Are Feathers of a Songbird Model Species (The Great Tit, Parus major) Suitable for Monitoring Perfluoroalkyl Acids (PFAAs) in Blood Plasma?

Abstract

Feathers have been shown to be useful in the biomonitoring of environmental contaminants, such as metals and persistent organic pollutants. However, little is known regarding the levels of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in feathers and the applicability of these structures for the biomonitoring of these compounds. In the present study, we report the extent to which feathers are suitable for monitoring PFAA concentrations in the blood plasma of an insectivorous songbird model species, the great tit (Parus major), settled at and in the vicinity of a fluorochemical plant in Antwerp, Belgium. For most of the target analytes (out of the 15 investigated), the feather PFAA concentrations near the plant are the highest ever reported in free-living birds. As PFAA concentrations did not differ in the adjacent sites, no pollution gradient with distance from the plant was observed. In addition, the PFAA concentrations were not associated with the age and sex of the birds. Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) concentrations were significantly higher in P. major feathers than in blood plasma, but for most other PFAAs, these differences were not observed. The concentrations of perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and PFOA in P. major feathers and plasma were significantly and positively correlated when combining data from all sites but often not at individual sites. This result was likely caused by lower sample sizes at the individual sites and the use of matrices that represent different time periods. Our results suggest that P. major feathers cannot be used to estimate PFOA and PFOS concentrations in blood plasma, except when there is a great deal of variation in pollutant concentrations among sites/individual birds. Both matrices represent different time frames, providing complementary information on environmental PFAA concentrations, as illustrated by the observation that more PFAA compounds could be detected in P. major feathers than in blood plasma.

A rapid method for the detection and quantification of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in bird feathers using UPLC-MS/MS

“…small feathers) to trace very low concentrations of PFAS (in the order of pg/g) in birds. The method we developed has been successfully applied on tail feathers (N = 75) from great tits (Parus major), a terrestrial songbird model species, collected at a fluorochemical site and at four other sites representing a distance gradient [30]. The recovery of the ISTDs for PFCAs and PFSAs in these feathers varied between 60% (PFBA) and 95% (PFOS) which was very similar to those reported in the present study [30].…”

“…The method we developed has been successfully applied on tail feathers (N = 75) from great tits (Parus major), a terrestrial songbird model species, collected at a fluorochemical site and at four other sites representing a distance gradient [30]. The recovery of the ISTDs for PFCAs and PFSAs in these feathers varied between 60% (PFBA) and 95% (PFOS) which was very similar to those reported in the present study [30]. However, in this study only legacy PFCAs and PFSAs were targeted, and the applicability of this method for the other groups of compounds still needs to be examined further.…”

“…In addition, feather concentrations may not always resemble the concentrations detected in the environment. For example, birds with a large foraging area, such as raptors, may not be appropriate for monitoring local contamination close to point sources [30]. Nonetheless, the usefulness of archived bird of prey feathers in monitoring spatiotemporal PFAS trends has been underlined by Sun et al [31].…”

Exposure assessment of PFAS‐contaminated sites using avian eggs as a biomonitoring tool: A frame of reference and a case study in the Po River valley (Northern Italy)

“…In contaminant research, at least three main tissues can be safely sampled in living birds with limited stress (depending on the sampling method) and little or no damage: blood, feathers, and claws (i.e., avian “nails”). PFAS have been successfully detected in blood and feathers (Briels et al, 2019; Groffen et al, 2020; Munoz et al, 2017; Sun et al, 2019), and they could be potentially detected in claws too, but the availability of sufficient tissue for the analysis depends on the body mass of the monitored species and often represents a critical issue. For example, the small body mass of most common passerines (~15–20 g) makes it difficult to obtain sufficient blood (at least 0.5–1.0 ml) to be analyzed with standard liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) instruments currently available in most laboratories.…”

“…For example, the small body mass of most common passerines (~15–20 g) makes it difficult to obtain sufficient blood (at least 0.5–1.0 ml) to be analyzed with standard liquid chromatography‐tandem mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) instruments currently available in most laboratories. The recent technological improvements in LC‐MS has allowed detection of very small concentrations of PFAS (on the order of pg/ml), opening up the possibility of using small amounts of tissue (i.e., a few μl of blood, small feather, or claw tips) as sampling matrices (Groffen et al, 2020). Claws are currently used as a reliable source of the isotopic signature of dietary intake, and they provide information integrated over a time scale varying from weeks to months (Bearhop et al, 2003), so they can potentially serve as a sampling matrix in PFAS biomonitoring too.…”