“…However, there was no significant difference (pairwise Wilcoxon; Table S7) between the concentrations when moving from D1 to D2 and from D2 to D3 for most PFASs. In many biofilters but specifically for sites #3, #6, and #7 with relatively higher loading rates, i.e., smaller FA/CA ratios (Table S1), D2 had higher concentrations than D1 for most quantified PFASs, likely due to more frequent saturated flow conditions and greater ponding hydraulic head which result in decreasing contact time, removing/collapsing the AWIs, preventing air–water interfacial accumulation, and/or potentially remobilizing AWI-retained PFAS fractions from the superficial layer. ,, Although the highest PFAS concentrations were often found in the upper layers, results indicate that PFASs penetrated deeper into biofilter media, aligning with results from sand column studies on PFAS transport/removals. , This finding contrasted with the retention patterns documented for other more hydrophobic OMPs, such as PAHs and PCBs, as well as metals and microplastics, which mostly accumulate in the upper 5 cm of biofilters. ,,,− In eight biofilters, greater PFAS concentrations were observed closer to the inlet (L1) compared with L2 (Figures S6 and S7). However, similar to a study by Furén et al on other OMPs accumulated in biofilter facilities in Ohio, Michigan, and Kentucky, the distance from the inlet (L1 vs L2) was generally not a significant factor in the accumulation of most PFASs (except for PFDS and PFTeDA, which demonstrated a significant decreasing trend along the flow path probably due to their higher hydrophobicity).…”