Estimating the second-stage sample size and the most probable number of hot spots from a first-stage sample of heavy-metal contaminated soil

Geoderma

Volumn 95, Issue 1-2, 2000, Pages 73-88

  Hsiao, Chuhsing Kate ^a   Juang, Kai Wei ^b,c   Lee, Dar Yuan ^c  

^a Graduate Institute of Epidemiology   (Taiwan)

^b INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Taiwan)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Bayesian approach; Hot spot; Sampling strategy; Soil sampling; Two stage sampling

Indexed keywords

HEAVY METAL; SAMPLING; SOIL POLLUTION;

EID: 0033956097     PISSN: 00167061     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7061(99)00085-3     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Byrnes M.E. Field Sampling Methods for Remedial Investigations. 1994;Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton. Chapter 2.
2. Christakos G., Killam B.R. Sampling design for classifying contaminant level using annealing search algorithms. Water Resour. Res. 29:1993;4063-4076.
3. Domburg P., de Gruijter J.J., van Beek P. Designing efficient soil survey schemes with a knowledge-based system using dynamic programming. Geoderma. 75:1997;183-201.
4. Dorfman R. Detection of defective members of a large population. Ann. Math. Stat. 14:1943;436-440.
5. Edwards W., Lindman H., Savage L.J. Bayesian statistical inference for psychological research. Psychol. Rev. 70:1963;193-242.
6. Flatman G.T., Englund E.J., Yfantis A.A. Geostatistical approaches to the design of sampling regimes. Keith L.H. Principles of Environmental Sampling. 1988;73-84 American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
7. Garner F.C., Stapanian M.A., Williams L.R. Composite sampling for environmental monitoring. Keith L.H. Principles of Environmental Sampling. 1988;363-374 American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
8. Gelman A., Carlin J.B., Stern H.S., Rubin D.B. Bayesian Data Analysis. 1996;Chapman & Hall, London.
9. Ho C.H., Smith E.I. Volcanic hazard assessment incorporating expert knowledge: Application to the Yucca Mountain region, Nevada, USA. Math. Geol. 29:1997;615-627.
10. Johnson N.L., Kotz S., Kemp A.W. Univariate Discrete Distributions. 1993;Wiley, New York.
11. Juang K.W., Lee D.Y. A comparison of three kriging methods using auxiliary variables in heavy-metal contaminated soils. J. Environ. Qual. 27:1998;355-363.
12. Juang K.W., Lee D.Y. Geostatistical cross-validation for the design of additional sampling regimes in heavy-metal contaminated soils. J. Chin. Inst. Environ. Eng. 1999;. (in press).
13. Juang K.W., Lee D.Y. Use of quantile of rank order transformation to improve kriging estimation of heavy metal distribution in contaminated soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1999;. Revised and resubmitted.
14. Mukhopadhyay N., Bendel R.B., Nikolaidis N.P., Chattopadhyay S. Efficient sequential sampling strategies for environmental monitoring. Water Resour. Res. 28:1992;2245-2256.
15. Shieh G.S. Refined composite sampling for acute toxicity standard. Environmetrics. 8:1997;121-132.
16. Tenenbein A. A double sampling scheme for estimating from misclassified multinomial data with applications to sampling inspection. Technometrics. 14:1972;187-202.
17. Thompson S.K. Sampling. 1992;Wiley, New York.
18. Turnberg W.L. Biohazardous Waste: Risk Assessment, Policy, and Management. 1996;Wiley, New York.
19. van Groenigen J.W., Stein A. Constrained optimization of spatial sampling using continuous simulated annealing. J. Environ. Qual. 27:1998;1078-1086.
20. van Groenigen J.W., Stein A., Zuurbier R. Optimization of environmental sampling using interactive GIS. Soil Technol. 10:1997;83-97.
21. Zirschky J., Gilbert R.O. Detecting hot spots at hazardous-waste sites. Chem. Eng. 91:1984;97-100.