Please wait a minute...
Journal of Arid Land
Journal of Arid Land  2026, Vol. 18 Issue (4): 632-656    DOI: 10.1016/j.jaridl.2026.04.005     CSTR: 32276.14.JAL.20250484
Research article     
Multi-media distribution, sources, and ecological risk of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the Weihe River Basin, China
TANG Bin1,2,3,4, SONG Jinxi1,2,3,4,*(), LU Aoran1,2,3,4, ZHANG Zhuo1,2,3,4, MAO Ruichen5, YANG Chenxi1,2,3,4, LI Nan1,2,3,4, FENG Jiayuan1,2,3,4
1 Xi'an Key Laboratory of Environmental Simulation and Ecological Health in the Yellow River Basin, Xi'an 710127, China
2 Shaanxi Key Laboratory of Earth Surface System and Environmental Carrying Capacity, Xi'an 710127, China
3 College of Urban and Environmental Sciences, Northwest University, Xi'an 710127, China
4 Yellow River Institute of Shaanxi Province, Xi'an 710127, China
5 School of Water and Environment, Chang'an University, Xi'an 710054, China
Download: HTML     PDF(32396KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      

Abstract  

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have garnered significant global attention due to their widespread presence and potential environmental and health risks. However, research on the occurrence and environmental behavior of PFAS across different media remains limited. We analyzed the occurrence, distribution, sources, and ecological risks of 32 PFAS across multiple media in the Weihe River, China. The concentrations of PFAS ranged from 5.89 to 472.84 ng/L in the pore water and from 9.93 to 459.50 ng/L in surface water, exhibiting significant spatial variability (P<0.05). In contrast, the PFAS concentration range in the sediments was 0.74-1.81 ng/g dry weight, with no pronounced spatial variation in solid-phase PFAS (P>0.05). Vertically, concentrations in 33.00% of pore water samples exceeded those in surface water, showing a heterogeneous vertical distribution with enrichment at depths of 40-60 cm. The physical-chemical characteristics of PFAS and the hydrological and sedimentary processes at the basin scale were responsible for PFAS partitioning between the aquatic environment and sediments. Four major sources were identified through integrated source apportionment: industrial and domestic wastewater (58.25%), aqueous film-forming foam (18.07%), combined input from household pollution and metal plating (8.70%), and stormwater runoff and landfill leachate (14.98%). The ecological risk assessment revealed negligible risks from short-chain PFAS in surface water and pore water, whereas long-chain PFAS posed low to moderate ecological risks. Furthermore, the discharge of PFAS from the Weihe River to the Yellow River was estimated up to 708.20 kg/a. This study provides critical data informing strategies for mitigating PFAS pollution in rivers across typical arid and semi-arid areas of China.

Key words： per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances      multi-media distribution      source apportionment      ecological risk      Weihe River     
Received: 28 September 2025      Published: 30 April 2026
Corresponding Authors: *SONG Jinxi (E-mail: jinxisong@nwu.edu.cn)
Service
E-mail this article
Add to my bookshelf
Add to citation manager
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
TANG Bin
SONG Jinxi
LU Aoran
ZHANG Zhuo
MAO Ruichen
YANG Chenxi
LI Nan
FENG Jiayuan
Cite this article:

TANG Bin, SONG Jinxi, LU Aoran, ZHANG Zhuo, MAO Ruichen, YANG Chenxi, LI Nan, FENG Jiayuan. Multi-media distribution, sources, and ecological risk of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the Weihe River Basin, China. Journal of Arid Land, 2026, 18(4): 632-656.

URL:

http://jal.xjegi.com/10.1016/j.jaridl.2026.04.005     OR     http://jal.xjegi.com/Y2026/V18/I4/632

Fig. 1 Geographic distribution of sampling sites along the Weihe River (a). (b-d), field photographs depicting characteristic riverine environments across the upper, middle, and lower sections of the river.
