Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39066709›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & technology2024

Assessing Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in Fish Fillet Using Non-Targeted Analyses.

Anna K Boatman, Jessie R Chappel, Madison E Polera, James N Dodds, Scott M Belcher, Erin S Baker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Anna K BoatmanDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-2582-0622
Jessie R ChappelDepartment of Bioinformatics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-1492-118X
Madison E PoleraDepartment of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.
James N DoddsDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9702-2294
Scott M BelcherDepartment of Biological Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1196-3705
Erin S BakerDepartment of Chemistry, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5246-2213

Funding

Single cell, multi-parametric high throughput platform to classify endocrine disruptor potential of mixturesP42ES027704 · NIEHS · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY · PI Weihsueh A Chiu · 2017 to 2026
$21.2M
Translational Research Support CoreP30ES025128 · NIEHS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI Sue Fenton · 2015 to 2026
$18.3M
Uncovering the Mechanisms of PFAS-induced ImmunotoxicityP42ES031009 · NIEHS · NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY RALEIGH · PI HOPPIN, JANE · 2020 to 2024
$9.3M
NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES025128NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES027704NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES031009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a class of thousands of man-made chemicals that are persistent and highly stable in the environment. Fish consumption has been identified as a key route of PFAS exposure for humans. However, routine fish monitoring targets only a handful of PFAS, and non-targeted analyses have largely only evaluated fish from heavily PFAS-impacted waters. Here, we evaluated PFAS in fish fillets from recreational and drinking water sources in central North Carolina to assess whether PFAS are present in these fillets that would not be detected by conventional targeted methods. We used liquid chromatography, ion mobility spectrometry, and mass spectrometry (LC-IMS-MS) to collect full scan feature data, performed suspect screening using an in-house library of 100 PFAS for high confidence feature identification, searched for additional PFAS features using non-targeted data analyses, and quantified perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in the fillet samples. A total of 36 PFAS were detected in the fish fillets, including 19 that would not be detected using common targeted methods, with a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 22 in individual fish. Median fillet PFOS levels were concerningly high at 11.6 to 42.3 ppb, and no significant correlation between PFOS levels and number of PFAS per fish was observed. Future PFAS monitoring in this region should target more of these 36 PFAS, and other regions not considered heavily PFAS contaminated should consider incorporating non-targeted analyses into ongoing fish monitoring studies.

Indexed as

FishesWater Pollutants, ChemicalAlkanesulfonic AcidsAnimalsChromatography, LiquidEnvironmental MonitoringFluorocarbonsNorth CarolinaAlkanesulfonic AcidsFluorocarbonsWater Pollutants, ChemicalBioaccumulationconsumption advisoryion mobility spectrometryLepomismass spectrometry

Identifiers

PMID39066709
PMCPMC11461023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.