Calibration of Perfluorinated Alkyl Acid Uptake Rates by a Tube Passive Sampler in Water

Authors

Matthew Dunn, University of Rhode Island
Jitka Becanova, University of Rhode IslandFollow
Jarod Snook, University of Rhode Island
Bridger Ruyle
Rainer Lohmann, University of Rhode IslandFollow

Document Type

Article

Date of Original Version

2023

Department

Oceanography

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of 4000+ man-made compounds of great concern due to their environmental ubiquity and adverse effects. Despite general interest, few reliable detection tools for integrative passive sampling of PFAS in water are available. A microporous polyethylene tube with a hydrophilic–lipophilic balance sorbent could serve as a flow-resistant passive sampler for PFAS. The tube’s sampling rate, R_s, was predicted based on either partitioning and diffusion or solely diffusion. At 15 ^°C, the laboratory-measured R_s for perfluorohexanoic acid of 100 ± 81 mL day^–1 was better predicted by a partitioning and diffusion model (48 ± 1.8 mL day^–1) across 10–60 cm s^–1 water flow speeds (15 ± 4.2 mL day^–1 diffusion only). For perfluorohexane sulfonate, R_s at 15 ^°C were similarly different (110 ± 60 mL day^–1 measured, 120 ± 63 versus 12 ± 3.4 mL day^–1 in respective models). R_s values from field deployments were in between these estimates (46 ± 40 mL day^–1 for perfluorohexanoic acid). PFAS uptake was not different for previously biofouled membranes in the laboratory, suggesting the general applicability of the sampler in environmental conditions. This research demonstrates that the polyethylene tube’s sampling rates are sensitive to the parameterization of the models used here and partitioning-derived values should be used.

Publication Title, e.g., Journal

ACS ES&T Water

Volume

3

Issue

2

Citation/Publisher Attribution

Dunn, M., Becanoca, J., Snook, J., Ruyle, B. & Lohmann, R. (2023). Calibration of Perfluorinated Alkyl Acid Uptake Rates by a Tube Passive Sampler in Water. ACS EST Water, 3(2), 323-341. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.2c00384

Available at: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.2c00384