Cited by 117Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology

Understanding the Dynamics of Physiological Changes, Protein Expression, and PFAS in Wildlife

Open access
Bangma, Jacqueline, Guillette, T.C., Bommarito, Paige A., Ng, Carla, Reiner, Jessica L., Lindstrom, Andrew B., Strynar, Mark J.·2022·Environment International

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) accumulation and elimination in both wildlife and humans is largely attributed to PFAS interactions with proteins, including but not limited to organic anion transporters (OATs), fatty acid binding proteins (FABPs), and serum proteins such as albumin. In wildlife, changes in the biotic and abiotic environment (e.g. salinity, temperature, reproductive stage, and health status) often lead to dynamic and responsive physiological changes that alter the prevalence and location of many proteins, including PFAS-related proteins. Therefore, we hypothesize that if key PFAS-related proteins are impacted as a result of environmentally induced as well as biologically programmed physiological changes (e.g. reproduction), then PFAS that associate with those proteins will also be impacted. Changes in tissue distribution across tissues of PFAS due to these dynamics may have implications for wildlife studies where these chemicals are measured in biological matrices (e.g., serum, feathers, eggs). For example, failure to account for factors contributing to PFAS variability in a tissue may result in exposure misclassification as measured concentrations may not reflect average exposure levels. The goal of this review is to share general information with the PFAS research community on what biotic and abiotic changes might be important to consider when designing and interpreting a biomonitoring or an ecotoxicity based wildlife study. This review will also draw on parallels from the epidemiological discipline to improve study design in wildlife research. Overall, understanding these connections between biotic and abiotic environments, dynamic protein levels, PFAS levels measured in wildlife, and epidemiology serves to strengthen study design and study interpretation and thus strengthen conclusions derived from wildlife studies for years to come.

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 · 10.1016/j.envint.2021.107037

Cites

143 of 143 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?

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: 2

  1. [134]Rothman KJ, Epidemiology: an introduction. 2012: Oxford university press.
  2. [139]Sagiv SK,, Early-Pregnancy Plasma Concentrations of Perfluoroalkyl Substances and Birth Outcomes in Project Viva: Confounded by Pregnancy Hemodynamics? American Journal of Epidemiology, 2018. 187(4): p. 793– 802. 29155920 PMC5884712

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bangma, J., Guillette, T. C., Bommarito, P. A., Ng, C., Reiner, J. L., Lindstrom, A. B., & Strynar, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (US)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
  • Environmental Protection Agency (US)
Corresponding author
Bangma, Jacqueline
Venue
Environment International
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-01
Volume
159
Pages
107037
ISSN
0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4200086124
Cited by
117
References
142
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 5
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environment International (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Keywords
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS, wildlife, protein expression, physiological changes, organic anion transporters, fatty acid binding protein, serum albumin, tissue distribution, exposure misclassification, biomonitoring, ecotoxicology, research design, reproductive stage, salinity, temperature
MeSH terms
Biological Monitoring, Animals, Animals, Wild, Fluorocarbons, Humans, Reproduction, Alkanesulfonic Acids

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