This study investigates the concentrations and bioaccessibility of essential trace elements (Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn) in commonly consumed edible plants. Using multiple physiologically relevant extraction methods, the work assesses both total and bioaccessible fractions to better estimate dietary intake.Monte Carlo simulations revealed variability in nutrient exposure, with most intake levels within recommended ranges but some cases indicating potential deficiencies or excess. The results highlight the importance of incorporating bioaccessibility and realistic exposure modeling into nutritional assessments and dietary risk evaluations.<blockquote><h4>The original article</h4><h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365">Essential Trace Elements in Edible Plants: Balancing Nutritional Benefits and Potential Health Risks</a></h4>Agata Stolecka*, Pilar Ortiz Sandoval, and Agnieszka Gruszecka-KosowskaJ. Agric. Food Chem. 2026, 74, 8, 7084–7097<a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365">https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365</a><h6>licensed under <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC-BY 4.0</a></h6></blockquote>Selected sections from the article follow. Formats and hyperlinks were adapted from the original.<div>Many trace elements are essential micronutrients required in minute amounts, yet they are indispensable for the structural and functional integrity of living organisms. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(1)</a> As a subgroup of micronutrients, alongside vitamins and antioxidants, they play vital roles in supporting regenerative processes, defending against oxidative stress, and maintaining immune function in metabolically active tissues. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(2)</a> Despite their low concentrations in biological systems, they serve as cofactors for numerous enzymatic reactions and contribute to essential physiological processes such as oxygen transport, redox balance, and cellular metabolism. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(3−5)</a> In line with the WHO <a href="javascript:void(0);">(6)</a> and Frieden <a href="javascript:void(0);">(7)</a> classifications, this study focuses on the essential trace elements (ETEs), namely cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), and zinc (Zn), all of which have well-established roles in human nutrition and are integral to maintaining both general and oral health. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(8)</a> Deficiency in the aforementioned elements can lead to a range of health problems. Co, as a component of vitamin B12, is critical for red blood cell formation and neurological function; its deficiency may result in megaloblastic anemia and neurological impairments. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(9)</a> Cu is essential for iron metabolism, antioxidant defense, and connective tissue synthesis; inadequate intake can lead to anemia, weakened immunity, impaired growth and development (especially in children), osteoporosis, abnormal cholesterol metabolism, and neurological disturbances. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(10)</a> Fe deficiency remains one of the most widespread nutritional problems globally and is the leading cause of anemia, fatigue, and impaired cognitive and immune function. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(11)</a> Mn is involved in bone development, metabolism, and antioxidant enzyme activity; low levels can impair growth, fertility, and glucose regulation. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(12)</a> Zn is vital for immune response, wound healing, and DNA synthesis; deficiency can cause growth retardation, delayed sexual maturation, and increased susceptibility to infections. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(13)</a> While maintaining adequate levels of these trace elements is crucial for overall health and physiological functioning, excessive intake may also pose health risks. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(14,15)</a> The margin between beneficial and toxic doses is broad for some bioelements but narrow for others, highlighting the need for careful monitoring of their concentrations in the food supply. