Skip to main content
AAS Open Research logoLink to AAS Open Research
. 2019 Jul 23;1:20. Originally published 2018 Jul 16. [Version 2] doi: 10.12688/aasopenres.12882.2

Environmental and biological monitoring in the workplace: A 10-year South African retrospective analysis

Puleng Matatiele 1,a, Lerato Mochaki 1, Bianca Southon 1, Boitumelo Dabula 1, Poobalan Poongavanum 1, Boitumelo Kgarebe 1,2
PMCID: PMC7194147  PMID: 32382697

Version Changes

Revised. Amendments from Version 1

The article’s main content has not been revised or modified in any way. However, the last paragraph in the conclusion section of the article has been revised to include in the limitations of the study the points pointed out by the reviewers, which the researchers had previously omitted to address. It has also been indicated in this same paragraph that the study will be used as a basis upon which further research to address those concerns raised by reviewers will be undertaken. The e-mail address of the corresponding author has also been updated.

Abstract

This report is an overview of requests for biological and environmental monitoring of hazardous chemicals, submitted to the National Institute for Occupational Health, Analytical Services Laboratory for testing from the years 2005 to 2015. The report discusses the nature of tests requested and implications for workers’ health and environment, as well as potential impact of the uncertainties associated with monitoring of hazardous chemicals. This is a retrospective, descriptive, qualitative and quantitative audit of all samples received and tests performed retrieved from records of analysis by the laboratory. The study sample consisted of 44,221 samples. The report indicates that throughout the interrogation period the demand for biological monitoring was higher than that for environmental monitoring, with more requests for toxic metals than organic pollutants. Toxic metal testing was highest for mercury, followed by manganese, lead, aluminium and arsenic. The highest number of tests for organic pollutants was conducted for pesticides followed by toluene and xylene. The study has also revealed that the scope of tests requested is rather narrow and does not reflect the broad spectrum of South Africa’s industrial diversity. Having identified possible reasons for underutilization, a number of reforms that could enhance the laboratory’s performance have been addressed.

Keywords: Analytical Services, chemical exposure, environment, monitoring, heavy metals

Introduction

Humans are exposed to hazardous chemicals in a variety of ways; mainly through diet and through the air that we breathe (indoor, outdoor and occupational). Occupational exposure can occur through inhalation, absorption through the skin or ingestion, with the inhalation of vapours, dusts, fumes or gases being the route of highest exposure 1. Both biological and environmental monitoring can help in assessment of exposure to specific chemicals, characterization of exposure pathways and potential risks and their mitigation, and thus serve as elements of health surveillance that can be used in the assessment of the risks to health as an integral part of occupational and environmental health and safety programmes. Thus, the three-pronged prevention of diseases due to toxic agents in the general or occupational environment involves both environmental and biological monitoring, as well as health surveillance 2. In the occupational context, environmental monitoring entails characterization and monitoring of the quality of the environment in preparation for environmental impact assessment 3, 4. As a result, environmental monitoring is critical to understanding whether the quality of the environment is getting better or worse, and allows for the removal of a worker from a contaminated environment before adverse health effects are experienced. Biological monitoring in the workplace involves the detection of biomarkers in biological samples (e.g., breath, urine, blood, hair, etc.) from workers, and the comparison to reference values 5, 6. Guidelines for chemical monitoring strategies have established that monitoring is necessary if there is reason to believe that a hazard exists or may develop in the workplace 7. Thus, monitoring and surveillance are valuable tools enabling identification and tracking of exposures to hazards in the environment and their related health implications. It is through the results of monitoring and surveillance programs that it becomes possible for authorities to make sound and effective public and environmental health policies and interventions, as well as enabling employers to measure the efficacy of control measures.

