Quick answer: Not necessarily. A sample can be collected correctly and analysed accurately while changing chemically, physically or biologically between collection and measurement. Where an experimental conclusion depends on the sample representing its original condition, researchers need to establish whether collection, preservation, storage or transport could have altered the result.
The Experiment May Continue After Collection
An environmental technology company is developing a new filtration material intended to remove dissolved nutrients from recycled water.
The research team installs a pilot system and collects samples upstream and downstream of the proposed treatment.
A specialist laboratory analyses the samples and reports lower nutrient concentrations after filtration.
The findings appear promising.
However, the engineering team later discovers that the upstream samples were refrigerated immediately while some downstream samples remained at ambient temperature during transport.
The difference raises an important question:
Did the measured reduction occur because the filtration material removed the nutrients, or could changes during sample handling have influenced the result?
Both explanations may be relevant.
The laboratory may have performed its analysis correctly. Its measurements may accurately describe the samples as received.
But those samples may no longer represent the water at the moment of collection.
This distinction matters whenever laboratory measurements are used to draw conclusions about a process operating elsewhere.
The Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality explain that some parameters, including dissolved oxygen and pH, can change after collection and may therefore be better measured in the field. The guidelines also emphasise appropriate sample collection, preservation and storage before laboratory analysis.
Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality — Field Sampling Program
The problem is not confined to environmental monitoring.
Similar concerns can arise in materials research, food technology, biotechnology and other investigations involving samples that may change before analysis.
Temperature, exposure to air, biological activity and interactions with sample containers can all affect measured properties.
The significance depends on the material, the analyte and the analytical method.
For a technically uncertain project, the central question is not simply whether the laboratory produced an accurate measurement.
It is whether that measurement still provides reliable evidence about the experimental condition the company intended to investigate.
Distinguish Material Behaviour From Sample-Handling Effects
An experimental programme should consider sample stability before the first specimens are collected.
Otherwise, changes introduced during handling may become difficult to distinguish from the technical effect under investigation.
Identify which properties may change
The research team should begin by identifying the specific property being measured and how it could change after collection.
For a water-treatment investigation, some parameters may need to be measured directly in the field.
Others may be suitable for laboratory analysis if the samples are collected, preserved and transported appropriately.
The National Measurement Institute provides recommendations for environmental testing samples, including sample containers, preservation conditions and holding times. Its guidance states that decisions should take account of the nature of the sample, the intended use of the data and the relevant data-quality objectives.
National Measurement Institute — Requesting and Submitting Environmental Testing Samples
There is no single preservation method suitable for every measurement.
A procedure that helps preserve one constituent may be unnecessary or inappropriate for another.
Researchers should therefore confirm the analytical requirements before collection rather than trying to resolve preservation questions after the samples reach the laboratory.
Keep handling conditions comparable
When an experiment compares alternative treatments, differences in sample handling can introduce another variable.
Consider the filtration example.
If upstream samples are transported promptly under controlled conditions while downstream samples experience longer delays or different temperatures, the comparison may reflect both the treatment and the handling difference.
The experimental design should seek to avoid that ambiguity.
Where technically appropriate, samples being compared should follow consistent collection, preservation and transport procedures.
The team should also consider whether collection order, transport timing or laboratory processing sequence could systematically affect one group more than another.
Equal handling does not guarantee that every sample remains unchanged.
It reduces the risk that a handling difference is mistaken for a treatment effect.
Investigate whether the sample remains stable
Sometimes the stability of a particular analyte or sample matrix under the proposed handling conditions is not adequately established.
Researchers may then need a separate investigation to determine whether the sampling and preservation procedure is suitable for the intended measurement.
For example, an appropriately designed study might compare measurements obtained soon after collection with measurements obtained after controlled storage intervals or under alternative preservation conditions.
The purpose would be to determine whether handling introduces changes large enough to affect the experimental conclusion.
NMI guidance recognises that alternative storage conditions may be used where analyte stability within the particular matrix can be demonstrated and the relevant data-quality objectives are not compromised.
National Measurement Institute — Environmental Sample Preservation and Holding Times
Importantly, a sample-stability investigation does not establish that the underlying technology works.
It establishes whether the measurement pathway is suitable for evaluating that technology.
Those are separate technical questions.
Preserve the Evidence Between Field and Laboratory
The evidence generated by an experimental trial includes more than the laboratory's final analytical report.
Researchers also need enough information to understand how each sample moved from the experimental system to the measurement process.
Record the conditions of collection
The research record should identify the sampling location, relevant operating conditions and collection method.
For the filtration example, this might include whether the sample was collected before or after treatment, the system's operating state and how the sample was obtained.
Where relevant, field measurements that may change before laboratory analysis should also be recorded.
These observations provide context for interpreting the laboratory results.
Document preservation and transport
Relevant records may include the preservation method, storage conditions, collection and receipt times, and departures from the intended procedure.
Where samples are transferred between organisations, their identity and handling history should remain traceable.
This does not require every research project to adopt an unnecessarily complex documentation system.
It requires enough information for another technically competent person to assess whether sample handling could materially affect the result.
