Long-Term Environmental Fate of Perfluorinated Compounds after Accidental Release at Toronto Airport
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS; a perfluorinated compound or PFC), its salts, and perfluorooctane sulfonyl fluoride have recently been listed in Annex B of the Stockholm Convention due to their widespread presence, persistence, and toxicity. Because of the persistent nature of PFCs, it is generally presumed that the impact of direct discharges of these chemicals on a receiving environment would be long-lasting. However, long-term environmental fate studies based on field measurements are rare. We examined spatial and long-term (9 year) temporal trends of PFCs in water, sediment, fish, and fish liver collected in 2003, 2006, and 2009 from 10 locations spanning ∼20 km in Etobicoke and Spring Creeks, where an accidental release of fire fighting foam containing PFOS from nearby Toronto International Airport occurred in 2000. Even a decade after the spill, sediment PFOS concentrations are still elevated in Spring Creek Pond which received the foam discharge; however, the major impact is relatively localized likely due to the stormwater management nature of the pond and the diluting effect of Etobicoke Creek. Fish and fish liver PFOS concentrations at a Spring Creek location downstream of Spring Creek Pond declined by about 70 and 85%, respectively, between 2003 and 2009. PFOS in water at locations further downstream in Etobicoke Creek have declined by >99.99% since the spill; however, the 2009 water and fish levels were ∼2-10 times higher than upstream locations likely due to the long-term impact of the spill as well as urbanization. The decrease in the upstream PFOS concentrations likely reflects the reduction of PFOS sources due to phased out production by 3M and regulations on the use of PFOS in fire fighting foams. Field-based sediment/water distribution coefficients (K(D)) and bioaccumulation factors (BAF) were calculated from environmental measurements. Log K(D) values were 0.54-1.65 for perfluoroalkyl sulfonates (PFASs) and 1.00-1.85 for perfluorocarboxylates (PFCAs). Log BAF(fish) ranged from 1.85 to 3.24 for PFASs and 0.88-3.47 for PFCAs, whereas log BAF(fish liver) ranged from 2.1-4.3 for PFASs and 1.0-5.0 for PFCAs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".