The National Institute for Occupational Health (NIOH) in South Africa (SA) has a well-established analytical chemistry laboratory (commonly referred to as Analytical Services) that specialises in hazardous chemical exposure analyses. The overall goal of the laboratory is to promote effective environmental and biological monitoring and surveillance of existing and emergent chemical hazards related to workplace chemicals and to environmental quality. As already indicated, quantifying exposure levels and generating science-based information is necessary to identify risks and inform risk management. The laboratory offering consists of different techniques of both well-established (accredited) and other novel technologies.

The current review focuses on the request for hazardous (organic and inorganic) chemicals analysis in Analytical Services of the NIOH as markers of biological and environmental exposure in the workplace. The number and type of tests requested from this laboratory shed light on the demand for biological and environmental monitoring of these chemicals of concern in workplaces. Hence the results of this study will bring to light whether the number and type of tests requested reflect SA’s mineral riches and industrial diversity where human exposure to these chemicals is highly possible.

Methods

Data source

This was a retrospective and descriptive study of the number of samples received and tests performed retrieved from records of analysis by the laboratory for the years 2005 to 2015. The study sample consisted of 30,399 samples analysed for toxic metals and 13822 samples for organic pollutant exposure. All samples for organic pollutants analysis were biological matrices (urine, blood and plasma), whereas samples for analysis of toxic metals comprised of both human (urine, blood, serum, plasma and tissue), and a variety of environmental matrices (water, dust, filters, paint, ink, traditional medicine concoctions, etc.). In total there were 40,931 and 3,290 human and environmental samples, respectively. These samples were from a variety of industries ranging from mining, petrochemicals, motor industry, agriculture, waste processing and the army. The data was entered onto an Excel spreadsheet. Tables and graphs were generated by number of tests per toxic metal, matrix type and organic pollutant.

Ethics

As a clinical chemistry laboratory, Analytical Services is accredited to both ISO 15189 and ISO/IEC 17025 by the South African National Accreditation System, (registration number M0276). The laboratory follows principles of Good Clinical Practice, which is an international ethical and scientific quality standard for designing, conducting, recording and reporting studies that involve the participation of human subjects. Compliance with the standard provides public assurance that the rights, safety and wellbeing of study subjects are protected, consistent with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki 8, 9.

Results

Table 1 shows the total number of tests performed for the analysis of both toxic metals and organic pollutants per year for the period 2005 to 2015 at NIOH, the results of which are available on OSF 10. Generally, there were more requests for analysis of toxic metals than for that of organic pollutants ( Figure 1). In addition, analysis of both toxic metals and organic pollutants exposure grew steadily from 2005 to 2010, after which the laboratory saw a decline in the number of test requests. With regard to individual toxic metals tests, Figure 2a shows that the demand for inorganic mercury testing had the highest frequency, followed by manganese and lead. The most common matrix tested was blood followed by urine, water, and serum ( Figure 2b). Organic pollutant monitoring results ( Figure 3) show that the highest number of tests was conducted for pesticides, followed by phenol, toluene and xylene. These pollutants are as a result of activities mainly from the agriculture (pesticides) and petrochemical/motor and mining (phenol, toluene and xylene) industries. Even though no data has been shown in this study, NIOH has also received requests for toxic chemical testing in a wide variety of samples, including nails, hair and unidentified powders and liquids. Also not shown are requests from clinicians for therapeutic drug monitoring and forensic toxicology assessment.

Table 1. The total number of toxic metals and organic pollutants tests done per year throughout the years 2005 to 2015 at NIOH.

Year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total
Toxic Metals 659 743 543 874 941 8066 4658 4825 2403 3824 2863 30399
Organic pollutants 457 1084 393 1503 1014 3093 2889 1340 1362 281 406 13822
Total 1116 1827 936 2377 1955 11159 7547 6165 3765 4105 3269 44221

Figure 1. The total number of tests for both toxic metals and organic pollutants done per year throughout the years 2005 to 2015 at NIOH.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

The total number of tests performed for environmental and biological monitoring of ( a) toxic metals in ( b) various matrices at NIOH from years 2005 to 2015.

Figure 3. The total number of tests performed for environmental and biological monitoring of organic pollutants at NIOH from years 2005 to 2015.