The Australian and New Zealand water-quality guidance identifies contamination, changes before measurement and incorrect sample identification as important potential sources of sampling error. It also describes chain-of-custody records as a way of preserving the history of sampling, transport, laboratory receipt, storage and analysis.
Australian and New Zealand Guidelines — Sampling, Preservation and Chain of Custody
A laboratory report alone may not reveal problems that occurred before the sample arrived.
Keep questionable observations visible
If the research team later discovers that some samples were preserved incorrectly, those results should not automatically be combined with properly handled observations.
The team should investigate whether the deviation affects interpretation.
Depending on the circumstances, the measurements may still be useful for a narrower question, may require qualification or may be unsuitable for the intended comparison.
The original results and the reason for any analytical exclusion should remain documented.
This preserves the distinction between evidence supporting the hypothesis and measurements whose relevance cannot be established.
Keep the Sample-Stability Question Separate From R&DTI Eligibility
Sample preservation, transport and laboratory analysis are established technical practices.
Applying recognised procedures, meeting analytical requirements or correcting a known handling error does not automatically constitute core R&D under Australia's R&D Tax Incentive.
There is also a specific statutory exclusion for activities associated with complying with statutory requirements or standards. That exclusion includes specified routine testing and analysis of materials, components, products, processes and other things where the activity is associated with meeting those statutory requirements or standards.
Australian Government — Excluded R&D Activities
This does not mean that every routine laboratory test is automatically covered by that exclusion.
Nor does technical difficulty in preserving or analysing a sample automatically create an eligible R&D activity.
A different question may arise where the behaviour of a novel material or experimental system cannot be determined from existing knowledge.
For example, a company developing an unfamiliar reactive filtration material may need to investigate whether an observed change in nutrient concentration reflects the intended removal mechanism or an unresolved reaction occurring during sampling or storage.
Under the current core R&D requirements, the activity must be conducted for the purpose of generating new knowledge. Its outcome must be unable to be known or determined in advance by a competent professional on the basis of knowledge, information or experience that is publicly available or reasonably accessible anywhere in the world when the activity begins.
The outcome must then be determined through a systematic progression of work based on principles of established science, proceeding from hypothesis to experiment, observation and evaluation and leading to logical conclusions.
Australian Government — Conducting Core R&D Activities
Identifying a sample-handling problem does not itself establish R&DTI eligibility.
The company must assess the purpose and nature of the actual activities against the applicable requirements.
Preserve the Research Record
Current R&DTI guidance states that records should be created at the time the activity is conducted and should show relevant background research and details of what was done, how the work was performed, when it occurred and who carried it out.
For sample-based experiments, a practical technical record may also identify:
• where and when samples were collected;
• relevant operating conditions at collection;
• sample identity and treatment group;
• preservation method and storage conditions;
• transport and laboratory receipt timing;
• deviations from the intended protocol; and
• how any handling issue affected interpretation of the result.
This is a practical research-record framework rather than a prescribed R&DTI template.
Australian Government — Record Keeping for the R&D Tax Incentive
For founders and engineering leads, these records help establish whether a promising laboratory result genuinely supports the proposed technology.
For CFOs, they help clarify whether further expenditure should focus on product development or first resolve uncertainty about the evidence itself.
If the samples did not reliably preserve the relevant experimental condition, repeating the same laboratory analysis may not solve the problem.
The next useful investigation may need to begin at the sampling point.
Conclusion
A technically accurate laboratory measurement is only as useful as the sample it represents.
If a sample changes between collection and analysis, the laboratory may accurately measure a condition that no longer reflects the experimental system at the time of sampling.
That does not automatically invalidate the entire trial.
But it may narrow what the evidence can support.
The useful question is therefore not simply:
Was the sample analysed correctly?
It is:
Did the sample still represent the experimental condition we intended to measure?
When that cannot be established, the next investigation may need to focus on sampling, preservation and transport before further conclusions are drawn about the technology itself.
Sources & Further Reading
Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality — Field Sampling Program
National Measurement Institute — Requesting and Submitting Environmental Testing Samples
National Measurement Institute — Drinking Water Sample Requirements
Australian Government — Conducting Core R&D Activities
Australian Government — Excluded R&D Activities
Australian Government — Record Keeping for the R&D Tax Incentive
Talk to Ignition Research if your environmental technology or materials investigation relies on laboratory measurements from samples that may change during collection, preservation or transport. Establishing whether the sample still represents the original experimental condition can be essential before interpreting the findings. As a Registered Research Service Provider, Ignition Research assists businesses with research question definition, experimental design, technical investigations and contemporaneous supporting records within its registered research fields.
RSP registration confirms that the provider has met the relevant registration requirements for its registered research fields. It does not constitute government endorsement of a project or guarantee R&DTI eligibility.
We do not determine R&DTI eligibility or provide tax advice. The R&D Tax Incentive is a self-assessment program, and companies remain responsible for assessing their activities, expenditure and circumstances and obtaining appropriate tax advice.
This article provides general information only and is not tax, legal or financial advice.
Working on a project like this?
Tell us what you're building and the part you're not sure will work. A researcher from our Adelaide team (registered Research Service Provider RSP000047) reads every enquiry and replies within two business days. No documents needed.
