Cited by 1Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchWater Treatment and DisinfectionFluoride Effects and Removal

PFAS forensics of drinking water sources

Open access
Dilparic, Daria·2023

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative compounds that are used in a variety of non-stick, water-proofing, and stain-resistant applications. PFAS have contaminated many water systems and pose a threat to drinking water supplies. Forensic techniques can be applied to identify potential PFAS contamination sources and inform the best possible water treatment options and selection of future municipal water sources. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources initiated a PFAS Action Plan in 2022 to sample Iowa surface and groundwaters. The testing results of this sampling have been analyzed to identify differences between the two water types. Among surface waters with detectable PFAS, the concentrations ranged from 2.0 – 49.0 ng/L, and from 1.8 – 419.6 ng/L for groundwater with detectable PFAS. The biggest distinction between surface water and groundwater was the distribution of PFAS subclasses; 87% of surface water samples contained no perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acids, indicating that aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) contamination is not likely a major contributor to PFAS in Iowa surface waters. An implication is that surface water treatment plants in Iowa should prioritize PFAS treatment technologies that are most effective for perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acid removal. Each municipal drinking water well in the City of Ames was sampled and analyzed to identify its PFAS fingerprint. Well 17 had the most elevated PFAS concentration but showed s…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31274/cc-20240624-1115

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • Samples from College Creek resembled Well 16 in both magnitude and distribution of PFAS concentrations.

    “Samples from the College Creek resembled Well 16 in both magnitude and distribution of PFAS concentrations (Dilparic, 2023).”

    From PFAS in Iowa drinking water sources: Chemical and geospatial patterns (2025) · cites this paper as Dilparic, 2023

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dilparic, D.
Corresponding author
Dilparic, Daria
Published
2023-12-01
OpenAlex
W4400031659
Cited by
0
References
0
Type
report
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-sa
Locations
Iowa State University Digital Repository (Iowa State University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Water Treatment and Disinfection
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fluoride Effects and Removal
Keywords
PFAS, per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, drinking water contamination, surface water, groundwater, perfluorinated carboxylic acids, perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acids, aqueous film-forming foam, biosolids, water treatment, Iowa

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