Figure 3.

Discussion and conclusions

Assessment and characterization of the body-burden of hazardous chemicals and the potential health risks thereof is a key strategy for providing a scientific basis for prevention via exposure reduction and motivating action especially in occupational settings. The increase in bio-monitoring versus environmental monitoring, as seen in our results, confirms some literature findings, which report that exposure assessment has shifted from pollutant monitoring in air, soil, and water towards personal exposure measurements and bio-monitoring 11. The decline in the number of tests requested from NIOH Analytical Services laboratory in latter years is noted. The decline is suggestive of an underutilized resource, which could have been as a result of various reasons, including:

  • Samples received being unlabelled, wrongly labelled or not collected properly thereby resulting in rejection by the laboratory 12, hence why as one of its key performance areas the Analytical Services laboratory conducts upon request free training on sample collection, handling and transportation of samples in the field of occupational and environmental health.

  • Previous regular users could have been unhappy and therefore left due to reasons such as long turn-around times, market-related pricing of tests, etc. Also, the unavailability of some test methods, as a result of the lack of suitable equipment and/or the relevant expertise could drive away clients. Consequently, NIOH has prioritized the purchase of state-of-the-art equipment, which is the gold standard equipment used for the services required. The use of these technologies and techniques, either individually, or in combination, has become essential in modern laboratory and environmental medicine.

  • Lack of marketing; potential users could have been unaware of NIOH as a service provider for laboratory testing for the purposes of environmental and biological monitoring and surveillance so that there was no growth in numbers of new requisitions. However, the growing number of current requests for testing (though not shown) indicates growing awareness for this specialized service which is the only one in the country for public service.

Notably, the rises and dips in the frequency of requests correlate strongly with environmental disaster occurrences and awareness campaigns, and their decline, in the country. Naturally, environmental disasters and work incidents pique the interest of various groups, namely regulators, environmentalists and workers’ rights groups, thereby putting pressure on the government and companies associated with these incidents to take action to monitor both the affected workers and the environment. For example, one international chemicals company operating in SA made headlines in the late 1990s when it was found guilty of having exposed some of its workers and nearby communities to massive quantities of mercury as well as keeping stock-piled mercury waste that had started to leach into soil and water bodies 13. As Figure 4 also shows, subsequent environmental monitoring requirements saw a peak in requests for mercury analysis 1419. Similarly, several studies conducted in SA, probably in the wake of global lead poisoning prevention campaigns, have revealed the sources and potential risk factors associated with human lead poisoning, thereby stimulating awareness leading to monitoring in highly susceptible groups, including children or workers in high risk work areas such as lead mines, shooting ranges, battery manufacturing, painting and many others 2025. In a similar manner, manganism came to the fore in 2007 when several cases of suspected chronic exposure to manganese had been detected at a ferromanganese smelter 26. A similar pattern was observed for exposure to arsenic and several other heavy metals 2729.

Figure 4. The total number of tests performed per year for toxic metals at NIOH from years 2005 to 2015.

Figure 4.

This study has also revealed that the scope of tests requested is quite limited and does not reflect the broad spectrum of SA’s mineral riches. SA’s main raw materials mined are gold, diamonds, platinum, chromium, vanadium, manganese, uranium, iron, coal and copper. Scientific studies have confirmed that mining of any of these minerals presents health hazards; hence human exposure to them should be monitored as well as the environment in which their use occurs 30. However, the spectrum of tests requested for biological and environmental monitoring at the Analytical Services is not representative of this variety of raw materials. Perhaps other workplaces make use of alternative private laboratories for their monitoring, which if not, could be indicative of lax monitoring (or no monitoring at all) with regard to exposures associated with the mining and use of these raw materials. For example, in SA it is common knowledge that artisanal mining, and small scale and illegal mining are thriving, especially at abandoned/disused underground mines 31. Workers in these environments are exposed to a wide variety of minerals, including lead, silica, gold, manganese, and platinum. Mining regulatory authorities do not monitor activities in these types of mining environments; and therefore workers and their associated health risks cannot be monitored and measured 32, 33.

