412
K. Dhangar and M. Kumar
ecological systems, which results in its bioaccumulation in various trophic levels
of ecosystems. PFOS’s potential hazards to human health inspired various studies
for its detection in various media in order to develop mitigation and management
strategies. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with tandem
mass spectrometry (MS/MS) was the primary detection method for PFOS (ATSDR
2015; de Voogt and Sáez 2006).
18.5.1 Occurrence of PFOS in Surface Waters
Table 18.4 gives the concentration range of PFOS detected in the surface waters
from around 25 countries including the developed and developing ones. From these
studies of the past two decades, it is observed that the natural surface water has
higher concentration of PFOS in developed and more industrialized countries which
include USA, Coastal China, England and Italy. This indicates the connection link
with the production and use of PFOS-contained products in these countries. The
concentration in these countries ranged from non-detection level (NDL) to some
hundreds of ng/L. Some limited studies detected significantly high concentration of
PFOS in countries like Spain (31–119 ng/L) (Flores et al. 2013) and South Korea
(2.24–651 ng/L) (Rostkowski et al. 2006). Maximum concentration of PFOS in
coastal and estuarine water of South Korea (730 ng/L) supports the fact of higher
concentration in estuarine/marine water (Pan and You 2010; So et al. 2004).
Among all the studies reported, higher concentration of PFOS was detected in
Spanish water. The Llobregat River and Besós River water had mean concentrations
of 254 ng/L and 275 ng/L, respectively (Loos et al. 2009). Flores et al. (2013) reported
average concentration range in Spanish water as 31–119 ng/L. Various studies at different locations in USA shows higher concentration of PFOS ranging from <1 to
190 ng/L (Quinones and Snyder 2009; Plumlee et al. 2008; Loganathan et al. 2007;
Nakayama et al. 2007; Hansen et al. 2002) except Georgia region where maximum
concentration was 22 ng/L (Loganathan et al. 2007). The high concentration areas
of USA includes California, Kentucky, North Carolina and Tennessee River where
the concentration value reported beyond 100 ng/L. Lake Erie and Lake Ontario in
Canada (USA) reported PFOS concentration as 11–39 ng/L and 6–121 ng/L, respectively (Boulanger et al. 2004). Enormous studies have been conducted on Japanese
river waters. Zushi et al. (2008) report highest concentration of Japan as 180 ng/L in
Tsurumi River. The author reports that the higher concentration is attributed to the
PFOS load coming from various nonpoint sources as well as discharge from nearby
sewage treatment plants. The Yodo River basin also showed significant concentration
up to 123 ng/L, whereas other areas such as Chubu, Chugoku, Hokkaido–Tohoku,
Kanto, Kinki, Kyoto, Kyushu-Shikoku and Osaka has concentration <40 ng/L (Takagi et al. 2008; Lein et al. 2008; Senthilkumar et al. 2007; Saito et al. 2004). Taniyasu
et al. (2002) conducted detection studies on bay waters of Ariake Bay, Osaka Bay
and Tokyo Bay and reported their concentration as < 9–11 ng/L, <4–21 ng/L and
8.0–59 ng/L, respectively. So et al. (2007) reported concentration up to 99 ng/L in
K. Dhangar and M. Kumar
ecological systems, which results in its bioaccumulation in various trophic levels
of ecosystems. PFOS’s potential hazards to human health inspired various studies
for its detection in various media in order to develop mitigation and management
strategies. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) coupled with tandem
mass spectrometry (MS/MS) was the primary detection method for PFOS (ATSDR
2015; de Voogt and Sáez 2006).
18.5.1 Occurrence of PFOS in Surface Waters
Table 18.4 gives the concentration range of PFOS detected in the surface waters
from around 25 countries including the developed and developing ones. From these
studies of the past two decades, it is observed that the natural surface water has
higher concentration of PFOS in developed and more industrialized countries which
include USA, Coastal China, England and Italy. This indicates the connection link
with the production and use of PFOS-contained products in these countries. The
concentration in these countries ranged from non-detection level (NDL) to some
hundreds of ng/L. Some limited studies detected significantly high concentration of
PFOS in countries like Spain (31–119 ng/L) (Flores et al. 2013) and South Korea
(2.24–651 ng/L) (Rostkowski et al. 2006). Maximum concentration of PFOS in
coastal and estuarine water of South Korea (730 ng/L) supports the fact of higher
concentration in estuarine/marine water (Pan and You 2010; So et al. 2004).
Among all the studies reported, higher concentration of PFOS was detected in
Spanish water. The Llobregat River and Besós River water had mean concentrations
of 254 ng/L and 275 ng/L, respectively (Loos et al. 2009). Flores et al. (2013) reported
average concentration range in Spanish water as 31–119 ng/L. Various studies at different locations in USA shows higher concentration of PFOS ranging from <1 to
190 ng/L (Quinones and Snyder 2009; Plumlee et al. 2008; Loganathan et al. 2007;
Nakayama et al. 2007; Hansen et al. 2002) except Georgia region where maximum
concentration was 22 ng/L (Loganathan et al. 2007). The high concentration areas
of USA includes California, Kentucky, North Carolina and Tennessee River where
the concentration value reported beyond 100 ng/L. Lake Erie and Lake Ontario in
Canada (USA) reported PFOS concentration as 11–39 ng/L and 6–121 ng/L, respectively (Boulanger et al. 2004). Enormous studies have been conducted on Japanese
river waters. Zushi et al. (2008) report highest concentration of Japan as 180 ng/L in
Tsurumi River. The author reports that the higher concentration is attributed to the
PFOS load coming from various nonpoint sources as well as discharge from nearby
sewage treatment plants. The Yodo River basin also showed significant concentration
up to 123 ng/L, whereas other areas such as Chubu, Chugoku, Hokkaido–Tohoku,
Kanto, Kinki, Kyoto, Kyushu-Shikoku and Osaka has concentration <40 ng/L (Takagi et al. 2008; Lein et al. 2008; Senthilkumar et al. 2007; Saito et al. 2004). Taniyasu
et al. (2002) conducted detection studies on bay waters of Ariake Bay, Osaka Bay
and Tokyo Bay and reported their concentration as < 9–11 ng/L, <4–21 ng/L and
8.0–59 ng/L, respectively. So et al. (2007) reported concentration up to 99 ng/L in