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(16)</a>The mineral content of edible plants, a major dietary source of essential elements, is influenced by numerous factors, including plant genotype (cultivar), soil properties, weather conditions, and agricultural practices such as fertilizer application during fruiting and maturation stages. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(17)</a> Consequently, the concentration of trace elements in plant-based foods can vary widely, affecting both their nutritional value and their potential to contribute to dietary exposure risks. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(18)</a> Customarily, the assessment of ETEs in edible plants has relied on total concentration (TC) measurements, which assume complete gastrointestinal absorption. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(19−21)</a> While this approach is commonly used to estimate nutritional contributions, it does not account for the fact that only a fraction of the ingested element may be bioaccessible and available for absorption during digestion. As a result, it may lead to either over- or underestimation of both health benefits and potential adverse effects. To better reflect human exposure, a range of in vitro extraction methods have been developed to simulate the bioaccessibility of elements under gastric and/or intestinal conditions. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(22,23)</a> These methods vary in terms of chemical reagents, pH levels, and complexity. For example, the BCR 3-step extraction targets chemical elements associated with different binding forms, <a href="javascript:void(0);">(24)</a> while the USEPA 1340 simulates acidic gastric conditions relevant to lead bioaccessibility. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(25)</a> More advanced protocols, like ISO 17924:2018 and the BARGE Unified Bioaccessibility Method (UBM), replicate digestive phases using physiologically relevant fluids. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(22,26)</a> Simpler methods, such as SBET and PBET, aim to simulate one or both digestion phases under controlled laboratory conditions. <a href="javascript:void(0);">(27,28)</a> In the context of ETEs such as Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn, evaluating bioaccessibility is crucial for accurate dietary intake estimates. These elements play key roles in numerous physiological functions, and both deficiencies and excess intake can affect human health. However, limited data exist on how the choice of extraction method affects estimates of their dietary contribution and associated noncarcinogenic risks.To address this gap, the present study evaluates Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn concentrations in vegetables, fruits, and cereals using seven extraction methods. The results are used to estimate both the nutritional contribution and the potential health risks from dietary intake. To incorporate variability and uncertainty in dietary exposure, such as metal concentrations, consumption patterns, and body weight, Monte Carlo simulations were applied. This probabilistic approach enables a more robust evaluation of nutrient intake and safety, providing insights that can inform dietary guidelines and regulatory decisions. The main objective of the study was to investigate how different extraction methods, simulating gastrointestinal bioaccessibility, may impact the estimation of both nutritional contribution and potential risks. In this study, the contribution of five ETEs, namely Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn, to a healthy diet and the potential health risks associated with their intake were evaluated. The detailed objectives of the study were to 1) investigate concentrations of Co, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn in three plant categories, namely vegetables, fruits, and cereals, using the following seven extraction methods: Total Content (TC), three-step extraction procedure (BCR), USEPA SW-846 Test Method 1340: In Vitro Bioaccessibility Assay for Lead in Soil (USEPA), ISO 17924:2018 Soil quality─Assessment of human exposure from ingestion of soil and soil material─procedure for the estimation of the human bioaccessibility/bioavailability of metals in soil (ISO), the BARGE (Bioaccessibility Research Group of Europe) unified bioaccessibility method (UBM), Simple Bioavailability Test (SBET), and Physiologically Based Extraction Test (PBET); 2) use Monte Carlo simulations to estimate the nutritional contribution and noncarcinogenic risk from dietary intake of these ETEs, based on Polish food consumption data; and 3) address variability and uncertainty in dietary exposure through probabilistic modeling with Monte Carlo simulations.