Fig. 2 Total concentration of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) and relative abundance in surface water (a, d), sediment (b, e), and pore water (c, f). C4-C7 PFCAs include PFBA, PFPeA, PFHxA, and PFHpA; C9-C14 PFCAs include PFNA, PFDA, PFUnDA, PFDoDA, PFTrDA, and PFTeDA; C4-C7 PFSAs include PFBS, PFPeS, PFHxS, and PFHpS; C9-C12 PFSAs include PFNS, PFDS, and PFDoS. In Figure c and f, the same sampling site with numbers means different sampling depths. The names of the abbreviations of these perfluorinated compounds are shown in Table S1.
Fig. 3 Distribution of total PFAS in the surface water (a), sediment (b), and pore water (c) of the Weihe River. Seasonal variations within different sub-basins are indicated in the violin plots (d-f). ns, non-significance; *, P<0.050 level; ***, P<0.001 level.
Fig. 4 Vertical concentration profiles of individual PFAS in the water (a1-a9) and sediment (b1-b6) samples of the Weihe River. (a1), PFBA; (a2), PFPeA; (a3), PFHxA; (a4), PFHpA; (a5), PFOA; (a6), PFNA; (a7), PFDA; (a8), PFBS; (a9), PFOS; (b1), PFHxA; (b2), PFHpA; (b3), PFOA; (b4), PFNA; (b5), PFDA; (b6), PFOS. The names of the abbreviations of these perfluorinated compounds are shown in Table S1.
Fig. 5 Sorption coefficients logKd (a) and logKoc (b) of PFAS in the Weihe River. Boxes indicate the IQR (interquartile range, 25th to 75th percentiles). The median value is shown as a line within the box. The square is shown as the mean value. Whiskers extend to the most extreme value within 1.5×IQR. The data distribution is represented by black diamonds and normal fit curves. The names of the abbreviations of these perfluorinated compounds are shown in Table S1.
Fig. 6 Source analysis of PFAS. (a), diagnostic ratios of PFOS/PFOA, PFBA/PFOA, PFHpA/PFOA, and PFNA/PFOA; (b), principal component analysis (PCA) result; (c), source apportionment results of PFAS with the positive matrix factorization (PMF) model. FC1-FC4 are the four primary factors contributing to PFAS contamination. The names of the abbreviations of these perfluorinated compounds are shown in Table S1.
Fig. 7 Mixture risk quotients (RQmix) and individual ecological risks for PFAS. (a), total RQmix in surface water (a1) and pore water (a2) across all sampling sites; (b), individual ecological risk quotient (RQ) for green algae (b1 and b2), daphnids (b3 and b4), and fish (b5 and b6) in surface water and pore water, respectively. The names of the abbreviations of these perfluorinated compounds are shown in Table S1.
Abbreviation Name Formula
Perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCA)
PFBA Perfluorobutanoic acid C4HF7O2
PFPeA Perfluoropentanoic acid C5HF9O2
PFHxA Perfluorohexanoic acid C6HF11O2
PFHpA Perfluoroheptanoic acid C7HF13O2
PFOA Perfluorooctanoic acid C8HF15O2
PFNA Perfluorononanoic acid C9HF17O2
PFDA Perfluorodecanoic acid C10HF19O2
