Developmental Exposure to Perfluorooctane Sulfonate (PFOS) and Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) Selectively Decreases Brain Dopamine Levels in Northern Leopard Frogs
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are synthetic compounds that are a major public health concern due to widespread use, long environmental and biological half-lives, detection in most human plasma samples, and links to multiple adverse health outcomes. The literature suggests that some PFAS may be neurotoxic. However, there are major gaps in the literature with respect to how environmentally-relevant doses during development may influence the nervous system. To address this gap, we utilized a sentinel species, Northern leopard frogs (Lithobates pipiens) to determine the effects of developmental exposure to environmentally relevant perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) on major neurotransmitter systems. Frog larvae at Gosner stage 25 were exposed to 10, 100, or 1000 ppb PFOS or PFOA for 30 days before neurochemical analysis. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with electrochemical detection or fluorescent detection assays was used to measure neurotransmitter levels, which were normalized to protein levels in each sample. Dopamine (DA) decreased significantly in the brains of frogs treated with PFOA (1000 ppb) and PFOS (100 and 1000 ppb). Significant increases in DA turnover also resulted from PFOA and PFOS treatment. Neither PFOS, nor PFOA produced detectable alterations in serotonin (nor its metabolite), norepinephrine, gamma-amino butyric acid (GABA), glutamate, or acetylcholine. PFAS body burdens showed that PFOS accumulated relative to dose, while PFOA did not. These data suggest that DArgic neurotransmission is selectively affected in developmentally exposed amphibians and that PFAS should be evaluated for a potential role in diseases that target the DA system.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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?
The dopaminergic system has received the most attention due to its apparent sensitivity to PFAS, with dopaminergic neuropathology observed at lower exposure levels compared to other neurotransmitter systems and consistent disruption across model organisms.
“The dopaminergic system has received the most attention due to its apparent sensitivity to PFAS, with dopaminergic neuropathology observed at lower exposure levels compared to other neurotransmitter systems and consistent disruption across model organisms”
From A Critical Review and Meta-Analysis of Impacts of Per- and Polyfluorinated Substances on the Brain and Behavior (2022) · cites this paper as Foguth et al., 2019
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 34 · Cited by 103
- Authors
- Foguth, R. M., Flynn, R. W., de Perre, C., Iacchetta, M., Lee, L. S., Sepúlveda, M. S., & Cannon, J. R.
- Affiliations
- Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
- Corresponding author
- Cannon, Jason R.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-08
- Volume
- 377
- Pages
- 114623
- ISSN
- 0041-008X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2951336142
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 34
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 3.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology (acceptedVersion)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program
- Ralph W. and Grace M. Showalter Research Trust Fund
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmaceutical Science › Fluorine in Organic Chemistry
- Keywords
- PFOS, perfluorooctanoic acid, early life exposure, dopamine, dopamine turnover, brain neurotransmitters, northern leopard frog, Rana pipiens, amphibian larvae, body burden, serotonin, norepinephrine, GABA, glutamate, acetylcholine
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Body Burden, Brain Chemistry, Caprylates, Dopamine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Environmental Pollutants, Female, Fluorocarbons, Larva, Synaptic Transmission, Pregnancy, Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects, Rana pipiens, Alkanesulfonic Acids, Neurotransmitter Agents, Neurotoxicity Syndromes
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