We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Toxicity differences between HFPO-TA and PFOA, and combination with PP-MPs: evidence against HFPO-TA as a safe PFOA alternative.
AI summary Read the abstract
Scientists replaced a banned "forever chemical" (PFOA) with a new one called HFPO-TA, but new research shows this substitute may actually be more toxic to soil organisms, causing worse cell damage. Combined with microplastics, these chemicals disrupt genes tied to growth, reproduction, and immunity. This suggests the "safer" replacement chemical might not be safer at all.
Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) has been banned worldwide due to its high environmental persistence and biological toxicity, and hexafluoropropylene oxide trimer acid (HFPO-TA) has become the most widely used alternative. However, the safety of HFPO-TA and its combined toxic effects with polypropylene microplastics (PP-MPs) remain unclear, posing challenges for soil pollution risk management. This study for the first time compared the toxicity of HFPO-TA and PFOA to Eisenia fetida under the same experimental conditions, and investigated the effects of environmentally relevant concentrations of PP-MPs on their toxicity, and the underlying mechanisms. Results demonstrated that HFPO-TA suppressed superoxide dismutase and glutathione S-transferase to trigger severe lipid peroxidation and DNA damage, while PFOA activated superoxide dismutase and glutathione S-transferase yet still caused DNA injury. HFPO-TA/PFOA alone and with PP-MPs exert adverse effects on genes related to reproduction, growth, and immunity. The integrated biomarker response analysis revealed that HFPO-TA exhibited higher comprehensive toxicity than PFOA. Notably, PFOA + PP-MPs exhibit synergistic toxicity, while HFPO-TA + PP-MPs exhibit antagonistic toxicity, possibly due to differing binding affinities. Both HFPO-TA and PFOA altered the shape of intestinal cell nuclei, PP-MPs exacerbated physical damage. Transcriptome analysis revealed that HFPO-TA targeted immune and growth pathways, PFOA affected transport/metabolism, and the PP-MPs complex induced inflammatory responses by regulating immune pathways. The results indicate that HFPO-TA may not be a safe alternative to PFOA, and provides scientific evidence for the soil environmental control policies of PFAS alternatives and the risk prevention of combined pollution by microplastics and organic pollutants.
More Papers Like This
Polystyrene microplastics enhanced the effect of PFOA on Chlorella sorokiniana: Perspective from the cellular and molecular levels
AI summary Read the abstract
This study found that polystyrene microplastics made the toxic effects of PFOA (a "forever chemical") worse on algae by increasing cell membrane permeability, allowing more PFOA to enter the cells. The findings matter because microplastics and PFOA often exist together in the environment, and their combined effect can be more harmful than either pollutant alone.
Effects of polyamide microplastics on the adsorption of perfluoroalkyl substances in soil
AI summary Read the abstract
This study found that polyamide microplastics in soil significantly affect how PFAS (including PFOA and GenX) are adsorbed and retained, with the microplastic-soil mixture behaving differently from either material alone. Since both microplastics and PFAS are widespread soil contaminants, their co-occurrence could change the mobility and bioavailability of these toxic 'forever chemicals,' complicating risk assessments.
Microplastic and nanoplastic interactions with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in soils: a critical review of main findings and knowledge gaps.
AI summary Read the abstract
Microplastics in soil (from things like compost, sewage sludge, and irrigation water) can sometimes team up with "forever chemicals" (PFAS) and carry them further into the environment, but this review of 37 studies found it's not a guaranteed effect, since it depends heavily on the type of plastic, soil conditions, and chemical properties involved. This matters because PFAS and microplastics both end up in the food we grow, but scientists still don't know exactly when or how much plastics make PFAS contamination worse, so more real-world (not just lab) testing is needed before we can say how big a risk this combo poses to our food and health
Effects of co-exposure to microplastics and perfluorooctanoic acid on the Caco-2 cells
AI summary Read the abstract
This study tested what happens when human intestinal cells are exposed to PET microplastics combined with PFOA, a persistent chemical pollutant often called a forever chemical. The combination was more toxic than either substance alone, causing greater cell damage and weakening the intestinal barrier that normally keeps harmful substances out of the bloodstream. The findings suggest that microplastics carrying adsorbed pollutants like PFOA could pose greater risks to gut health than microplastics by themselves.
Reduced disparity in the physiological effects between perfluorooctanoic acid and its alternative GenX on freshwater microalgae during co-exposure with nanoplastics
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers compared how polystyrene nanoplastics alter the toxicity of legacy PFOA and its newer alternative GenX in freshwater microalgae, finding that nanoplastics transport both chemicals into cells and amplify their photosynthesis-disrupting effects, ultimately reducing the toxicity difference between the two compounds and highlighting nanoplastics as important vectors for fluorinated pollutants.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.