<h4>2. Materials and Methods</h4><h5>2.3. Instrumental Analysis</h5>The concentrations of investigated ETEs were determined by inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) (ELAN 6100; PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA) in the case of Co or inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP-OES) (OPTIMA 7300DV; PerkinElmer, Waltham, MA, USA) in the case of Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) 6020B and ISO 17294-2:2003 protocols.<h4>4. Results and Discussion</h4><h5>4.2. Estimated Nutrient Intake (ENI)</h5>Estimated Nutrient Intake of ETEs (50th percentile) from all edible plants intake from Monte Carlo simulations is shown in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365#fig2">Figure 2</a>.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/J_Agric_Food_Chem_2026_74_8_7084_7097_Figure_2_Estimated_Nutrient_Intake_ENI_of_ET_Es_based_on_the_50th_percentile_of_all_investigated_edible_plant_intake_from_Monte_Carlo_simulations_7ad01eb189.jpg" alt="Anal. Chem. 2026, 98, 9, 6589–6597: Figure 2. Evaluation of CoD screening prediction performance of LCMS-Net in comparison to benchmark models. The prediction performance of a classifier is measured by accuracy, macro F1-score, macro sensitivity, and macro specificity over five model runs. The error bars represent the standard deviations between model runs." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_J_Agric_Food_Chem_2026_74_8_7084_7097_Figure_2_Estimated_Nutrient_Intake_ENI_of_ET_Es_based_on_the_50th_percentile_of_all_investigated_edible_plant_intake_from_Monte_Carlo_simulations_7ad01eb189.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="2092" height="852"><h5>4.3. Human Health Risk Assessment</h5>Noncarcinogenic risk (HQ) values for 5th, 50th, and 95th percentiles of the determined concentrations of investigated ETEs in vegetables, fruits, and cereals calculated using Monte Carlo simulations are presented in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365#fig3">Figure 3</a>, and the same values for the sum of edible plants consumed are presented in <a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jafc.5c10365#fig4">Figure 4</a>.<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/J_Agric_Food_Chem_2026_74_8_7084_7097_Figure_3_Noncarcinogenic_HQ_risk_values_for_investigated_trace_elements_from_various_extraction_methods_4f2d9ee942.jpg" alt="J. Agric. Food Chem. 2026, 74, 8, 7084–7097: Figure 3. Noncarcinogenic (HQ) risk values for investigated trace elements from various extraction methods according to Polish statistical consumption of edible plants, vegetables, fruits, and cereals separately." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_J_Agric_Food_Chem_2026_74_8_7084_7097_Figure_3_Noncarcinogenic_HQ_risk_values_for_investigated_trace_elements_from_various_extraction_methods_4f2d9ee942.jpg 110w," sizes="100vw" width="1822" height="2583"><img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/JAGRIC_2_76102decb2.jpg" alt="J. Agric. Food Chem. 2026, 74, 8, 7084–7097: Figure 4. Noncarcinogenic (HQ) risk values for investigated trace elements from various extraction methods according to Polish statistical consumption of the sum of edible plants." srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_JAGRIC_2_76102decb2.