ibsp & obsp

Make More Sense of Your Environmental Data with the

Branch of Quality System’s Blind-Sample Products

IBSP & OBSP

2

Question

You see a trend or pattern in your environmental data that you didn’t

expect.

How might you explain this?

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

3

Blind Samples

What is a “Blind” sample?• A blind sample is a quality-control sample whose

composition and origin is unknown except to those who are submitting the sample.

• It is disguised to appear like a regular environmental sample to the laboratory.

• Its purpose is to allow a realistic and uncensored measure of bias and variability of the entire laboratory process.

4

Blind Samples

How do blind-samples results help data-users assess their environmental sample results

from the NWQL?

• Blind samples are treated the same as environmental samples and are designed to capture the same sources of variability as environmental samples Inorganic-from login through NWIS Organic-from login through StarLIMS

• Blind samples and on-line QC samples are different

5

Blind Samples

How do blind-samples results help data-users assess their environmental sample results

from the NWQL?

• User accessible data sets Blind-sample results are retrieved, posted, and

available to the data-user• Inorganic – Within 1-3 days of release from the NWQL• Organic – Data reviewed when available.

6

Current products that help aid in data interpretation

• Time-series charts/box plots To observe bias and variability over time

• Recovery versus concentration charts To assess recovery and variability at

different concentration ranges• Blind-blank/false positive/false negative

charts To observe blank contamination and

assess reporting levels

7

Current products that help aid in data interpretation

• Raw data

• Custom data packets

• Data-quality assessment reports

8

Time-series charts: IBSP

9

Question

You see a trend or pattern in your environmental data that you didn’t

expect.

How might you explain this?

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

10


11


12

Time-series charts: OBSP

13

Time-series charts: OBSP

14

Box Plots: OBSPBQS ORGANIC BLIND SAMPLES

DETERMINATION: CYANAZINE, SCHEDULE: 2033 TESTIDCODE: 04041GCM35 , MEASURED IN MICROGRAMS PER LITER

04/03/08 TO 12/22/11 Open Data Set

15

Recovery vs. Concentration: OBSP

16

Question

You’re seeing unexpected results in your blank/low-level environmental

sample data.

How can you sort out these issues?

17

Blind-blank charts: IBSP

ICPMS, Nickel, Water, Filtered, collision

Test ID: 01065PLM10, Labcode: 3130

Open DataSet

http://bqs.usgs.gov/bbp/BBP01065PLM10.csv

18

Blind-blank charts: IBSP

ICPMS, Aluminum, Water, Filtered


Open DataSet


19

False positive charts: OBSP

20


Lab ID Spike Mix Reporting Level Analysis Date Result Conc.

20092960005 Crescent 08LL076: 80 µl 0.2 12/04/09 1.130

20093100005 Accu 209081217: 20 µl 0.2 12/18/09 0.070

20093380010 Crescent 08LL076: 20 µl 0.2 02/09/10 0.300

20093450031 Restek A070024: 40 µl 0.2 02/11/10 0.050

20101270037 Restek A070024: 80 µl 0.2 07/20/10 0.020

20101410010 Crescent 08LL076: 40 µl 0.2 08/18/10 0.590

20102390261 Crescent 08LL076: 40 µl 0.2 09/29/10 0.660

False Positives Listing for DIETHYL PHTHALATE

21


False Positives Listing for 3-Chloropropene

Lab ID Spike Mix Reporting Level

Analysis Date

Result Conc.

20103020157 Accu 210061400: 40 µl 0.08 11/02/10 0.198

20110070107 Accu 210061400: 20 µl 0.08 01/08/11 0.101

20110490036 Accu 210061400: 20 µl 0.08 02/19/11 0.140

20110690081 Accu 210061400: 40 µl 0.08 03/17/11 0.261

20111170106 Accu 210061400: 20 µl 0.08 04/29/11 0.162

20111540001 Accu 210061400: 40 µl 0.08 06/05/11 0.187

20112030060 Accu 210061400: 20 µl 0.08 07/23/11 0.134

20113010043 Accu 210061400: 20 µl 0.08 11/03/11 0.104

20113500023 Accu 210061400: 40 µl 0.08 12/17/11 0.110

22

Question

You expected to see a certain compound

in your sample and instead youreceived a < (less than) as your result.