PFUnDA Perfluoroundecanoic acid C11HF21O2
PFDoDA Perfluorododecanoic acid C12HF23O2
PFTrDA Perfluorotridecanoic acid C13HF25O2
PFTeDA Perfluorotetradecanoic acid C14HF27O2
Perfluoroalkyl sulfonic acids (PFSA)
PFBS Potassium perfluorobutane sulfonate C4F9KO3S
PFPeS Sodium perfluoropentane sulfonate C5F11NaO3S
PFHxS Sodium perfluorohexane sulfonate C6F13NaO3S
PFHpS Sodium perfluoroheptane sulfonate C7F15NaO3S
PFOS Sodium perfluorooctane sulfonate C8F17NaO3S
PFNS Sodium perfluorononane sulfonate C9F19NaO3S
PFDS Sodium perfluorodecane sulfonate C10F21NaO3S
PFDoS Sodium perfluorododecane sulfonate C12F25NaO3S
Fluorotelomer sulfonic acids (FTSA)
4:2 FTS 4:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate sodium C6H4F9NaO3S
6:2 FTS 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate sodium C8H4F13NaO3S
8:2 FTS 8:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate sodium C10H4F17NaO3S
Polyfluoroalkyl ether sulfonates (PFESA)
PFEESA Potassium perfluoro (2-ethoxyethane) sulfonate C4F9KO4S
9Cl-PF3ONS Potassium 9-chlorohexadecafluoro-3-oxanonane-1-sulfonate C8ClF16KO4S
11Cl-PF3OUdS Potassium 11-chloroeicosafluoro-3-oxaundecane-1-sulfonate C10ClF20KO4S
Perfluoroalkyl ether carboxylic acids (PFECA)
HFPO-DA Hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid C6HF11O3
NADONA Sodium 4,8-dioxa-3H-perfluorononanoate C7HF12NaO4
PF4OPeA Perfluoro-4-oxapentanoic acid C4HF7O3
PF5OHxA Perfluoro-5-oxahexanoic acid C5HF9O3
3,6-OPFHpA Perfluoro-3,6-dioxaheptanoic acid C5HF9O4
Perfluorooctane sulfonamidoacetic acids (FOSAA)
N-MeFOSAA N-methylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamidoacetic acid C11H6F17NO4S
N-EtFOSAA N-ethylperfluoro-1-octanesulfonamidoacetic acid C12H8F17NO4S
Table S1 List of target perfluorinated compounds monitored, abbreviations, names, and chemical formulas
Compound Recovery (%) Water Sediment
MDL (ng/L) MQL (ng/L) DF (%) MDL (ng/g DW) MQL (ng/g DW) DF (%)
PFBA 122.80±6.90 0.06 0.20 60.00 0.0022 0.0073 0.00
PFPeA 126.50±8.10 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0052 0.0173 5.00
PFHxA 115.00±5.70 0.03 0.10 100.00 0.0028 0.0093 85.00
PFHpA 80.80±6.40 0.24 0.80 100.00 0.0096 0.0320 100.00
PFOA 101.80±8.10 0.03 0.10 100.00 0.0016 0.0053 100.00
PFNA 101.10±6.40 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0016 0.0053 100.00
PFDA 110.60±12.40 0.03 0.10 100.00 0.0028 0.0093 100.00
PFUnDA 114.10±6.00 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0034 0.0113 60.00
PFDoDA 107.20±2.40 0.03 0.10 100.00 0.0032 0.0107 80.00
PFTrDA 88.90±9.20 0.02 0.07 75.00 0.0044 0.0147 0.00
PFTeDA 91.10±6.90 0.04 0.13 60.00 0.0040 0.0133 0.00
PFBS 88.50±8.40 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0024 0.0080 20.00
PFPeS 90.20±5.20 0.04 0.13 10.00 0.0030 0.0100 0.00
PFHxS 102.30±4.70 0.08 0.27 85.00 0.0016 0.0053 40.00
PFHpS 85.30±6.50 0.02 0.07 45.00 0.0018 0.0060 5.00