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="1877" height="896">Due to concentrations below the LOQ, HQ values could not be calculated for several ETEs in vegetables, fruits, and cereals across the different extraction methods. For instance, Co in cereals yielded measurable concentrations only under the TC method, whereas Fe in vegetables was consistently above the LOQ for all extraction methods, allowing HQ estimation in each case. These results indicate that the efficiency of element recovery is both element- and matrix-dependent and that no single extraction protocol is universally optimal for all ETE–matrix combinations.Considering HQs that were successfully simulated across most elements (particularly Co, Cu, and Fe), the TC method produced the highest HQ values, exceeding the risk threshold (HQ = 1) at the 95th percentile for Co and Cu. The 95th percentile HQ for Co under TC reached 1.05 in vegetables and 2.77 in fruits, staying below the safety threshold for cereals, while for Cu it reached 4.30 in vegetables, 1.83 in fruits, and 1.08 in cereals, indicating potential overestimation if full bioavailability is assumed. For Fe the risk was lower, staying below the threshold in all cases, but TC still displayed the highest values in most cases with the 95th percentile HQ reaching 0.66 in vegetables, 0.39 in fruits, and 0.43 in cereals. The only exception to this trend was the 95th percentile risk for Fe in vegetables, where the ISO intestinal yielded 0.87.In contrast, bioaccessibility-based methods (e.g., UBM, PBET, SBET, and BCR) generally generated lower HQs, often falling below the threshold. For example, 95th percentile Co HQ values under UBM gastric and intestinal extractions were ∼0.75 in vegetables, while USEPA was 0.56 and SBET, PBET, and BCR yielded &lt;0.50. A similar trend was observed for Cu, where UBM intestinal yielded 0.58 vs 4.30 under TC.However, Mn and Zn showed distinctively different patterns. For Mn in cereals, the USEPA method produced a median HQ of 5.18 and 15.7 at the 95th percentile, far higher than all the other methods, including the TC method (median 0.32). For Zn in vegetables, ISO gastric (0.39) and intestinal (0.37) extractions gave median HQs higher than that of TC (0.27).<h5>4.7. Implications</h5>This study shows that the extraction method choice greatly affects Estimated Nutrient Intake (ENI) and dietary exposure assessments of essential trace elements in edible plants. Simulated gastrointestinal methods, reflecting human physiology, generally report lower concentrations than the TC method, indicating that relying on total concentrations alone can overestimate intake by ignoring bioaccessibility, a key factor in accurate risk assessment.ENI assessments help evaluate nutrient over- or underexposure but may miss health risks. Monte Carlo-based Hazard Quotient (HQ) analysis provides a more precise dietary risk estimate by accounting for bioavailability and intake variability. This combined approach is crucial for essential elements, balancing deficiency and toxicity concerns.For most elements, ENI values matched recommended intakes, but variations occurred by element, food group, and extraction method. Some simulations indicated possible insufficient intake risks (e.g., Co and Fe in certain plants), while others showed overexposure risks (notably, Cu and Mn) when assuming full bioavailability from total concentrations. These results highlight the need to include realistic bioaccessibility in dietary nutrient assessments.Comparing HQ values across plant types and elements, the study highlights how vegetables, fruits, and cereals contribute differently to nutritional risk. This comprehensive approach offers a clearer picture of dietary exposure than analyses based on only total concentrations or single foods. While most essential trace elements posed no immediate risk under realistic bioaccessibility assumptions, Co and Cu results indicate a potential for excessive intake.Our results revealed that UBM, ISO, PBET1, and BCR1 methods provide the most reliable estimates of ETE bioaccessibility in edible plants, while TC tends to overestimate and simpler methods (SBET, PBET2) may underestimate exposure. Incorporating bioaccessibility-corrected data and considering food matrix-specific factors are essential for accurate dietary risk assessments and effective public health management.In conclusion, these findings highlight the importance of incorporating physiologically relevant extraction methods into dietary risk assessment to complement the total concentration data in food safety and nutrition research. The results may inform future regulatory frameworks, dietary guidance, and fortification strategies. Further research should focus on validating in vitro bioaccessibility with in vivo evidence, exploring nutrient–contaminant interactions, and expanding assessments across diverse diets and populations to strengthen the evidence base for nutrition policy development.</div>