Thus, having identified the reasons for underutilization of such a valuable resource, the NIOH started working on action-oriented steps to address some of these problems; hence, the above outline of a number of reforms that have been implemented and have enhanced the laboratory’s performance. In a similar manner, having analysed the trends above, the NIOH continues to work on action-oriented steps to address some of the identified gaps. For example, as the awareness of exposures and the science of measurement and associated diseases grow, stronger engagement with stakeholders (regulators, labour and business) and provision of resources to upgrade the existing laboratories and engage in contract research focusing on biological and environmental monitoring of the impact of technology has resulted in the upcoming acquisition of state-of-the-art equipment.

This study is, however, not without its own limitations. Lack of extensive interrogation of data in the study leaves many questions unanswered. For example, the number of samples submitted for testing does not necessarily imply unacceptable exposure levels to the particular hazardous chemical under scrutiny. While this could be one reason an employer would deem it unnecessary and uneconomical to carry out continuous monitoring, neither is testing many individual workers an indication of a safe working environment. The uncertainty regarding reasons why monitoring was initiated but later abruptly terminated could have been dealt with better by sending out questionnaires to the tests requesters. It is thus difficult with the current information to determine if there was compliance with Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL) values or not. Hence, this work only forms the basis upon which an extensive future study will be conducted which will consider the relevant reference values to determine safety conditions of the various work environments. Nevertheless, Analytical Services provides an invaluable service that should be utilized to its full capacity if workers’ health in the region is to improve. In fact, thousands of workers still are becoming ill and dying as a result of exposure to hazardous chemicals, because they are being exposed to levels of chemicals that are not necessarily illegal, but are not safe 34, 35, hence why consistent monitoring should be encouraged.

Data availability

Complete data regarding the number of tests for each metal and organic compound are available on OSF: http://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/fh8z7 10. Data are displayed per year and consolidated.

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the researchers who have contributed to our understanding of the importance of biological and environmental monitoring as they relate to workers’ health and whose works have not been cited here due to space limitations.

Funding Statement

We acknowledge financial support from the National Health Laboratory Service (South Africa). Boitumelo Kgarebe is a Fellow of the African Academy of Sciences.

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved]

