Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements

A realistic estimation of uncertainty is an essential requirement for all analytical measurements. It is common practice, however, for the uncertainty estimate of a chemical measurement to be based on the instrumental precision associated with the analysis of a single or multiple samples, which can...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Paul J. Worsfold, Eric P. Achterberg, Antony J. Birchill, Robert Clough, Ivo Leito, Maeve C. Lohan, Angela Milne, Simon J. Ussher
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2019-01-01
Series:Frontiers in Marine Science
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2018.00515/full
id doaj-dd73bcb6168f499e991f9aead892466e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-dd73bcb6168f499e991f9aead892466e2020-11-24T23:05:15ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Marine Science2296-77452019-01-01510.3389/fmars.2018.00515387497Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element MeasurementsPaul J. Worsfold0Eric P. Achterberg1Antony J. Birchill2Robert Clough3Ivo Leito4Maeve C. Lohan5Angela Milne6Simon J. Ussher7Biogeochemistry Research Centre, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United KingdomGEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Kiel, GermanyBiogeochemistry Research Centre, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United KingdomBiogeochemistry Research Centre, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United KingdomInstitute of Chemistry, University of Tartu, Tartu, EstoniaOcean and Earth Science, National Oceanography Centre, The University of Southampton, Southampton, United KingdomBiogeochemistry Research Centre, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United KingdomBiogeochemistry Research Centre, School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, United KingdomA realistic estimation of uncertainty is an essential requirement for all analytical measurements. It is common practice, however, for the uncertainty estimate of a chemical measurement to be based on the instrumental precision associated with the analysis of a single or multiple samples, which can lead to underestimation. Within the context of chemical oceanography such an underestimation of uncertainty could lead to an over interpretation of the result(s) and hence impact on, e.g., studies of biogeochemical cycles, and the outputs from oceanographic models. Getting high quality observational data with a firm uncertainty assessment is therefore essential for proper model validation. This paper describes and compares two recommended approaches that can give a more holistic assessment of the uncertainty associated with such measurements, referred to here as the “bottom up” or modeling approach and the “top down” or empirical approach. “Best practice” recommendations for the implementation of these strategies are provided. The “bottom up” approach combines the standard uncertainties associated with each stage of the entire measurement procedure. The “top down” approach combines the uncertainties associated with day to day reproducibility and possible bias in the complete data set and is easy to use. For analytical methods that are routinely used, laboratories will have access to the information required to calculate the uncertainty from archived quality assurance data. The determination of trace elements in seawater is a significant analytical challenge and iron is used as an example for the implementation of both approaches using real oceanographic data. Relative expanded uncertainties of 10 – 20% were estimated for both approaches compared with a typical short term precision (rsd) of ≤5%.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2018.00515/fulluncertainty estimationmetrologytrace elementsmodeling approachempirical approach
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Paul J. Worsfold
Eric P. Achterberg
Antony J. Birchill
Robert Clough
Ivo Leito
Maeve C. Lohan
Angela Milne
Simon J. Ussher
spellingShingle Paul J. Worsfold
Eric P. Achterberg
Antony J. Birchill
Robert Clough
Ivo Leito
Maeve C. Lohan
Angela Milne
Simon J. Ussher
Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
Frontiers in Marine Science
uncertainty estimation
metrology
trace elements
modeling approach
empirical approach
author_facet Paul J. Worsfold
Eric P. Achterberg
Antony J. Birchill
Robert Clough
Ivo Leito
Maeve C. Lohan
Angela Milne
Simon J. Ussher
author_sort Paul J. Worsfold
title Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
title_short Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
title_full Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
title_fullStr Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
title_full_unstemmed Estimating Uncertainties in Oceanographic Trace Element Measurements
title_sort estimating uncertainties in oceanographic trace element measurements
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Marine Science
issn 2296-7745
publishDate 2019-01-01
description A realistic estimation of uncertainty is an essential requirement for all analytical measurements. It is common practice, however, for the uncertainty estimate of a chemical measurement to be based on the instrumental precision associated with the analysis of a single or multiple samples, which can lead to underestimation. Within the context of chemical oceanography such an underestimation of uncertainty could lead to an over interpretation of the result(s) and hence impact on, e.g., studies of biogeochemical cycles, and the outputs from oceanographic models. Getting high quality observational data with a firm uncertainty assessment is therefore essential for proper model validation. This paper describes and compares two recommended approaches that can give a more holistic assessment of the uncertainty associated with such measurements, referred to here as the “bottom up” or modeling approach and the “top down” or empirical approach. “Best practice” recommendations for the implementation of these strategies are provided. The “bottom up” approach combines the standard uncertainties associated with each stage of the entire measurement procedure. The “top down” approach combines the uncertainties associated with day to day reproducibility and possible bias in the complete data set and is easy to use. For analytical methods that are routinely used, laboratories will have access to the information required to calculate the uncertainty from archived quality assurance data. The determination of trace elements in seawater is a significant analytical challenge and iron is used as an example for the implementation of both approaches using real oceanographic data. Relative expanded uncertainties of 10 – 20% were estimated for both approaches compared with a typical short term precision (rsd) of ≤5%.
topic uncertainty estimation
metrology
trace elements
modeling approach
empirical approach
url https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2018.00515/full
work_keys_str_mv AT pauljworsfold estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT ericpachterberg estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT antonyjbirchill estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT robertclough estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT ivoleito estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT maeveclohan estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT angelamilne estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
AT simonjussher estimatinguncertaintiesinoceanographictraceelementmeasurements
_version_ 1725626656636272640