Essential Trace Elements in Edible Plants: Balancing Nutritional Benefits and Potential Health Risks

In the week from April 20, the following webinars await you in the field of atomic and molecular spectroscopy and spectrometry<blockquote><h4><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinars">👉 DETAILS AND REGISTRATION IN THE WEBINARS SECTION</a></h4>👉 Search and filter in the largest global database with over 5 500 GC, LC, MS and spectroscopy webinars.</blockquote><h5>1. Metrohm: Copper deposition baths: Advanced analytical solutions for development and monitoring</h5><ul><li>Tu, 21.4.2026 09:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6123">Registration</a></li></ul>Discover a multi-method approach to copper plating bath analysis combining titration, CVS, XRF, and pH measurement for improved process control, data reliability, and production quality.<h5>2. Thermo Fisher Scientific: Lunch and Learn Tips and Tricks Series: Qtegra Part 2</h5><ul><li>Tu, 21.4.2026 12:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/5976">Registration</a></li></ul>Part two explores efficient Qtegra ISDS workflows and integrated tools designed to improve laboratory productivity and enhance trace elemental analysis quality.<h5>3. C&amp;EN: NMR-augmented Workflows: Most Modern Integration into Laboratories</h5><ul><li>Tu, 21.4.2026 17:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6107">Registration</a></li></ul>From high resolution instruments in smaller footprints to smarter software that enhances data quality and streamlines analysis.<h5>4. Agilent Technologies: Accurate Determination of Chlorine Isotope Ratio Analysis by 8900 ICP-MS</h5><ul><li>Tu, 21.4.2026 20:30 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6047">Registration</a></li></ul>This session discusses techniques for low level chlorine analysis and isotope ratio on the 8900 QQQ-ICPMS.<h5>5. SelectScience: What’s in your hydrogen? Analytical toolkits for fuel purity analysis</h5><ul><li>We, 22.4.2026 10:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6055">Registration</a></li></ul>Join this dual-session webinar on hydrogen impurity testing and ISO 14687 fuel quality. Learn how GC, GC-MS, IC, and FTIR workflows support safe, compliant hydrogen production and fuel-cell applications.<h5>6. Bruker: Introduction to Photothermal AFM-IR for Infrared Spectroscopists</h5><ul><li>We, 22.4.2026 17:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6109">Registration</a></li></ul>With photothermal atomic force microscope infrared spectroscopy (AFM-IR), chemical identification at the nanoscale is achieved by measuring local IR spectra directly at the AFM tip.<h5>7. Mettler-Toledo: How to Determine Specific Heat Capacity by DSC</h5><ul><li>Th, 23.4.2026 16:00 CET</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/5736">Registration</a></li></ul>Explore six DSC techniques for measuring specific heat capacity and understand its importance in material performance, processing, and safety. Join the live webinar.<h5>8. Bruker: EDS Analysis of Fibers, Polymers, and Ceramics – Best Practices</h5><ul><li>Th, 23.4.2026 17:00 CEST</li><li><a target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://icpms.labrulez.com/webinar/6111">Registration</a></li></ul>Different EDS measurement approaches using conventional geometry and an annular approach (QUANTAX FlatQUAD) making the best choice for challenging analytical tasks.