Are the concentrations in your samples too low to be quantified?

23

False negative charts: OBSP

24

False negative charts: OBSP

Lab ID Spike Mix Reporting Level Analysis Date Result Conc.

20101340151 Accu 209081166: 80 µl 0.1 06/10/10 0.062

20111960035 Crescent 163162: 100 µl 0.1 07/18/11 0.087

False Positives Listing for CHLORAMBEN, METHYL ESTER

Lab ID Spike Mix Reporting Level Analysis Date Expected Conc.

20100920050 Restek A069890: 40 µl 0.1 04/14/10 0.1880564

20101270033 Spex Organics T1090828008: 40 µl

0.1 05/26/10 0.1907467

20101550008 Restek A069890: 80 µl 0.1 06/16/10 0.3845367

20101760005 Restek A069890: 40 µl 0.1 07/14/10 0.1879248

20103430088 ChemService 448-45B: 40 µl 0.1 01/04/11 0.1450068

20110130055 Abs 090910HPLC: 40 µl 0.1 02/02/11 0.1506629

20110410063 Abs 090910HPLC: 40 µl 0.1 02/25/11 0.1494322

20110490034 ChemService 448-45B: 40 µl 0.1 03/07/11 0.1443439

20110770004 Abs 090910HPLC: 40 µl 0.1 04/12/11 0.1490757

20111590002 ChemService 448-45B: 100 µl 0.1 06/28/11 0.3669634

False Negatives Listing for CHLORAMBEN, METHYL ESTER

25

Question

You think quality-control charts are OK,but you would really just like to have

the data to work with it yourself.

How can you easily obtain a subset of the QC data in a user-friendly format?

26

Raw data: IBSP/OBSP



Open DataSet


27

Raw data: IBSP/OBSP



Open DataSet


28

Raw data: IBSP/OBSP

29

Branch of Quality Systemsbqs.usgs.gov

•Inorganic blind-sample project Ted Struzeski

•Organic blind-sample project Suranne Stineman

30

Question

The website can be overwhelming with so many QC charts for so many parameters.

Can you just have a summary of suspecteddata-quality issues?

31

Data-quality assessment reports

• Inorganic: Every-other-month• Organic: Data reviewed when

available Data Quality Assessment Report - August 20112060

Analyte Name OBSP Notes NWQL Comment Corrective Action

Chloramben methyl ester

The most recent two points are recovering slightly higher than the recoveries seen prior to these samples. The two samples are from two different OBSP spike mixes.

Chloramben methyl ester has an interference peak which can cause it to be more difficult to quantitate at lower concentrations. The calculated LTMDL FY2012 has increased from 0.05 to 0.10 µg/L due to the presence of the interference.

The LT-MDL was raised in FY12 for this compound.

Also mentioned in the November 2010 report this analyte showed some false negatives all coming from one vendor. Since then, there have been multiple false negatives from 3 more different vendors.

This is likely due to the problems in quantitation of this compound at low levels due to the presence of the interference.

http://bqs.usgs.gov/OBSP/WY11Charts/August/Spikelevel_2060_CHLORAMBEN,_METHYL_ESTER.html

http://bqs.usgs.gov/OBSP/WY11Charts/August/Spikelevel_2060_CHLORAMBEN,_METHYL_ESTER.html

32

Data-quality assessment reports

33

Moving Forward…Inorganic Blind Sample Project

• Method-to-method charts To assess data-quality between methods

• Method A versus method B• Filtered versus unfiltered• Old method versus new method

• Concentration-dependent charts To assess concentration-dependent bias and

variability• Percent RSD charts

To assess variability at a given concentration To characterize overall method variability

34

Inorganic Blind Sample Project

• Potential Future Products Analyte by different methods: ICP versus DA

08/10/10 11/08/10 02/06/11 05/07/11 08/05/11 11/03/11 02/01/12 05/01/1280

85

90

95

100

105

110

115

120 Silica, filtered .

ICP vs. DA% Recov-DA% Recov-ICP

Date

Pe

rcen

t R

ecovery

35


• Potential Future Products Analyte in different phases: filtered versus unfiltered –

Example 1

8/17/03 8/17/04 8/17/05 8/17/06 8/17/07 8/17/08 8/17/09 8/17/10 8/17/1140

60

80

100

120

140

160

Lead, ICP-MS Filtered vs. Unfiltered .

