The method was applied to determine the iAs mass fraction in several food commodities purchased from various Spanish markets. The results obtained with this method for a series of different matrices are classified in Table 4 following the categories used by EFSA3 in a report in which dietary exposure to inorganic arsenic in the European population is evaluated on the basis of data reported by Official Control Laboratories (OCL). The results in Table 4 represent the mean of three replicates ± the reproducibility standard deviation (SR) for the different food categories, calculated during the collaborative trial in which the present method was validated13. The results shown in Table 4 are in good agreement with other previously published in similar matrices11,12,14.
Of particular relevance are the results obtained for iAs in different types of rice because maximum limits are included for them in the European legislation for contaminants in food1. The highest values being obtained for brown rice and the lowest for white rice, in agreement with the findings of the OCLs3. The highest levels were found for the sea weed Hizikia fusiforme, whose consumption has been discouraged by several authorities as indicated in the report by EFSA.
The performance of laboratories that participated in PTs organized by the EURL-HM and the JRC and that used this method for the determination of iAs, has been compared to the performance of laboratories using other methods. Most of the other methods are based on HPLC-ICP-MS (around 50% of the evaluated results) and on HG-AAS without previous separation of iAs from other arsenic species (25% of the total), Figure 1. Other approaches used (around 15% of the evaluated results), were based on electrothermal atomization (ETAAS), fluorescence detection and ICP coupled to atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES), with and without hydride generation, and are evaluated together under the name "Other methods" because the individual numbers would be too few to be of any statistical significance.
Some of the laboratories that have used the evaluated method introduced some variations to the original protocol and used ICP-MS instead of FI-HG-AAS. Frequently those laboratories did not apply the dry ashing step (Step 5 in the protocol) and just introduced the 1 M HCl phase into the ICP-MS. The PTs evaluated covered various matrices: rice15,16, wheat, spinach, algae17 and chocolate18.
The performance of laboratories was expressed as z-score:

Where:
xlab is the measurement result reported by a participant in a PT
Xref is the assigned value (used to benchmark laboratories). In all PTs dealt within this paper the assigned value was established by a group of expert laboratories in the field of iAs analysis using different analytical methods.
σ is the standard deviation for proficiency assessment, fixed by the PT provider taking into consideration the state of the art in a certain area of analysis. In the PTs considered in this paper σ was 15% of the assigned value for rice and wheat, 22% in algae and 25% for spinach and chocolate.
The interpretation of the z score is done according to ISO 17043:201019:
|score| ≤ 2 satisfactory (S) performance
2 < |score| < 3 questionable (Q) performance
|score| ≥ 3 unsatisfactory (U) performance
Seventy-five per cent of the results obtained with the method described above, got a satisfactory z-score. The determination of the iAs mass fraction in algae turned out to be challenging as expected, taking into consideration the complex distribution of arsenic species in matrices of marine origin. Two out of the three values reported in IMEP-112 for iAs in algae, using this method, got an unsatisfactory z-score. The same difficulty was observed among the results obtained with other methods. Excluding the results reported for iAs in algae, 85% of the results obtained with the evaluated method were satisfactory.

Figure 1: Comparison of Performances (expressed as z-scores) of Laboratories Taking Part in PTs (IMEP-107, IMEP-112, EURL-HM-20 and IRMM-PT-43) with the Method Described in this Paper and with Other Commonly Applied Methods. S: satisfactory, Q: questionable and U: unsatisfactory. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Expected iAs mass fraction
lower than 0.010 mg/kg | Expected iAs mass fraction
higher than what is covered
by the calibration curve |
| 6 mol L-1 HCL volume used to re-dissolve the ashes (mL) | 2 | 10 |
| Pre-reducing agent volume (mL) | 2 | 10 |
| Final volume (mL) | 10 | 50 |
Table 1: Modifications of the Protocol when Analyzing Samples in which Very Low or Very High iAs Concentrations are Expected.
Concentration in the
calibration curve (µg/L) | Aliquot (mL) |
| 0.5 | 1 |
| 1 | 2 (QC1) |
| 2.5 | 5 |
| 5 | 10 (QC2) |
| 7.5 | 15 |
| 10 | 20 |
| All As(III) calibration standard solutions shall be prepared freshly before each calibration. |
Table 2: Aliquots to be taken from the 25 µg/L As(V) standard solution to construct the As(III) calibration curve in a 50 mL final volume.
Flow injection
Hydride generation | · Loop sample: 0.5 mL (To be adapted when the reconstitution volume of the final pre-reducing solution is different from 25 mL). |
| · Reducing agent: 0.2 % (w/v) NaBH4 in 0.05 % (w/v) NaOH; 5 mL/min flow rate. |
| · HCl solution 10 % (v/v), 10 mL/min flow rate. |
| · Carrier gas: Argon, 100 mL/min flow rate. |
Atomic absorption
spectrometer | · Wavelength: 193.7 nm |
| · Spectral band-pass: 0.7 nm |
| · Electrodeless discharge lamp system 2 |
| · Lamp current setting: 400 mA |
| · Cell temperature: 900 °C |
Table 3: Instrumental Conditions used for iAs Quantification by HG-AAS.
| Food | i-As (µg/kg fresh weight) |
| Grain and grain-based products | | |
| Rice | White | 113 ± 18 |
| | 73 ± 12 |
| | 56 ± 9 |
| Brown | 197 ± 32 |
| | 125 ± 20 |
| | 275 ± 44 |
| Parboiled | 134 ± 21 |
| | 159 ± 25 |
| Wafers | 162 ± 26 |
| | 127 ± 20 |
| Vegetable and vegetable products | | |
| Dehydrated mushroom | Boletus edulis | 174 ± 10 |
| Galocybe gambosa | 74 ± 4 |
| Marasmius oreades | 104 ± 6 |
| Cantharellus lutescens | 16 ± 1 |
| Lentinula edodes | 96 ± 6 |
| Sea weed | Hizikia fusiforme | 97000 ± 14550 |
| | 44943 ± 6742 |
| Fucus vesiculosus | 288 ± 43 |
| | 433 ± 65 |
| Fish and other seafood | | |
| Fish meat | Flathead grey mullet | 53 ± 12 |
| | 21 ± 5 |
| European eel | 72 ± 16 |
| | 42 ± 9 |
| Crayfish | 33 ± 7 |
| | 20 ± 4 |
| Tuna | 11 ± 2 |
| | 5 ± 1 |
| Molluscs | Clam | 243 ± 54 |
| | 133 ± 29 |
| Mussel | 32 ± 32 |
| | 139 ± 31 |
Table 4: Results Obtained for a Range of Different Matrices Applying the Described Method.