References

  • 1. Bohlin P, Jones KC, Strandberg B: Occupational and indoor air exposure to persistent organic pollutants: A review of passive sampling techniques and needs. J Environ Monit. 2007;9(6):501–09. 10.1039/b700627f [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Offi IL: Encyclopedia of occupational health and safety: ILO.1971. [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Liu HY, Bartonova A, Pascal M, et al. : Approaches to integrated monitoring for environmental health impact assessment. Environ Health. 2012;11(1):88. 10.1186/1476-069X-11-88 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Weston S: An overview of environmental monitoring and its significance in resource and environmental management. School of Resource and Environmental Studies, Dalhousie University. 2011. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Lowry LK: Role of biomarkers of exposure in the assessment of health risks. Toxicol Lett. 1995;77(1–3):31–38. 10.1016/0378-4274(95)03268-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Tomatis L: How much of the human disease burden is attributable to environmental chemicals? Toxicol Lett. 1995;77(1–3):1–8. 10.1016/0378-4274(95)03264-9 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. General Assembly of the World Medical Association: World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. J Am Coll Dent. 2014;81(3):14–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences: International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Bull Med Ethics. 2002; (182):17–23. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Chemical monitoring activity under the common implementation strategy of the WFD. J Environ Monit.Royal Society of Chemistry,2006;8:240–241. 10.1039/B517848G [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Matatiele P: Biomonitoring@NIOH 2010 to 2015. Open Science Framework. 2018. 10.17605/osf.io/fh8z7 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Morello-Frosch R, Brody JG, Brown P, et al. : Toxic ignorance and right-to-know in biomonitoring results communication: a survey of scientists and study participants. Environ Health. 2009;8(1):6. 10.1186/1476-069X-8-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Dikmen ZG, Pinar A, Akbiyik F: Specimen rejection in laboratory medicine: Necessary for patient safety? Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015;25(3):377–85. 10.11613/BM.2015.037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Environmental Justice Case Study: Thor Chemicals and Mercury Exposure in Cato-Ridge, South Africa.[Accessed 28 May 2018]. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Barratt GJ, Combrink J: An assessment of the degree of mercury(Hg) bio-transformation in two river systems following discharges from a mercury recovery plant.Water SA.2002;29:1–5. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Matthews S: Mercury levels in SA water resources probed. Water Wheel. 2008;7(1):23 Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Leaner JJ, Dabrowski JM, Mason RP, et al. : Mercury emissions from point sources in South Africa. In Mercury Fate and Transport in the Global Atmosphere.Springer, Boston, MA.2009;113–130. 10.1007/978-0-387-93958-2_5 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Somerset V, Leaner JJ, Williams CW, et al. : A National survey of mercury levels in South Africa’s water resources.CSIR, Stellenbosch. Report No. CSIR/NRE/WR/IR/2010/0021/B.2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Walters CR, Somerset VS, Leaner JJ, et al. : A review of mercury pollution in South Africa: Current status. J Environ Sci Health A Tox Hazard Subst Environ Eng. 2011;46(10):1129–37. 10.1080/10934529.2011.590729 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. AJUA Environmental Consultants: Inventory of Mercury Releases in South Africa.Report prepared for the Department of Environmental Affairs, Republic of South Africa.2011; (Accessed on 25 June 2018). Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Tong S, von Schirnding YE, Prapamontol T: Environmental lead exposure: a public health problem of global dimensions. Bull World Health Organ. 2000;78(9):1068–77. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Sheqafrica: Many workers at risk of lead poisoning.Published by Africa Media Group, 16/10/2013.2013; [Accessed on 01 June 2018]. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Binns HJ, Campbell C, Brown MJ, et al. : Interpreting and managing blood lead levels of less than 10 microg/dL in children and reducing childhood exposure to lead: recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention. Pediatrics. 2007;120(5):e1285–98. 10.1542/peds.2005-1770 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. von Schirnding Y, Mathee A, Kibel M, et al. : A study of pediatric blood lead levels in a lead mining area in South Africa. Environ Res. 2003;93(3):259–63. 10.1016/S0013-9351(03)00117-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Naicker N, Mathee A: Trends in lead exposure in a rural mining town in South Africa, 1991-2008. S Afr Med J. 2015;105(7):515. 10.7196/SAMJNEW.7809 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Mathee A: Towards the prevention of lead exposure in South Africa: contemporary and emerging challenges. Neurotoxicology. 2014;45:220–3. 10.1016/j.neuro.2014.07.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Ramutloa L: Probe Of KZN Manganese Poisoning Case To Resume.Published by The South African Department of Labour.2008; [accessed on 04 June 2018]. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Naidoo S, Africa A, Dalvie MA: Exposure to CCA-treated wood amongst food caterers and residents in informal areas of Cape Town. S Afr J Sci. 2013;109(7–8):1–7. 10.1590/sajs.2013/20120043 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Gosling M: Contamination scare hits SA fruit. Published by Independent Media,2007; [Accessed on 08 June 2018]. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Okem A, Southway C, Ndhlala AR, et al. : Determination of total and bioavailable heavy and trace metals in South African commercial herbal concoctions using ICP-OES. S Afr J Bot. 2012;82:75–82. 10.1016/j.sajb.2012.07.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Utembe W, Faustman EM, Matatiele P, et al. : Hazards identified and the need for health risk assessment in the South African mining industry. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2015;34(12):1212–21. 10.1177/0960327115600370 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Mkhize MC: New interventions and sustainable solutions. Reappraising illegal artisanal mining in South Africa.SA Crime Quarterly.2017; (61):67–75. 10.17159/2413-3108/2018/v0n61a1726 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Smith S: OSHA: Workers Are Not Being Protected From Chemical Hazards. EHS Today. 2014. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Coetzee B, Horn R: The theft of precious metals from South African mines and refineries. Africa Portal. 2007. Reference Source [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Crinnion WJ: The CDC fourth national report on human exposure to environmental chemicals: what it tells us about our toxic burden and how it assist environmental medicine physicians. Altern Med Rev. 2010;15(2):101–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Howard J: Setting occupational exposure limits: are we living in a post-OEL world. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Labor and Employment Law. 2004;7:513 Reference Source [Google Scholar]
AAS Open Res. 2019 Aug 12. doi: 10.21956/aasopenres.14065.r27087

