Comparison Of Two Analysis Methods Of Methylmercury In Environmental Samples

In this disquisition, the research mostly concentrated on the determination of methlmercury in environmental samples and biological specimen by comparing GC and CVAFS. The Weisha anabranch of the Songhua River basin is choosento study , we collect samples in the study areas, including water , sediment and soil , plant and Rana Chensinensis , the typical Economical animals in the area. The study on Rana Chensinensis refer to every part of body, like skin, muscle, viscus and brain, also we use fish to do control experiment.The study work on two aspects respectively. The first is adding different concentration of methlmercury standard solution, and pretreating and analysing the samples. Compare the recovery ratio and the precision ; The sencond is pretreating and analysing the samples, determining the content of methlmercury. We have determinated 80 groups of samples , and gotten more than 500 datas . The results shows that :1 The recovery of methlmercury by GC is higher than 80% . It proves the stabilization of GC is good. The GC in the study has better stabilization when the concentration of methlmercury is low than the concentration of methlmercury is high. So it is suit for the real samples with low methlmercury.2 Capillary column in GC works well in analyse methlmercury. But after using for a long time, the column efficiency and the seperation will be effected. So it would be better to change the calillary column.3 In the experiment of stabillization, the results show that besides of the peak area, the peak height is also another parameter to calculate the concentration of methlmercury.4 The results of methlmercury of the field samples in the area by GC are undulatory.5 The recovery of methlmercury by CVAFS is totally higher than80% . The method is feasible.And comparing with GC, the pretreatment of CVAFS is more convenient, fast and practical.6 In the process of determination, the rate of determination by CVAFS is higher than by GC. The rate of the study can be raisen.7 The results is not good when analyse the field samples by CVAFS. There are undulatory property in the results.