Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42141224›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science and pollution research international2026

Differential prevalence of PFAS, PCBs and pesticides in liver of hunted game.

Alexandra Esther, Michelle Peter, Vera Ritz, Daniel Esther, Doreen Gabriel, Roman Trommler, Detlef Schenke, Klaus Polaczek, Kathrin Fisch, Christoph Müller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Alexandra EstherInstitute for Plant Protection in Horticulture and Urban Green, Julius Kühn Institute (JKI), Messeweg 11/12, 38104, Brunswick, Germany. alexandra.esther@julius-kuehn.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8047-4374
Michelle PeterDepartment of Pharmacy, Center for Drug Research, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Butenandtstraße 5-13, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Vera RitzDepartment Pesticides Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Max-Dohrn-Straße 8-10, 10589, Berlin, Germany.
Daniel EstherUFB Umwelt- und Forstbüro, Wilsdruffer Straße 25, 01737, Tharandt, Germany.
Doreen GabrielInstitute for Crop and Soil Science, Julius Kühn Institute (JKI), Bundesallee 58, 38116, Brunswick, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2504-1987
Roman TrommlerDepartment of Pharmacy, Center for Drug Research, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Butenandtstraße 5-13, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Detlef SchenkeInstitute for Ecological Chemistry, Plant Analysis and Stored Product Protection, Julius Kühn Institute (JKI), Königin-Luise-Straße 19, 14195, Berlin, Germany.
Klaus PolaczekStaatsbetrieb Sachsenforst, Kompetenzzentrum Wald und Forstwirtschaft, Bonnewitzer Straße 34, 01796, Pirna, Germany.
Kathrin FischInstitute for Ecological Chemistry, Plant Analysis and Stored Product Protection, Julius Kühn Institute (JKI), Königin-Luise-Straße 19, 14195, Berlin, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1723-1601
Christoph MüllerDepartment of Pharmacy, Center for Drug Research, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Butenandtstraße 5-13, 81377, Munich, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1163-2527

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Free foraging game animals are constantly exposed to environmental pollutants and can therefore serve as bioindicators for these substances. However, they can also pose a health risk to humans if polluted meat of wild game animals enters the food chain. We analysed 219 potentially critical pollutants in 164 liver samples of hunted wild boar (Sus scrofa) and roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) from north-eastern Germany. Overall, 24 pollutants were detected and 16 of them were detected quantitatively. PCBs, PFAS and rodenticides were more frequent and present in far higher concentrations in wild boar than in roe deer. Only for rodenticides can it be assumed that there is no health risk for the game animals; otherwise, no statement can be made due to a lack of reference data. Risks for human consumers of liver arise from concentrations in wild boar liver exceeding the tolerable weekly intake for PFAS by up to 17 times and in individual cases the acute reference dose for brodifacoum by up to 485%. In contrast, the health risk of eating game meat is usually negligible, as chemical residues generally accumulate in the liver and less in muscle tissue. The significance of up to 12 co-occurring residues for animal and human health is still an open research issue.

Indexed as

Environmental PollutantsFluorocarbonsLiverPesticidesPolychlorinated BiphenylsAlkanesulfonic AcidsAnimalsDeerEnvironmental MonitoringGermanyHumansSus scrofaAlkanesulfonic AcidsEnvironmental PollutantsFluorocarbonsPesticidesPolychlorinated BiphenylsGC–MS/MSHealth riskLC–MS/MSLiver consumptionLiver residuesRoe deer (Capreolus capreolus)Wild boar (Sus scrofa)

Identifiers

PMID42141224
PMCPMC13226317

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.