% Recov-FIL

% Recov-UnF

Date

Pe

rce

nt

Re

co

ve

ry

36


• Potential Future Products Analyte in different phases: filtered versus unfiltered –

Example 2

12/29/04 12/30/05 12/30/06 12/30/07 12/29/08 12/30/09 12/30/10 12/30/1140

60

80

100

120

140

160

Zinc, cICP-MS Filtered vs. Unfiltered .

% Recov-FIL% Recov-UnF

Date

Pe

rce

nt

Re

co

ve

ry

37


• Potential Future Products Analyte by different methods: old method versus new method

7/13/02 7/14/03 7/13/04 7/13/05 7/13/06 7/14/07 7/13/08 7/13/09 7/13/10 7/14/11-6

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

Zinc, Filtered, ICP-MS ICP-MS vs. cICP-MS .

nsd for cICP-MS

nsd for ICP-MS

Date

Nu

mb

er

of

F-P

se

ud

osig

ma

s f

rom

th

e T

arg

et

Va

lue

38


• Potential Future Products Concentration-dependent recovery charts

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 840

60

80

100

120

140

160

Selenium, Unfiltered -- ICP-MS

Concentration, ug/L

Pe

rce

nt

Re

co

ve

ry

39


• Potential Future Products % Relative Standard Deviation chart

Math!

%RSD = (SD/mean)*100

SD = %RSD(mean)/100

Let %RSD = 3 and concentration = 20 mg/L

SD = 3(20)/100

SD = 0.6

40

41

• Analyte in multiple methods• To assess data-quality performance across multiple methods• Old method versus new method

• Chart of expected and reported concentration versus time• To assess concentration-dependent bias over time

• Annual false positive and false negative summaries• To assess potential contamination issues or interferences• To assess confidence in low-concentration results

• Plot some “user defined limits” on the various charts• To assess how blind-sample results compare to these limits

Moving Forward…

Organic Blind Sample Projects

42

Got Caffeine…

43

• Potential Future Products Analyte by several different methods

Organic Blind Sample Project

44

• Potential Future Products Analyte by several different methods


45


• Potential Future Products Expected and reported concentration versus time

46

April 08, 2010 to Jan 19, 2012LS 1383 TestID CAS# # spiked

False negative

# not spiked

False positives

Acenaphthylene34200GCM57

208-96-821 0 27 0

Acenaphthene34205GCM57

83-32-921 0 27 0

Anthracene34220GCM57

120-12-721 0 27 2

Benzo[b]fluoranthene34230GCM57

205-99-221 0 27 0

Benzo[k]fluoranthene34242GCM57

207-08-921 0 27 0

Benzo[a]pyrene34247GCM57

50-32-821 0 27 1

bis(2-Chloroethyl)ether34273GCM57

111-44-421 0 27 0

bis(2-Chloroethoxy)methane

34278GCM57

111-91-121 0 27 0

bis(2-chloroisopropyl) ether

34283GCM57

108-60-121 0 27 0

Butylbenzyl phthalate34292GCM57

85-68-721 0 27 2

Chrysene34320GCM57

218-01-921 0 27 0

Diethyl phthalate34336GCM57

84-66-221 0 27 0

Dimethyl phthalate34341GCM57

131-11-321 1 27 3


• Potential Future Products False positives and false negatives summary table

47------- = Recovery range (50% to 150%)


• Potential Future Products User defined limits on an existing time series chart

48

Moving Forward…Inorganic & Organic Blind Sample Projects

• Modification to format of existing data-quality assessment reports

• Look into NWIS toolbox for IBSP and OBSP data analysis

• QA upcoming organic tissue and sediment methods

• Use more different types of matrices for the inorganic blind samples

• Provide information about the matrix for the inorganic blind samples

49

Moving Forward…Inorganic & Organic Blind Sample Projects

• Requesting input from the data users

What do you want to see?

What would be useful to you?

50

Branch of Quality Systemsbqs.usgs.gov

• Inorganic blind-sample project Ted Struzeski bqs.usgs.gov/ibsp/ [email protected] 303.236.1872

• Organic blind-sample project Suranne Stineman bqs.usgs.gov/obsp/ [email protected] 303.236.1821

ibsp & obsp

Documents