliminate contamination in the blank.
  • Yes (please explain)
    Expert 7
    There are different things that can be done to minimize/eliminate analyte-like response in procedural blanks, for example, using high-purity reagents and solvents, thoroughly cleaning labware, using specific gloves, minimizing environmental contamination, running instrumental blanks...
0
Expert 2
07/30/2025 22:00
The authors should carefully read the suggestions made by the experts and try and incorporate them into the revised manuscript.
0
Expert 8
07/31/2025 02:06
I found this question a bit confusing, so I think that possibly lead to the 6:3 yes:no answer ratio.  Analyte-like response in procedural blanks is likely less problematic than analyte-like responses in the true samples.  For example, natural polyamides (proteins) will mimic nylons in FTIR analysis.  Assuming the procedural blanks dont have matrix in them, very little to no proteins should be present to amplify the nylon signal.  But in the tissue samples, this signal should be expected.  Ways to avoid those false positives include very close manual examination of the FTIR spectra and comparison to several natural polyamides. The answers seemed to build on and reiterate previous suggestions for how to eliminate background contamination.
0
Expert 4
07/31/2025 03:02
Looks like the experts agree on the need of best practises whilst acknowledging that such practises do not yet exist.
1 vote 1 0 votes
Expert 7
07/31/2025 08:54
I suggest that the author carefully evaluate the reviewers' comments and provide reliable information into the revised manuscript to strengthen its overall quality.
0
Expert 5
07/31/2025 11:56
The authors should point out as per the reviewers the need for consideration of the components of the matrix (and their breakdown products) when evaluating analytes of interest for possible false signals.
Comments are closed for this page.