Cited by 2,750Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology

Global Distribution of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate in Wildlife

Giesy, John P., Kannan, Kurunthachalam·2001·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Here we report, for the first time, on the global distribution of perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS), a fluorinated organic contaminant. PFOS was measured in the tissues of wildlife, including, fish, birds, and marine mammals. Some of the species studied include bald eagles, polar bears, albatrosses, and various species of seals. Samples were collected from urbanized areas in North America, especially the Great Lakes region and coastal marine areas and rivers, and Europe. Samples were also collected from a number of more remote, less urbanized locations such as the Arctic and the North Pacific Oceans. The results demonstrated that PFOS is widespread in the environment. Concentrations of PFOS in animals from relatively more populated and industrialized regions, such as the North American Great Lakes, Baltic Sea, and Mediterranean Sea,were greaterthan those in animals from remote marine locations. Fish-eating, predatory animals such as mink and bald eagles contained concentrations of PFOS that were greater than the concentrations in their diets. This suggests that PFOS can bioaccumulate to higher trophic levels of the food chain. Currently available data indicate that the concentrations of PFOS in wildlife are less than those required to cause adverse effects in laboratory animals.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es001834k

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
Giesy, J. P., & Kannan, K.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Giesy, John P.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2001-03-01
Volume
35
Issue
7
Pages
1339-1342
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W1976770880
Cited by
2,750
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 123 · 2025: 150 · 2024: 137 · 2023: 134 · 2022: 143 · 2021: 155 · 2020: 131 · 2019: 109 · 2018: 114 · 2017: 93 · 2016: 115 · 2015: 100 · 2014: 125 · 2013: 145 · 2012: 117
FWCI
37.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Science & Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
PFOS, global distribution, wildlife contamination, bioaccumulation, trophic transfer, fish, birds, marine mammals, bald eagle, polar bear, albatrosses, seals, Great Lakes, Arctic, North Pacific, Baltic Sea, Mediterranean Sea
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Wild, Ursidae, Birds, Diet, Environmental Monitoring, Environmental Pollutants, Fluorocarbons, Tissue Distribution, Food Chain, Seals, Earless

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