Cited by 158Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchEnvironmental Chemistry and AnalysisPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies

Sorption of Fluorotelomer Sulfonates, Fluorotelomer Sulfonamido Betaines, and a Fluorotelomer Sulfonamido Amine in National Foam Aqueous Film-Forming Foam to Soil

Barzen-Hanson, Krista A., Davis, Shannon E., Kleber, Markus, Field, Jennifer A.·2017·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

During fire-fighter training, equipment testing, and emergency responses with aqueous film-forming foams (AFFFs), milligrams per liter concentrations of anionic, zwitterionic, and cationic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) enter the environment. Because the behavior of zwitterionic and cationic PFASs in the subsurface is unknown, batch sorption experiments were conducted using National Foam AFFF, which contains anionic fluorotelomer sulfonates (FtSs), zwitterionic fluorotelomer sulfonamido betaines (FtSaBs), and cationic 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonamido amine (FtSaAm). Sorption of the FtSs, FtSaBs, and 6:2 FtSaAm to six soils with varying organic carbon, effective cation-exchange capacity, and anion-exchange capacity was evaluated to determine sorption mechanisms. Due to the poor recovery of the FtSaBs and 6:2 FtSaAm with published PFAS soil extraction methods, a new soil extraction method was developed to achieve good (90-100%) recoveries. The 6:2 FtSaAm was depleted from the aqueous phase in all but one soil, which is attributed to electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. Sorption of the FtSs was driven by hydrophobic interactions, while the FtSaBs behave more like cations that strongly associate with the solid phase relative to groundwater. Thus, the sorption mechanisms of the FtSs, FtSaBs, and 6:2 FtSaAm are more complex than expected and cannot be predicted by bulk soil properties.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.est.7b03452

Cites

10 of 10 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
Barzen-Hanson, K. A., Davis, S. E., Kleber, M., & Field, J. A.
Affiliations
Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Field, Jennifer A.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2017-10-16
Volume
51
Issue
21
Pages
12394-12404
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2760136917
Cited by
158
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11
FWCI
6.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Division of Graduate Education (DGE-1314109)
  • U.S. Department of Defense (ER-2128)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Environmental Chemistry and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Keywords
fluorotelomer sulfonates, aqueous film-forming foam, soil extraction methods, hydrophobic interactions, electrostatic interactions, soil organic carbon, cation exchange capacity, anion exchange capacity
MeSH terms
Amines, Betaine, Fluorocarbons, Soil, Water Pollutants, Chemical

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