Cited by 21Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchEnvironmental and Analytical Chemistry StudiesEnvironmental Chemistry and Analysis

Assessing the impact of immobilisation on the bioavailability of PFAS to plants in contaminated Australian soils

Open access
Khair Biek, Sali, Khudur, Leadin S., Rigby, Laura, Singh, Navneet, Askeland, Matthew, Ball, Andrew S.·2024·Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have become a key concern to both environmental and human health due to their extreme persistence in the environment and their ability to bioaccumulate in plants, animals, and humans. In this mesocosm study, Australian PFAS-contaminated soil with a mean total concentration of 8.05 mg/kg and a mean combined PFHxS + PFOS concentration of 7.89 mg/kg was treated with an immobilisation sorbent (RemBind®) at different application rates (0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, and 5% w/w). To assess the efficacy of this immobilisation treatment, PFAS leachability, PFAS plant uptake, and ecotoxicity tests were conducted. Leachability testing was performed according to the Australian Standard Leaching Procedure (ASLP) at pH 5 and 7. A grass species (Dactylis glomerata) was used to measure plant uptake of PFAS from untreated and treated contaminated soil. In addition, the Microtox test was used to assess the associated ecotoxicity. The immobilisation treatment resulted in a significant reduction of 88.5-99.8% in the total PFAS leachability and 88.7-99.8% in the combined PFOS and PFHxS leachability at pH 5. Similarly, significant reductions (5-12-fold) were observed in the plant uptake of total PFAS and combined PFOS and PFHxS in all treated soil samples. In addition, although the Microtox test showed relatively low ecotoxicity in all the experimental samples, including the untreated soil, a significant decrease in the ecotoxicity of treated soil samples was observed. The results from this study highlight that this treatment approach has the potential to reduce both PFAS leachability and plant bioavailability with a relatively low associated ecotoxicity. This is likely to reduce the risk of the transfer of PFAS into higher trophic levels. This immobilisation treatment may, therefore, reduce the risk associated with PFAS-contaminated soils and may be an important remediation tool for managing certain PFAS-contaminated soils.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11356-024-32496-7

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Soil amendments, such as clays or immobilization agents, can significantly reduce PFAS bioavailability and plant uptake.

    “Soil amendments, such as clays or immobilization agents, can significantly reduce PFAS bioavailability and plant uptake, offering potential remediation strategies [166,167].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Banks RE, Smart BE, Tatlow J (2013) Organofluorine chemistry: principles and commercial applications, Springer Science & Business Media
  2. Bräunig J Baduel C Barnes CM Mueller JF Sorbent assisted immobilisation of perfluoroalkyl acids in soils – effect on leaching and bioavailability J Hazard Mater 2021 412 125171 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125171 33529830 · DOI
  3. Juhasz AL, Kastury F, Herde C, Tang W (2022b) Application of soil amendments for reducing PFAS leachability and bioavailability. Environ Pollut 119498 35618144

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Khair Biek, S., Khudur, L. S., Rigby, L., Singh, N., Askeland, M., & Ball, A. S.
Affiliations
RMIT University (AU)
Corresponding author
Khudur, Leadin S.
Venue
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Published
2024-02-19
Volume
31
Issue
13
Pages
20330-20342
ISSN
  • 0944-1344 (ISSN-L)
  • 1614-7499
OpenAlex
W4391948401
Cited by
21
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 1
FWCI
2.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Science and Pollution Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Environmental and Analytical Chemistry Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Environmental Chemistry and Analysis
Keywords
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFOS, PFHxS, plant uptake, bioavailability, Dactylis glomerata, ecotoxicity, Microtox test, soil remediation, bioaccumulation
MeSH terms
Animals, Australia, Biological Availability, Fluorocarbons, Humans, Plants, Soil, Soil Pollutants

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review