Repository logo

Infoscience

  • English
  • French
Log In
Logo EPFL, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne

Infoscience

  • English
  • French
Log In
  1. Home
  2. Academic and Research Output
  3. Journal articles
  4. Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)
 
research article

Improving Inter-Laboratory Reproducibility in Measurement of Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP)

Hafner, Sasha D.
•
Fruteau de Laclos, Hélène
•
Koch, Konrad
Show more
June 19, 2020
Water

Biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests used to determine the ultimate methane yield of organic substrates are not sufficiently standardized to ensure reproducibility among laboratories. In this contribution, a standardized BMP protocol was tested in a large inter-laboratory project, and results were used to quantify sources of variability and to refine validation criteria designed to improve BMP reproducibility. Three sets of BMP tests were carried out by more than thirty laboratories from fourteen countries, using multiple measurement methods, resulting in more than 400 BMP values. Four complex but homogenous substrates were tested, and additionally, microcrystalline cellulose was used as a positive control. Inter-laboratory variability in reported BMP values was moderate. Relative standard deviation among laboratories (RSDR) was 7.5 to 24%, but relative range (RR) was 31 to 130%. Systematic biases were associated with both laboratories and tests within laboratories. Substrate volatile solids (VS) measurement and inoculum origin did not make major contributions to variability, but errors in data processing or data entry were important. There was evidence of negative biases in manual manometric and manual volumetric measurement methods. Still, much of the observed variation in BMP values was not clearly related to any of these factors and is probably the result of particular practices that vary among laboratories or even technicians. Based on analysis of calculated BMP values, a set of recommendations was developed, considering measurement, data processing, validation, and reporting. Recommended validation criteria are: (i) test duration at least 1% net 3 d, (ii) relative standard deviation for cellulose BMP not higher than 6%, and (iii) mean cellulose BMP between 340 and 395 NmLCH4 gVS−1. Evidence from this large dataset shows that following the recommendations—in particular, application of validation criteria—can substantially improve reproducibility, with RSDR < 8% and RR < 25% for all substrates. The cellulose BMP criterion was particularly important. Results show that is possible to measure very similar BMP values with different measurement methods, but to meet the recommended validation criteria, some laboratories must make changes to their BMP methods. To help improve the practice of BMP measurement, a new website with detailed, up-to-date guidance on BMP measurement and data processing was established.

  • Files
  • Details
  • Metrics
Type
research article
DOI
10.3390/w12061752
Author(s)
Hafner, Sasha D.
Fruteau de Laclos, Hélène
Koch, Konrad
Holliger, Christof  
Date Issued

2020-06-19

Published in
Water
Volume

12

Issue

6

Article Number

1752

Subjects

Biomethane potential

•

BMP

•

Laboratory methods

•

Interlaboratory test

•

Intra-laboratory reproducibility

•

Round robin test

•

Methane yield

•

Method standardization

•

Validation criteria

•

Measurement repeatability

•

BMP dataset

Editorial or Peer reviewed

REVIEWED

Written at

EPFL

EPFL units
LBE  
Available on Infoscience
July 16, 2020
Use this identifier to reference this record
https://infoscience.epfl.ch/handle/20.500.14299/170194
Logo EPFL, École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne
  • Contact
  • infoscience@epfl.ch

  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Instagram
  • Follow us on LinkedIn
  • Follow us on X
  • Follow us on Youtube
AccessibilityLegal noticePrivacy policyCookie settingsEnd User AgreementGet helpFeedback

Infoscience is a service managed and provided by the Library and IT Services of EPFL. © EPFL, tous droits réservés