297 / 328
Precision
ER 1
Varies. Mostly around or below 10%, with one exception of 27% for low level 1-MN.
ER 2
Precision and reproducibility varies and is dependent on the specific analyte. The reported values meet the validation
criteria
ER 3
Good
ER 4
In Shrimp: 1.40-26.9% In mussel: 2.52-17.1% In oyster: 3.12-22.7%
ER 5
Good
ER 6
I am not familiar with the expectations for precision for an AOAC method; however, the precision here appears to be
adequate.
ER 7
Precision was excellent.
ER 8
good
Reproducibility
ER 1
Varies. Mostly between 10%-20%.
ER 2
Precision and reproducibility varies and is dependent on the specific analyte. The reported values meet the validation
criteria
ER 3
Good
ER 4
In Shrimp: 5.41-29.4% In mussel: 4.19-32.5% In oyster: 8.41-31.8%
ER 5
Good
ER 6
I am not familiar with the expectations for reproducibility for AOAC method; however, the reproducibility for this study
appears to be inadequate for many of the more volativle PAHs (e.g., naphthalene) and particularly in the oyster tissue.
ER 7
Reproducibility was good except for a few compounds in oyster stored at -20 C.
ER 8
good
System Suitability
ER 1
Not discussed.
ER 2
System is suitable
ER 3
Good
ER 4
na
ER 5
Were IDLs, MDLs and PQLs carried out on all instrumentation used in the Collaborative Study? If not, this should be
performed and documented in the Method. Are there records of Intra-day, Inter-day variability? Are there records of
Analyst variability? If so, the Method should state.
ER 6
No comments
ER 7
System check samples were analyzed.
ER 8
very good
ERP PROFILE SUMMARIES
257