XRF (X-ray fluorescence analysis) has been applied as the method for analysis of plant samples, but not in its full potential. This method would be highly suitable for monitoring programs and screening studies. A simple sample preparation procedure makes this technique time and cost-effective, although the absence of adequate calibration standards for some analyzed matrices can be a significant limiting factor. Nevertheless, this obstacle can be overcome by the development of the so-called “standardless method” approach. It is important to explore the possibilities and limitations of such method applied to an analysis of plant materials. The accuracy of XRF analysis is highly dependent on the physical characteristics of the sample, which can be significantly affected by the sample preparation procedure. Variations of 3 crucial sample preparation parameters: the mass of the samples (from 1 to 5 g), binder ratio (from 0 to 25% of wax), and pressing pressure (from 10 to 25 t) were tested on needles obtained from two widespread conifer species: Pinus nigra and Abies alba. For most elements, the correlation between the concentration and the change of the binder ratio was statistically significant, while there was no statistically significant correlation between the concentration and the change of the pellet mass and applied pressure. For both types of needles, an estimated systematic error was always higher than a random error. The difference between two types of errors has been higher among samples with different wax content than in samples with different pellet mass, while the variation of applied pressure did not introduce any significant systematic error. On average the change of wax content inflated the value of systematic error by 18 and 13% for the pine and fir needle samples (respectively), while the change of the sample mass has introduced systematic error in lesser extent, on average it was 11% for pine needles and 10% for fir needle samples. The change of pelletizing pressure affected the results by only 3.9% for both conifer needles.

XRF（X 射线荧光分析）已被用作分析植物样品的方法，但尚未发挥其全部潜力。这种方法非常适用于监测程序和筛选研究。简单的样品制备程序使这项技术既省时又经济，但对于某些分析的基质缺乏足够的校准标准可能是一个重要的限制因素。尽管如此，这一障碍可以通过开发所谓的“无标准方法”方法来克服。探索这种方法应用于植物材料分析的可能性和局限性非常重要。XRF 分析的准确性高度依赖于样品的物理特性，而样品制备程序会显着影响样品的物理特性。黑松和冷杉. 对于大多数元素，浓度与粘合剂比例变化之间的相关性在统计上是显着的，而浓度与颗粒质量和施加压力的变化之间没有统计上显着的相关性。对于这两种类型的针，估计的系统误差总是高于随机误差。两种类型的误差在不同蜡含量的样品之间的差异比在不同颗粒质量的样品中更大，而施加压力的变化没有引入任何显着的系统误差。平均而言，蜡含量的变化使松针和冷杉针样品（分别）的系统误差值膨胀了 18% 和 13%，而样品质量的变化在较小程度上引入了系统误差，平均而言，松针为 11%，冷杉针样品为 10%。对于两种针叶树针，造粒压力的变化对结果的影响仅 3.9%。