PFOS 117.40±5.90 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0014 0.0047 85.00
PFNS 113.40±5.90 0.06 0.20 30.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
PFDS 90.40±11.20 0.04 0.13 60.00 0.0028 0.0093 0.00
PFDoS 74.70±4.40 0.03 0.10 25.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
4:2 FTS 121.90±4.70 0.05 0.17 0.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
6:2 FTS 127.70±7.10 0.02 0.07 100.00 0.0022 0.0073 25.00
8:2 FTS 127.40±10.30 0.04 0.13 15.00 0.0026 0.0087 0.00
PFEESA 112.50±3.70 0.06 0.20 0.00 0.0064 0.0213 0.00
9Cl-PF3ONS 152.30±9.60 0.03 0.10 55.00 0.0030 0.0100 0.00
11Cl-PF3OUdS 75.40±7.30 0.05 0.17 55.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
HFPO-DA 132.30±6.10 0.38 1.27 0.00 0.0164 0.0546 0.00
NaDONA 119.50±11.20 0.08 0.27 0.00 0.0022 0.0073 0.00
PF4OPeA 110.00±5.70 0.02 0.07 35.00 0.0032 0.0107 0.00
PF5OHxA 129.50±10.30 0.12 0.40 30.00 0.0080 0.0266 0.00
3,6-OPFHpA 117.10±5.70 0.05 0.17 30.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
N-MeFOSAA 89.80±6.20 0.08 0.27 40.00 0.0042 0.0140 0.00
N-EtFOSAA 89.20±10.30 0.09 0.30 45.00 0.0064 0.0213 0.00
Table S2 Method of detection limit (MDL), method of quantification limit (MQL), recovery, and detection frequency (DF) of individual per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in water and sediment
Compound W12
(20 cm)		 W12
(40 cm)		 W12
(60 cm)		 W15
(20 cm)		 W15
(40 cm)		 W15
(60 cm)		 W17
(20 cm)		 W17
(40 cm)
PFBA 0.000 0.000 0.000 -0.167 -0.079 0.138 -0.214 -0.336
PFPeA -1.555 -1.187 -0.437 -0.060 -0.019 0.030 -0.329 -0.283
PFHxA -2.319 -1.183 -0.870 -0.266 -0.143 -0.133 -0.364 -0.213
PFHpA -1.043 -1.043 -1.043 -0.239 -0.117 -0.163 -0.176 -0.040
PFOA -0.985 -0.442 0.501 0.049 0.125 0.224 0.451 0.456
PFNA -1.274 -0.786 2.310 0.026 0.368 0.575 1.595 1.725
PFDA 0.483 0.559 2.897 -2.095 -1.776 -0.611 0.388 0.154
PFBS -3.148 -1.220 -1.516 -0.226 -0.205 -0.028 -0.043 -0.013
PFOS 0.012 -1.082 0.991 1.321 0.209 0.569 1.627 1.612
Compound W17
(60 cm)		 W18
(20 cm)		 W18
(40 cm)		 W18
(60 cm)		 W19
(20 cm)		 W19
(40 cm)		 W19
(60 cm)		 Median
PFBA -0.044 -0.523 -0.675 -0.660 -0.835 ‒0.269 0.139 ‒0.170
PFPeA -0.012 -1.778 -2.218 -2.942 -1.020 ‒0.714 ‒0.241 ‒0.440
PFHxA -0.138 -0.870 -1.099 -0.981 -1.048 ‒0.759 ‒0.334 ‒0.760
PFHpA 0.008 -0.887 -1.108 -0.842 -1.102 ‒0.555 ‒0.198 ‒0.560
PFOA 0.474 -0.827 -1.009 -0.874 -0.127 0.198 0.391 0.120
PFNA 1.034 -0.276 -1.064 -1.730 0.701 0.668 0.446 0.450
PFDA -0.123 -0.303 -1.575 -2.128 -0.817 0.037 ‒0.598 ‒0.300
PFBS 0.213 -1.037 -1.865 -1.883 0.012 ‒0.105 0.807 ‒0.210
PFOS 0.721 0.551 0.358 ‒0.259 0.706 1.064 0.466 0.570
Table S3 Distribution of concentration ratio (CR) between pore water and surface water for detected PFAS
Fig. S1 Cumulative weight curves of sediment grain size for various sampling sites. (a), W12; (b), W15; (c), W17; (d), W18; (e), W19.
