Chemotaxonomic and anatomic wood species identification in bleached pulp: blind test and method validation
Author:
Flaig Max L.1ORCID, Berger Jens1, Helmling Stephanie2, Olbrich Andrea2, Schaffrath Heinz J.3, Zahn Daniel4, Saake Bodo1
Affiliation:
1. 14915 Institute of Wood Science, Chemical Wood Technology, University of Hamburg , Haidkrugsweg 1, 22885 Barsbüttel-Willinghusen , Germany 2. Johann Heinrich von Thünen Institute (TI), Institute of Wood Research , Leuschnerstr. 91, 21031 Hamburg-Bergedorf , Hamburg , Germany 3. Papierfabrikation und Mechanische Verfahrenstechnik, TU Darmstadt , Alexanderstr. 8, 64283 Darmstadt , Germany 4. Physikalische Analytik und Materialprüfung, Sterilisierverpackung, ISEGA Forschungs- und Untersuchungsgesellschaft mbH , Zeppelinstraße 3, 63741 Aschaffenburg , Germany
Abstract
Abstract
This paper presents a comparative analysis of the blind test outcomes of two independent methods for the identification of tropical wood species in pulp and paper products. Both, the established anatomical and the relatively new chemotaxonomic method support the European Deforestation Regulation 2023/1115 (EUDR), which aims to ensure that only legally harvested timber that has not contributed to deforestation is traded in the EU. The blind test involved 570 decisions on 15 test sheets of 37 self-manufactured mixed tropical hardwood pulps and an industrial beech pulp, used as a matrix. Both detection techniques demonstrated robust performance with over 80 % hit rates. The results show that the synergies and combination of the strengths of both methods can be utilized and lead to even better combined performance. In order to establish the chemotaxonomic identification method as a complement to the conventional anatomy-based method, statistical analyses were performed to assess its intermediate precision between three different GC-MS systems. In most cases, the method gave consistent results independent of the instrument used.
Funder
Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Reference35 articles.
1. Alaerts, G., Pieters, S., Logie, H., van Erps, J., Merino-Arevalo, M., Dejaegher, B., Smeyers-Verbeke, J., and Vander Heyden, Y. (2014). Exploration and classification of chromatographic fingerprints as additional tool for identification and quality control of several artemisia species. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 95: 34–46, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2014.02.006. 2. Alfassi, Z.B. (2004). On the normalization of a mass spectrum for comparison of two spectra. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom. 15: 385–387, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1044-0305(03)00844-4. 3. Bansal, M., Nagaraju, S.K., and Prasad, V. (2019). The origin and diversification of plant family Dipterocarpaceae. OJG 9: 593–596, https://doi.org/10.4236/ojg.2019.910050. 4. Braga, J., Deklerck, V., Espinoza, E., Groening, M., Koch, G., Monteiro Pastore, T.C., Ramananantoandro, T., Schroeder, H., Watkinson, C., Wiedenhoeft, A.C., et al.. (2020). Scientific methods for taxonomic and origin identification of timber. Global Timber Tracking Network. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342003654 (Accessed 15 May 2023). 5. Deklerck, V., Lancaster, C.A., van Acker, J., Espinoza, E.O., van den Bulcke, J., and Beeckman, H. (2020). Chemical fingerprinting of wood sampled along a pith-to bark gradient for individual comparison and provenance identification. Forests 11: 1–13, https://doi.org/10.3390/f11010107.
|
|