Analysis of PFAS in Drinking Water

Authors: Mégane Moreau, Serge Auger, Pierre Picard and Jean Lacoursière
Themes: High-Throughput, Drinking Water, LDTD-MS/MS, PFAS
Download PDF

Introduction

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of chemicals made by humans. Since the 1950s, PFASs have been used in many consumer products and industrial processes. They have properties that resist heat, grease, and water. There are thousands of types of PFAS. The most common types and final products of degradation are PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctanoic sulfonic acid). They were widely detected in different environmental media (Mahiba Shoeib et al. 2005) and human blood (Perez et al. 2013). PFAS in drinking water is one of the most concerning aspects.

The goal of this application note is to develop an automated sample preparation of drinking water samples and a rapid analytical method to analyze PFAS using LDTD-MS/MS.

 

Sample Preparation Method

Automated Sample Extraction

Figure 1 – Automated extraction system – Azeo Liquid Handler

Two milliliters of drinking water samples are transferred to a borosilicate tube (12X75 mm) then inserted in the Azeo extraction system (Figure 1). The automated extraction process is as follows:

LDTD®-MS/MS Parameters

LDTD

Model: Luxon T-960 NG, Phytronix

Carrier gas: 9 L/min (Nitrogen) + 7.5 µL/min TFA solution (0.05% in water)

Laser pattern:

MS/MS

MS model: TSQ Altis plus, Thermo Scientific

IonSpray Voltage: -3800 V

Scan Time: 5 msec

Analysis Method: Negative MRM mode

 

Transition CE (V)
PFBA 327.0 → 169.0 20
PFBA-M3 330.0 → 172.0 20
HFPO-DA 443.0 → 169.0 20
HFPO-DA-M3 446.0 → 172.0 20
PFBS 451.0 → 299.0 20
PFBS-M4 455.0 → 303.0 20
PFHxA 427.0 → 269.0 20
PFHxA-M6 433.0 → 274.0 20
PFHxS 551.0 → 399.0 20
PFHxS-M6 557.0 → 405.0 20
PFOA 527.0 → 412.8 8
PFOA-M8 538.0 → 420.8 8
6:2 FTS 579.0 → 427.0 24
6:2 FTS-M6 585.0 → 433.0 24
PFNA 577.0 → 463.0 8
PFNA-M6 583.0 → 469.0 8
PFOS 651.0 → 499.0 20
PFOS-M8 659.0 → 507.0 20

 

Results and Discussion

Linearity

The calibration curve is prepared in HPLC water. PFAS concentration between 20 to 200 ng/L are used to evaluate the method linearity and 100 to 10 000 ng/L for PFBA. The peak area against the internal standard (IS) ratio was used to normalize the signal. Replicate extractions are deposited on a LazWell™ plate and dried before analysis. Figure 4 and Figure 5 shows a typical calibration curve for PFOA and PFOS. Similar results were obtained for the other PFAS.

 

Figure 2 – Typical calibration curve for PFOA

 

Figure 3 – Typical calibration curve for PFOS

 

Precision and Accuracy

Spiked sample solutions are used to validate the precision and accuracy of the method. For the accuracy and precision evaluation, the following acceptance criteria were used:

For the intra and inter-run precision and accuracy experiment, each fortified sample set is analyzed in sextuplicate, in the same runs. Table 1 shows the intra-run precision and accuracy results for PFOA. %CV was below 20% and the accuracy within 20%. Similar results were obtained for the other PFAS.

 

Table 1 – Intra-Run Precision for PFOA
PFOA Cal-1 Cal-2 Cal-3 Cal-4 Cal-5
Conc (ng/L) 20 60 100 140 200
N 3 3 3 3 3
Mean (ng/L) 18.2 68.7 85.6 154.5 195.4
%CV 16.6 5.9 10.7 11.0 2.9
%Nom 91.2 114.5 85.6 110.3 97.7

For the inter-run precision experiment, each fortified sample set is analyzed in triplicate on three different runs. Table 2 shows the inter-run precision and accuracy results for PFOA. %CV was below 20% and the accuracy within 20%. Similar results were obtained for the other PFAS.

Table 2 – Intra-Run Precision for PFOA
PFOA Cal-1 Cal-2 Cal-3 Cal-4 Cal-5
Conc (ng/L) 20 60 100 140 200
N 9 9 9 9 9
Mean (ng/L) 18.0 65.6 91.7 148.6 198.6
%CV 19.3 9.6 9.3 9.4 3.5
%Nom 90.0 109.4 91.7 106.2 99.3

Recovery

Blank samples were extracted and then spiked at the middle calibration level after the automated extraction process. The middle standard was compared to the recovery sample to determine the recovery percentage of PFAS. Table 3 shows the recovery results.

Table 3 – Recovery Results
PFAS Recovery
PFBA 72.3
HFPO-DA 71.4
PFBS 42.7
PFHxA 77.1
PFHxS 78.1
PFOA 78.8
6:2 FTS 72.6
PFNA 81.8
PFOS 87.0

Multi-matrix analysis of PFAS in drinking water

Drinking water was collected from different sites. Samples are analyzed to verify the presence of each PFAS. PFAS are spiked at 100 ng/L (500 ng/L for PFBA) and analyzed as unknown to verify the method performance. Results are report in Table 4.

 

Table 4 – Drinking water sample results
Sample PFOA
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFOS
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFNA
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFHxS
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFHxA
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFBS
Conc.
(ng/L)
PFBA
Conc.
(ng/L)
HFPO-DA
Conc.
(ng/L)
6:2-FTS
Conc.
(ng/L)
DW-1 <20 <20 33.6 <20 <20 <20 <100 <20 <20
DW-1-100 118.2 108.9 143.6 110.3 122.1 124.7 514.6 99.4 130.4
DW-2 <20 <20 <20 <20 28.4 <20 <100 <20 <20
DW-2-100 115.4 105.3 113.6 105.5 120.1 108.1 548.6 98.4 102.7
DW-3 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 21.2 <100 <20 <20
DW-3-100 97.0 99.1 112.6 103.6 105.3 123.0 492.2 88.5 107.3
DW-4 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 26.8 <100 <20 <20
DW-4-100 101.4 102.9 106.7 103.1 112.4 111.2 547.9 109.5 116.7
DW-5 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 28.1 <100 <20 <20
DW-5-100 95.5 101.8 108.9 102.7 117.1 118.0 512.7 117.4 116.4
DW-6 <20 <20 <20 <20 35.0 26.5 <100 <20 27.7
DW-6-100 112.0 101.3 121.6 102.3 133.2 117.8 501.9 112.6 125.1

 

Conclusion

Luxon Ion Source® combined with a Thermo Scientific TSQ Altis Plus mass spectrometer system allows ultra-fast (10 seconds per sample) analysis of a panel of PFAS in drinking water using a simple and automated sample preparation method.