Component Concentration (ng/L) Mass load (kg/a)
Upstream Midstream Downstream Upstream Midstream Downstream
PFBA 0.21 8.30 0.55 0.35 37.38 4.18
PFPeA 0.38 45.40 2.49 0.63 204.50 19.05
PFHxA 0.83 129.68 6.82 1.37 584.20 52.20
PFHpA 0.40 84.75 5.19 0.66 381.80 39.70
PFOA 3.20 74.29 19.76 5.29 334.70 151.30
PFNA 1.54 56.54 23.29 2.55 255.20 178.30
PFDA 0.22 19.68 4.34 0.37 88.650 33.220
PFUnDA 1.59 3.09 0.30 2.63 13.94 2.26
PFDoDA 0.69 0.31 0.05 1.14 1.38 0.38
PFTrDA 0.37 - 0.24 0.62 0.00 1.84
PFTeDA 0.07 - - 0.11 0.00 0.00
PFBS 0.56 19.96 4.64 0.92 89.94 35.49
PFHxS 0.13 1.73 3.41 0.22 7.78 26.10
PFHpS - - 0.14 0.00 0.00 1.08
PFOS 0.40 1.94 20.16 0.67 8.73 154.30
PFNS 0.20 - - 0.33 0.00 0.00
PFDS 0.15 0.07 - 0.24 0.30 0.00
6:2 FTS 0.03 0.22 0.25 0.06 1.00 1.95
9Cl-PF3ONS - 0.05 0.18 0.00 0.23 1.35
11Cl-PF3OUdS 0.08 - - 0.14 0.00 0.00
PF4OPeA - 7.33 0.44 0.00 33.02 3.35
PF5OHxA - 4.57 0.20 0.00 20.59 1.53
3,6-OPFHpA - 1.50 0.08 0.00 6.74 0.64
N-MeFOSAA 0.13 - - 0.22 0.00 0.00
N-EtFOSAA 0.15 - - 0.25 0.00 0.00
Long-chain PFAS (kg/a) 14.60 1084.00 562.40
Short-chain PFAS (kg/a) 3.49 923.80 137.00
Emerging PFAS (kg/a) 0.66 61.58 8.81
Total PFAS (kg/a) 18.75 2070.00 708.20
Table S4 Estimated mass load of PFAS discharged from the Weihe River to the Yellow River
Fig. S2 Conceptual model of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) interactions with sediments. Mechanisms include hydrogen bonding, electrostatic attraction and repulsion, and hydrophobic interactions. Molecular model adapted is referenced from Lyu et al. (2022).
[1]   Boano F, Harvey J W, Marion A, et al. 2014. Hyporheic flow and transport processes: Mechanisms, models, and biogeochemical implications. Reviews of Geophysics, 52(4): 603-679.
doi: 10.1002/2012RG000417
[2]   Buck R C, Franklin J, Berger U, et al. 2011. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 7(4): 513-541.
doi: 10.1002/ieam.258 pmid: 21793199
[3]   Cai L L, Hu J R, Li J, et al. 2022. Occurrence, source apportionment, and pollution assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in a river across rural and urban areas. Science of The Total Environment, 835: 155505, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.155505.
[4]   Cai M H, Yang H Z, Xie Z Y, et al. 2012. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in snow, lake, surface runoff water and coastal seawater in Fildes Peninsula, King George Island, Antarctica. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 209-210: 335-342.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2012.01.030 pmid: 22305203
[5]   Chang J X, Wang Y M, Istanbulluoglu E, et al. 2015. Impact of climate change and human activities on runoff in the Weihe River Basin, China. Quaternary International, 380-381: 169-179.
[6]   Chen S, Jiao X C, Gai N, et al. 2016. Perfluorinated compounds in soil, surface water, and groundwater from rural areas in eastern China. Environmental Pollution, 211: 124-131.
doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2015.12.024 pmid: 26745397
[7]   Chen Y, Wei L J, Luo W, et al. 2023. Occurrence, spatial distribution, and sources of PFASs in the water and sediment from lakes in the Tibetan Plateau. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 443: 130170, doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130170.
[8]   Cheng D M, Liu X H, Wang L, et al. 2014. Seasonal variation and sediment-water exchange of antibiotics in a shallower large lake in North China. Science of The Total Environment, 476-477: 266-275.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.01.010
[9]   DEEGS (Department of Ecology and Environment of Gansu Province). 2025. Report on the state of the ecology and environment in Gansu 2024. DEEGS, Lanzhou, China. [2025-04-22]. https://sthj.gansu.gov.cn/.
