To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Can determination of extractable organofluorine (EOF) be standardized? First interlaboratory comparisons of EOF and fluorine mass balance in sludge and water matrices
Örebro University, School of Science and Technology. (Man-Technology-Environment Research Centre (MTM))ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7555-142X
Örebro University, School of Science and Technology. (Man-Technology-Environment Research Centre (MTM))ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6800-5658
Department of Environmental Science, Stockholm University, Sweden.
TZW: DVGW-Technologiezentrum Wasser, Germany.
Show others and affiliations
2021 (English)In: Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, ISSN 2050-7887, E-ISSN 2050-7895, Vol. 23, no 10, p. 1458-1465Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The high proportion of unidentified extractable organofluorine (EOF) observed globally in humans and the environment indicates widespread occurrence of unknown per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). However, efforts to standardize or assess the reproducibility of EOF methods are currently lacking. Here we present the first EOF interlaboratory comparison in water and sludge. Three participants (four organizations) analyzed unfortified and PFAS-fortified ultrapure water, two unfortified groundwater samples, unfortified wastewater treatment plant effluent and sludge, and an unfortified groundwater extract. Participants adopted common sample handling strategies and target lists for EOF mass balance but used in-house combustion ion-chromatography (CIC) and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methods. EOF accuracy ranged from 85-101% and 76-109% for the 60 and 334 ng L-1 fluorine (F) - fortified water samples, respectively, with between-laboratory variation of 9-19%, and within-laboratory variation of 3-27%. In unfortified sludge and aqueous samples, between-laboratory variation ranged from 21-37%. The contribution from sum concentrations of 16 individual PFAS (∑PFAS-16) to EOF ranged from 2.2-60% but extended analysis showed that other targets were prevalent, in particular ultra-short-chain perfluoroalkyl acids (e.g. trifluoroacetic acid) in aqueous samples and perfluoroalkyl acid-precursors (e.g. polyfluoroalkyl phosphate diesters) in sludge. The EOF-CIC method demonstrated promising accuracy, robustness and reporting limits but poor extraction efficiency was observed for some targets (e.g. trifluoroacetic acid).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Royal Society of Chemistry, 2021. Vol. 23, no 10, p. 1458-1465
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-94573DOI: 10.1039/d1em00224dISI: 000697519700001PubMedID: 34546240Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85117956210OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-94573DiVA, id: diva2:1597387
Funder
Swedish Research Council Formas, 2018-00801
Note

Funding agency:

Swedish Chemicals Agency

Available from: 2021-09-27 Created: 2021-09-27 Last updated: 2022-02-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Kärrman, AnnaYeung, Leo W. Y.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Kärrman, AnnaYeung, Leo W. Y.
By organisation
School of Science and Technology
In the same journal
Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 146 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf