MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7104859013 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17584907

Trifluoroacetic Acid (TFA) as a Planetary Boundary Threat

2025· article· W7104859013 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsTrifluoroacetic acidPollutionBioaccumulationOzone depletionHazardous wasteOzoneAir pollution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trifluoroacetic acid (TFA) belongs to the subclass of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) known as ultra-short chain perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs). The initial wave of scientific interest surrounding TFA started in the mid-1990s and was related to the introduction of F-gases as novel refrigerants, as TFA is their common degradation product. F-gases were introduced after chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) were phased out under the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. In recent years, TFA has been commonly measured and reported alongside other PFAS, with alarmingly high concentrations detected across various environmental matrices, making TFA the most abundant PFAS in the environment.[1] Although early studies suggested that TFA and other short-chain PFAAs are less hazardous than long-chain PFAAs - due to their lower bioaccumulation in lipids and lower direct toxicity - more recent evidence highlights concerns about TFA's environmental persistence and very high accumulation in water matrices and especially plants. Although there are fewer toxicological data compared to long-chain PFAAs, we maintain that there are more than sufficient data to conclude that TFA poses a risk to humans and the environment and meets the criteria of a planetary boundary threat for novel entities.[1] We performed an analysis of the scientific literature on TFA to assess if there is sufficient evidence of its exceedance of a planetary boundary. According to Persson et al.[3], chemical poses a planetary boundary threat if three conditions are met: “Condition 1 (C1) – the pollution has a disruptive effect on a vital earth system process of which we are ignorant; Condition 2 (C2) – the disruptive effect is not discovered until the associated impacts are, or inevitably will be, manifested at a global scale; and Condition 3 (C3) the impacts are poorly reversible because the level of pollution in the global environment cannot be readily reduce”. To assess whether TFA meets these conditions, a review and analysis of the existing body of scientific literature on TFA’s environmental effects and exposure were conducted. In addition, current health advisory and regulatory values were assessed in this context. A review of the scientific literature was conducted to obtain an overview of average and maximum concentrations in diverse environmental media, with 43 studies spanning from the late 1990s to the 2020s selected and monitoring data reporting on TFA concentrations were analyzed. These were compared with potential disruptive effects on human health and the environment. We conclude from this that Condition 1 (C1) is fulfilled based on the many known and unknown thresholds that could be exceeded of which we are ignorant. Condition 2 (C2) is fulfilled as TFA is already present globally in all environmental media and Condition 3 (C3) is satisfied because the effects of TFA, once realized, will be irreversible for the foreseeable future, owing to its high persistence, mobility, and emissions from multiple sources. Acknowledgments. European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program project ZeroPM, under grant agreement No 101036756, and the Horizon Europe project ARAGORN under grant agreement 101112723.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research→French-language works237,207→