[10]   DEESX (Department of Ecology and Environment of Shaanxi Province). 2025. Report on the state of the ecology and environment in Shaanxi 2024. DEESX, Xi'an, China. [2025-05-26]. https://sthjt.shaanxi.gov.cn/.
[11]   Diao J Y, Chen Z W, Wang T Y, et al. 2022. Perfluoroalkyl substances in marine food webs from South China Sea: Trophic transfer and human exposure implication. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 431: 128602, doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128602.
[12]   Dosunmu O, Whiting R, Matharu A, et al. 2025. The unintentional role of chemical regulation in regrettable substitution: The case of PFAS. Environmental Science & Policy, 174: 104275, doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104275.
[13]   EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2012. Ecological Structure-Activity Relationships Program (ECOSAR) Methodology Document v2.0. Washington DC:EPA.
[14]   Evich M G, Davis M J B, McCord J P, et al. 2022. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment. Science, 375(6580): eabg9065, doi: 10.1126/science.abg9065.
[15]   Gao L J, Liu J L, Bao K, et al. 2020. Multicompartment occurrence and partitioning of alternative and legacy per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in an impacted river in China. Science of The Total Environment, 729: 138753, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138753.
[16]   Ghaznavi S M, Choudhary M, Hannan M, et al. 2025. A critical review of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances adsorption by soil. Journal of Hazardous Materials: Organics, 1(1): 100001, doi: 10.1016/j.hazmo.2025.100001.
[17]   Glüge J, Scheringer M, Cousins I T, et al. 2020. An overview of the uses of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts, 22(12): 2345-2373.
[18]   Guelfo J L, Higgins C P. 2013. Subsurface transport potential of perfluoroalkyl acids at Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF)-Impacted Sites. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(9): 4164-4171.
doi: 10.1021/es3048043
[19]   Hamid H, Li L Y, Grace J R. 2020. Formation of perfluorocarboxylic acids from 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate (6:2 FTS) in landfill leachate: Role of microbial communities. Environmental Pollution, 259: 113835, doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113835.
[20]   Heys K A, Shore R F, Pereira M G, et al. 2016. Risk assessment of environmental mixture effects. RSC Advances, 6(53): 47844-47857.
doi: 10.1039/C6RA05406D
[21]   Higgins C P, Luthy R G. 2006. Sorption of perfluorinated surfactants on sediments. Environmental Science & Technology, 40(23): 7251-7256.
doi: 10.1021/es061000n
[22]   Hu J J, Yu S K, Yin C, et al. 2025. Sorption and mechanisms of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) on different particle size fractions of marine sediments. Environmental Research, 278: 121643, doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2025.121643.
[23]   Hubert M, Arp H P H, Hansen M C, et al. 2023. Influence of grain size, organic carbon and organic matter residue content on the sorption of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances in aqueous film forming foam contaminated soils-Implications for remediation using soil washing. Science of The Total Environment, 875: 162668, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162668.
[24]   Jurado E, Zaldivar J M, Marinov D, et al. 2007. Fate of persistent organic pollutants in the water column: Does turbulent mixing matter? Marine Pollution Bulletin, 54(4): 441-451.
pmid: 17257629
[25]   Land M, de Wit C A, Bignert A, et al. 2018. What is the effect of phasing out long-chain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances on the concentrations of perfluoroalkyl acids and their precursors in the environment? A systematic review. Environmental Evidence, 7(1): 4, doi: 10.1186/s13750-017-0114-y.
[26]   Lee Y M, Lee J Y, Kim M K, et al. 2020. Concentration and distribution of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the Asan Lake area of South Korea. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 381: 120909, doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.120909.
[27]   Li F, Duan J, Tian S T, et al. 2020a. Short-chain per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in aquatic systems: Occurrence, impacts and treatment. Chemical Engineering Journal, 380: 122506, doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.122506.