Reviewer response for version 2

Jolanta Skowroń 1

I agree with the authors' explanations to my comments. I suggest to publish the article in Version 2.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

AAS Open Res. 2019 May 29. doi: 10.21956/aasopenres.13949.r26936

Reviewer response for version 1

Jolanta Skowroń 1

The title of the article by Matatiele et al. promises a lot, but what is involved is a pure analysis of the laboratory's activity that measures the concentrations of chemicals in the air of the work environment and in the biological material.

More interesting for occupational health and safety would be information on the assessment of exposure to chemicals at workplaces with respect to applicable occupational exposure limits. The same problem applies to biological monitoring in the work environment, which in the EU now is becoming increasingly important in the assessment of exposure for example to carcinogens. The authors of the article have referred to reference values for both types of monitoring, but these are articles from 1995 and do not contain reference values.

The number of tests and analysis carried out in the working environment does not prove safety conditions. Only information about compliance with OEL values or exceeding them is valuable for the OSH and employer services, because it requires the use of appropriate technical, technological or organizational measures to provide employees safety working conditions.

Very interesting is the number of the analyses in biological material (blood, urine, breath, hair, etc.), but without the reference value it is difficult to interpret the results. Has biological monitoring been performed in employees for whom concentrations of e.g. metals in the work environment have been determined? If so, what should be done OSH service, if these values are exceeded and the concentrations in the working environment are below the limit values? Similarly, it was interesting to also consider the reverse situation.

I hope that this article is just an introduction to undertake deeper analysis regarding working environment with particular emphasis on biological monitoring.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

AAS Open Res. 2018 Oct 1. doi: 10.21956/aasopenres.13949.r26576

Reviewer response for version 1

Alastair W M Hay 1

This paper by  P Matatiele et al is suitable for indexing as it stands. It is well written and I could find no mistakes that require correction.

The paper is an analysis of requests and tests carried out by the National Institute of Occupational Health’s Analytical Services laboratory over the decade 2005 to 2015. It is interesting to read about what was requested and when. The authors surmise on reasons for the decline in certain areas is also interesting.

But for me this paper raises many other questions and it is something I would like both the authors and editors to consider.

It is all very well to list requests, however, for practicing scientists the more interesting question is what did the tests show? It would help to know what the range of results were, what the mean was and how many exceeded the appropriate national limit? For those which exceeded limits were there any follow- up requests?

What I am suggesting here is a much more extensive piece of work and perhaps material for a follow–on publication.

Regarding the tests performed when results are expressed I would want to know the methods used, limits of detection and accuracy and reproducibility of methods.

As for reasons for declining requests the authors cite various possibilities. This begs the question: Have the authors sent out any questionnaire to users to get feedback about the service and to ascertain where changes are needed? They refer to long periods to generate data. How long might these intervals be and what is being done to redress them? Is the new equipment they refer to any attempt to bridge some of these problems?

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Data Availability Statement

    Complete data regarding the number of tests for each metal and organic compound are available on OSF: http://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/fh8z7 10. Data are displayed per year and consolidated.


    Articles from AAS Open Research are provided here courtesy of African Academy of Sciences

    RESOURCES