Cited by 102Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchGroundwater flow and contamination studiesPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies

Transport and retention of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in natural soils: Importance of soil organic matter and mineral contents, and solution ionic strength

Lyu, Xueyan, Liu, Xing, Sun, Yuanyuan, Ji, Rong, Gao, Bin, Wu, Jichun·2019·Journal of Contaminant Hydrology

Abstract

Effects of soil organic matter and mineral contents, and solution ionic strength on the transport of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in different types of soils (i.e., desert soil, black soil, and red soil) were systematically investigated with a set of laboratory column experiments. The retention of PFOA in the soils under two solution ionic strengths conditions (1.0 mM and 10.0 mM CaCl 2) followed an order of red soil > black soil > desert soil (expect red soil in 10 mM CaCl 2). PFOA retention in the black soil (soil organic carbon content: 2.57%) was higher than that in the desert soil (soil organic carbon content: 0.05%). In addition, PFOA also showed higher mobility in treated black soils with lower organic carbon contents. These results suggest that the hydrophobic interaction is a key mechanism governing PFOA retention and transport in soils. Besides, more PFOA retention in the red soil (zeta potential: 7.25 ± 0.10 mV and 14.80 ± 0.20 mV) than the desert soil (-15.70 ± 0.10 mV and - 9.11 ± 0.10 mV) was observed, suggesting that electrostatic interaction may be another important mechanism for PFOA retention and transport in soils. Increasing ionic strength slightly increased the retention of PFOA in negatively charged desert and black soils, but significantly decreased the retention of PFOA in the positively charged red soil. Findings of this study point to the importance of soil physiochemical properties to the fate and transport of PFOA in natural soils.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2019.03.009

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lyu, X., Liu, X., Sun, Y., Ji, R., Gao, B., & Wu, J.
Affiliations
  • State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse (CN)
  • University of Florida (US)
Corresponding author
  • Sun, Yuanyuan
  • Wu, Jichun
Venue
Journal of Contaminant Hydrology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-08
Volume
225
Pages
103477
ISSN
0169-7722 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2931216158
Cited by
102
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
FWCI
3.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Contaminant Hydrology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Key Research and Development Program of China (YFC1800604)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (U1503282)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China-Xinjiang project (41730856)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Groundwater flow and contamination studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Keywords
perfluorooctanoic acid, soil organic carbon, soil mineral content, ionic strength, zeta potential, electrostatic interactions, hydrophobic interactions, red soil, black soil, desert soils, perfluorinated compounds
MeSH terms
Caprylates, Carbon, Fluorocarbons, Minerals, Osmolar Concentration, 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