[28]   Li H, Zhu X, Zhang J, et al. 2023. Characterizing the long-term occurrence and anthropogenic drivers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in surface water of the Rhine River. Water Research, 245: 120528, doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2023.120528.
[29]   Li J, Gao Y, Xu N, et al. 2020b. Perfluoroalkyl substances in the Yangtze River: Changing exposure and its implications after operation of the Three Gorges Dam. Water Research, 182: 115933, doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2020.115933.
[30]   Li J, Li X L, Zhu Y, et al. 2025. The first survey of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in Hulun Lake, China: Occurrence, sources, and environmental impacts. Emerging Contaminants, 11(1): 100431, doi: 10.1016/j.emcon.2024.100431.
[31]   Li W Z, Li H Z, Zhang D N, et al. 2022. Legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances behave distinctly in spatial distribution and multimedia partitioning: A case study in the Pearl River, China. Environmental Science & Technology, 56(6): 3492-3502.
doi: 10.1021/acs.est.1c07362
[32]   Lin A Y C, Panchangam S C, Lo C C. 2009. The impact of semiconductor, electronics and optoelectronic industries on downstream perfluorinated chemical contamination in Taiwanese rivers. Environmental Pollution, 157(4): 1365-1372.
doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2008.11.033
[33]   Liu B L, Zhang H, Xie L W, et al. 2015. Spatial distribution and partition of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) in rivers of the Pearl River Delta, southern China. Science of The Total Environment, 524-525: 1-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.004
[34]   Liu J J, Zhang Y H, Li F, et al. 2024. Contamination status, partitioning behavior, ecological risks assessment of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in a typical heavily polluted semi-enclosed bay, China. Environmental Research, 247: 118214, doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2024.118214.
[35]   Liu W X, Wu J Y, He W, et al. 2019. A review on perfluoroalkyl acids studies: Environmental behaviors, toxic effects, and ecological and health risks. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 5(1): 1-19.
doi: 10.1080/20964129.2018.1558031
[36]   Lougkovois R, Gkotsis G, Parinos C, et al. 2025. Storm Daniel extreme flood event in Thessaly, Greece: Assessing the pollution status of the impacted coastal marine areas through extended screening of emerging contaminants using LC-TIMS-HRMS. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 12(4): 432-439.
[37]   Lyu X Y, Xiao F, Shen C Y, et al. 2022. Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in subsurface environments: Occurrence, fate, transport, and research prospect. Reviews of Geophysics, 60(3): e2021RG000765, doi: 10.1029/2021RG000765.
[38]   Maskaoui K, Zhou J L, Hong H S, et al. 2002. Contamination by polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in the Jiulong River estuary and Western Xiamen Sea, China. Environmental Pollution, 118(1): 109-122.
pmid: 11996375
[39]   Maskaoui K, Zhou J L, Zheng T L, et al. 2005. Organochlorine micropollutants in the Jiulong River Estuary and Western Xiamen Sea, China. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 51(8-12): 950-959.
doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.11.018 pmid: 16291197
[40]   Massarsky A, Donnell M T, de Gandiaga E, et al. 2022. Critical evaluation of ECOSAR and E-FAST platforms to predict ecological risks of PFAS. Environmental Advances, 8: 100221, doi: 10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100221.
[41]   Miralles-Marco A, Harrad S. 2015. Perfluorooctane sulfonate: A review of human exposure, biomonitoring and the environmental forensics utility of its chirality and isomer distribution. Environment International, 77: 148-159.
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2015.02.002 pmid: 25728452
[42]   Munoz G, Budzinski H, Babut M, et al. 2017. Evidence for the trophic transfer of perfluoroalkylated substances in a temperate macrotidal estuary. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(15): 8450-8459.
doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b02399
[43]   Pan C G, Wang Y H, Yu K F, et al. 2020. Occurrence and distribution of perfluoroalkyl substances in surface riverine and coastal sediments from the Beibu Gulf, south China. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 150: 110706, doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110706.