Webinars LabRulezICPMS Week 17/2026

Proficiency testing (PT) is applicable to quantitative, qualitative and interpretative assessments, but this leaflet will concentrate on PTs for quantitative tests. Participation in PT is an essential part of the quality assurance in analytical laboratories and provides them with many benefits. In PT the provider evaluates the performance of participants against pre-established criteria defined in the design of the PT scheme.<h4>Performance evaluation&nbsp;</h4>The majority of PT schemes involve some form of performance score, such as the z or similar scores1 , and corresponding assessment criteria. An assigned value (xpt) and a standard deviation for proficiency assessment (spt) are determined and used to calculate the performance score of the laboratory result (xi), e.g. the z score with z = (xi - xpt ) / spt<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Eurachem_How_can_proficiency_testing_help_my_laboratory_2_c1bf0b596f.jpg" alt="Eurachem: How can proficiency testing help my laboratory?" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Eurachem_How_can_proficiency_testing_help_my_laboratory_2_c1bf0b596f.jpg 195w," sizes="100vw" width="952" height="761">Assessment of z scores is based on the following criteria:&nbsp;<ul><li>|z| ≤ 2.0 is regarded as satisfactory;&nbsp;</li><li>2.0 &lt; |z| &lt; 3.0 is regarded as questionable (‘warning signal’);&nbsp;</li><li>|z| ≥ 3.0 is regarded as unsatisfactory (‘action signal’).&nbsp;</li></ul>This is based on the concept that normally distributed analytical results lie within two standard deviations with a probability of ca. 95 %, and within three standard deviations with a probability of 99.7 %.&nbsp;PT providers have several options to determine spt such as prescribed/perceived desirable analytical performance or the observed distribution of data. The spt used by the PT provider may not be appropriate for all laboratories. If justified, the participants may then calculate their own z score using an alternative spt value which is fit for their purpose.&nbsp;<h4>Corrective actions</h4>Unsatisfactory performance scores (‘action signal’) indicate possible problems in the analysis undertaken. The laboratory must investigate this (e.g. by checking for transcription/calculation errors, trueness and precision) and, if necessary, address the problems through appropriate corrective actions. Participation in the PT provides very limited benefits to the laboratory, if unsatisfactory performance scores are not acted upon.<h4>Evaluation of results over time&nbsp;</h4>In addition to internal quality control, regular participation in PT enables laboratories to monitor their performance over time and to identify trends before these become problems. Performance scores obtained from subsequent PT rounds can be plotted in a control chart.&nbsp;<h4>Method comparisons&nbsp;</h4>Where PT schemes require participants to report details of the method used, the PT report may enable the participant to compare the performance of their method with that of other methods used.&nbsp;<h4>Use of PT data to estimate bias&nbsp;</h4>The bias of a method should be established using certified reference materials (CRMs) or comparison with a reference method. However, these may not be available for all matrices, analytes and levels, or CRMs may not be fully representative of the real test samples. Participation in PT provides the opportunity to check the bias taking into account the effects of matrix and concentration variation, provided that a reliable estimate of the “true value” is assigned in the PT. Participation in several PT rounds also provides information on the bias variability which can be used as a contribution in the laboratory evaluation of the measurement uncertainty.&nbsp;<h4>Use of PT to check measurement uncertainties&nbsp;</h4>The ζ (zeta) score can help to check the plausibility of the laboratory’s measurement uncertainty estimate. It is calculated as follows:<img src="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/Eurachem_zeta_score_calculation_b70d8b1187.jpg" alt="Eurachem: Zeta score calculation" srcset="https://storage.googleapis.com/labrulez-bucket-strapi-h3hsga3/thumbnail_Eurachem_zeta_score_calculation_b70d8b1187.jpg 245w," sizes="100vw" width="423" height="188">where xi is the laboratory’s result, xpt the assigned value, and u(xi) and u(xpt) are their respective standard uncertainties.&nbsp;The assessment criteria for satisfactory, questionable and unsatisfactory results are the same as for the z score. The uncertainty reported by a laboratory for its measurement result is an estimate of the accuracy that the laboratory claims to reach. If ζ scores are outside the acceptable range, this shows that the laboratory is not able to fulfill its own requirements. In other words the measurement uncertainty is underestimated.&nbsp;Additionally, the standard measurement uncertainty of a laboratory result can be expected to be lower than the reproducibility observed in the proficiency test. If the measurement uncertainty is much lower the uncertainty estimate should be reviewed.&nbsp;<h4>Demonstration of competence&nbsp;</h4>Successful participation in PT (| z | ≤ 2.0) is often seen as a proof of competence to customers, accreditation bodies and regulatory authorities. PT can also provide a valuable educational element to the laboratory, for example it can indicate the success of staff training or where additional training is required.&nbsp;<h4>More information / further reading&nbsp;</h4>B. Brookman and I. Mann (eds.) Eurachem Guide: Selection, Use and Interpretation of Proficiency Testing (PT) Schemes (3rd ed. 2021). Information about PT providers and schemes can be obtained from your national accreditation body, from the EPTIS website (www.eptis.org) or from other national or international organisations.

How can proficiency testing help my laboratory?

Article

Webinars

Academy

Food

Health

Scientific article

Science and research

Eurachem is a European network promoting international traceability of chemical measurements and good analytical practice. It provides expert guidance, supports method validation, uncertainty evaluation, proficiency testing, and facilitates discussion on technical and policy issues in analytical quality.

Eurachem

Everything from the world of analytical chemistry in one place. We connect people in solving their problems. At Labrulez you will find all the necessary information easily, quickly and clearly. Stop searching and start finding.

LabRulez

Peak Scientific Infinity XE 60 Series Membrane Nitrogen Generator (Refurbished)

The Infinity XE 60 Series from Peak Scientific delivers a robust and scalable nitrogen generation solution tailored for modern laboratories.

Marketplace products from category Nitrogen generators focused on Laboratory gases and gas generators - page 1

Related content

How can proficiency testing help my laboratory?

Webinars LabRulezICPMS Week 17/2026

Essential Trace Elements in Edible Plants: Balancing Nutritional Benefits and Potential Health Risks