Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 766

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Detection of Organophosphate Flame Retardants in Furniture Foam and U.S. House Dust

Open access
Stapleton, Heather M., Klosterhaus, Susan, Eagle, Sarah, Fuh, Jennifer, Meeker, John D., Blum, Arlene, Webster, Thomas F.·2009·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Restrictions on the use of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) have resulted in the increased use of alternate flame retardant chemicals to meet flammability standards. However, it has been difficult to determine which chemical formulations are currently being used in high volumes to meet flammability standards since the use of flame retardant formulations in consumer products is not transparent (i.e., not provided to customers). To investigate chemicals being used as replacements for PentaBDE in polyurethane foam, we analyzed foam samples from 26 different pieces of furniture purchased in the United States primarily between 2003 and 2009. Samples included foam from couches, chairs, mattress pads, pillows, and, in one case, foam from a sound-proofing system of a laboratory-grade dust sieve, and were analyzed using gas chromatography mass spectrometry. Fifteen of the foam samples contained the flame retardanttris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP; 1-5% by weight), four samples contained tris(1-chloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TCPP; 0.5 -22% by weight), one sample contained brominated chemicals found in a new flame retardant mixture called Firemaster 550 (4.2% by weight), and one foam sample collected from a futon likely purchased prior to 2004 contained PentaBDE (0.5% by weight). Due to the high frequency of detection of the chlorinated phosphate compounds in furniture foam,we analyzed extracts from 50 house dust samples collected between 2002 and 2007 in the Boston, MA area for TDCPP, TCPP, and another high volume use organophosphate-based flame retardant used in foam, triphenylphosphate (TPP). Detection frequencies for TDCPP and TPP in the dust samples were > 96% and were log normally distributed, similar to observations for PBDEs. TCPP was positively detected in dust in only 24% of the samples, but detection was significantly limited by a coelution problem. The geometric mean concentrations for TCPP, TDCPP, and TPP in house dust were 570, 1890, and 7360 ng/g, respectively, and maximum values detected in dust were 5490, 56,080 and 1,798,000 ng/g, respectively. These data suggest that levels of these organophosphate flame retardants are comparable, or in some cases greater than, levels of PBDEs in house dust. The high prevalence of these chemicals in foam and the high concentrations measured in dust (as high as 1.8 mg/g) warrant further studies to evaluate potential health effects from dust exposure, particularly for children.

Overview

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/es9014019

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 766

Metadata

Authors
Stapleton, H. M., Klosterhaus, S., Eagle, S., Fuh, J., Meeker, J. D., Blum, A., & Webster, T. F.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2009-08-13
Volume
43
Issue
19
Pages
7490-7495
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W1972155984
Cited by
766
References
0
FWCI
13.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Detection of Organophosphate Flame Retardants in Furniture Foam and U.S. House Dust. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es9014019
The paper
Stapleton, H. M., Klosterhaus, S., Eagle, S., Fuh, J., Meeker, J. D., Blum, A., & Webster, T. F. (2009). Detection of Organophosphate Flame Retardants in Furniture Foam and U.S. House Dust. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es9014019

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.