Removal of eight perfluoroalkyl acids from aqueous solutions by aeration and duckweed
Abstract
Poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are surfactants. Leveraging their surface active feature, this work investigated using aeration to remove perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) from aqueous solutions. Eight PFAAs were spiked to either deionized water or Hoagland solution at three pHs. After 7 h of aeration, removals of perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA), perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA), perfluorobutanesulfonic acid (PFBS), and perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) were marginal and much lower than those of and perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFHpA), perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS). In deionized water, close to 80% of PFOA and PFOS at 200 ppb were removed when the pH was 2.3. The Hoagland solution at pH 2.3 and 5.0 benefited removal of long-chain PFAS at 2 ppb, but not at 200 ppb. With duckweed growing on the Hoagland solution surface, >95% of PFHpA, PFHxS, PFOA, and PFOS at 200 ppb were removed after 2 weeks. Aeration enhanced duckweed uptake of PFHxS, PFOA, and PFOS at 2 ppb significantly. Specific to PFOS, duckweed accumulated 14.4% of this compound initially spiked at 2 ppb in 2 weeks. These results demonstrated that aeration plus duckweed could be a viable and scalable remediation solution for surface water contaminated by PFAS.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Adding aeration within wetland systems removed 80% of PFOS concentrations within 7 hours and 95% within two weeks, likely due to an increase in microbial action.
“Adding aeration within wetland systems has been shown to remove 80 % of PFOS concentrations within 7 h, with 95 % removal in two weeks, likely due to an increase in microbial action (Zhang and Liang, 2020).”
From Review of emerging contaminants in green stormwater infrastructure: antibiotic resistance genes, microplastics, tire wear particles, PFAS, and temperature (2024) · cites this paper as Zhang and Liang, 2020
Cites
Buck, R. C., Franklin, J., Berger, U., Conder, J. M., Cousins, I. T., de Voogt, P., Jensen, A. A., Kannan, K., Mabury, S. A., & van Leeuwen, S. P. (2011) · Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management · doi:10.1002/ieam.258 · Cited by 4,641 · see citing works
Fate and Effects of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances in the Aquatic Environment: A Review
Ahrens, L., & Bundschuh, M. (2014) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.2663 · Cited by 817 · see citing works
Shoeib, M., Harner, T., Wilford, B. H., Jones, K. C., & Zhu, J. (2005) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es048340y · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Remediation of water from per-/poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)–Challenges and perspectives
Garg, S., Wang, J., Kumar, P., Mishra, V., Arafat, H., Sharma, R. S., & Dumée, L. F. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jece.2021.105784 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Plant uptake and soil fractionation of five ether-PFAS in plant-soil systems
Zhang, W., Cao, H., & Liang, Y. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144805 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Self-citationBodus, B., O'Malley, K., Dieter, G., Gunawardana, C., & McDonald, W. (2024) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.167195 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
- Authors
- Zhang, W., & Liang, Y.
- Venue
- Science of The Total Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-07
- Volume
- 724
- Pages
- 138357
- ISSN
- 0048-9697
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 3
- Language
- en
- Funders
- University at Albany
- State University of New York
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