Disposition of perfluorinated acid isomers in sprague-dawley rats; Part 2: Subchronic dose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two major industrial synthetic pathways have been used to produce perfluorinated acids (PFAs) or their precursors: Telomerization and electrochemical fluorination (ECF). Products of telomer and ECF origin can be distinguished by structural isomer profiles. A mixture of linear and branched perfluoroalkyl isomers is associated with ECF. Telomer products characteristically consist of a single perfluoroalkyl geometry, typically linear. In biota, it is unclear if the isomer profile is conserved relative to the exposure medium and hence whether PFA isomer profiles in organisms are useful for distinguishing environmental PFA sources. A companion study suggested isomer-specific disposition following a single oral gavage exposure to rats. To confirm these findings under a more realistic subchronic feeding scenario, male and female rats were administered PFA isomers by diet for 12 weeks, followed by a 12-week depuration period. The diet contained 500 ng/g each of ECF perfluorooctanoate (PFOA, approximately 80% n-PFOA), ECF perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS, approximately 70% n-PFOS), and linear and isopropyl perfluorononanoate (n- and iso-PFNA). Blood sampling during the exposure phase revealed preferential accumulation of n-PFOA and n-PFNA compared to most branched isomers. Female rats depurated all isomers faster than males. Both sexes eliminated most branched perfluorocarboxylate isomers more rapidly than the n-isomer. Elimination rates of the major branched PFOS isomers were not statistically different from n-PFOS. Two minor isomers of ECF PFOA and one branched PFOS isomer had longer elimination half-lives than the n-isomers. Although extrapolation of these pharmacokinetics trends in rats to humans and wildlife requires careful consideration of dosage level and species-specific physiology, cumulative evidence suggests that perfluorocarboxylate isomer profiles in biota may not be suitable for quantifying the relative contributions of telomer and ECF sources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".