[44]   Peralta-Maraver I, Reiss J, Robertson A L. 2018. Interplay of hydrology, community ecology and pollutant attenuation in the hyporheic zone. Science of The Total Environment, 610-611: 267-275.
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.036
[45]   Perkola N, Sainio P. 2013. Survey of perfluorinated alkyl acids in Finnish effluents, storm water, landfill leachate and sludge. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20(11): 7979-7987.
doi: 10.1007/s11356-013-1518-z
[46]   Reif D, Zoboli O, Wolfram G, et al. 2022. Pollutant source or sink? Adsorption and mobilization of PFOS and PFOA from sediments in a large shallow lake with extended reed belt. Journal of Environmental Management, 320: 115871, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115871.
[47]   Riaz R, Junaid M, Rehman M Y A, et al. 2023. Spatial distribution, compositional profile, sources, ecological and human health risks of legacy and emerging per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in freshwater reservoirs of Punjab, Pakistan. Science of The Total Environment, 856: 159144, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159144.
[48]   Song J X, Tang B, Zhang J L, et al. 2018. System dynamics simulation for optimal stream flow regulations under consideration of coordinated development of ecology and socio-economy in the Weihe River Basin, China. Ecological Engineering, 124: 51-68.
doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2018.09.024
[49]   Tang W Q, Wang T T, Miao J W, et al. 2025. Presence and sources of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in the three major rivers on Hainan Island. Environmental Research, 266: 120590, doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2024.120590.
[50]   Tao Y R, Pang Y, Luo M K, et al. 2024. Multi-media distribution and risk assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the Huai River Basin, China. Science of The Total Environment, 914: 169581, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169581.
[51]   Thomaidi V S, Tsahouridou A, Matsoukas C, et al. 2020. Risk assessment of PFASs in drinking water using a probabilistic risk quotient methodology. Science of The Total Environment, 712: 136485, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.136485.
[52]   UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2009. Listing of Perfluorooctane Sulfonic Acid (PFOS), its Salts and Perfluorooctane Sulfonyl Fluoride (PFOSF) in Annex B of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants. Geneva: UNEP.
[53]   UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). 2019. Listing of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA), its Salts and PFOA-Related Compounds in Annex A to the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants with Specific Exemptions. Geneva: UNEP.
[54]   Wang S W, Huang J, Yang Y, et al. 2013. First report of a Chinese PFOS alternative overlooked for 30 years: Its toxicity, persistence, and presence in the environment. Environmental Science & Technology, 47(18): 10163-10170.
doi: 10.1021/es401525n
[55]   Wang T Y, Khim J S, Chen C L, et al. 2012. Perfluorinated compounds in surface waters from Northern China: Comparison to level of industrialization. Environment International, 42: 37-46.
doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2011.03.023 pmid: 21536332
[56]   Xiao F. 2017. Emerging poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in the aquatic environment: A review of current literature. Water Research, 124: 482-495.
doi: S0043-1354(17)30597-3 pmid: 28800519
[57]   Yamazaki E, Lalwani D, Thaker P, et al. 2025. Historical reconstruction of PFAS discharge into the Cooum River-before and after the great Chennai flood in 2015. Chemosphere, 371: 144068, doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2025.144068.
[58]   Yu L, Liu X D, Hua Z L, et al. 2024. Intense turbulent bursts promote the release of perfluoroalkyl acids from sediments at high flow velocity. Environmental Science & Technology, 58(26): 11737-11747.
doi: 10.1021/acs.est.4c03885
[59]   Zhang S Y, Zhang L L, Zhang Q M, et al. 2025. Pollution characteristics and ecological risks of perfluoroalkyl substances at key discharge points in the Wei River Basin. Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology, 11(12): 3061-3073.
[60]   Zhou L F, Chen W J, Zhang Y, et al. 2023. Pollution characteristics and risk assessment of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in waters of Meiliang Bay, Taihu Lake. Environmental Chemistry, 42(10): 3408-3419. (in Chinese)
[61]   Zhou J, Li Z, Guo X T, et al. 2019. Evidences for replacing legacy per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances with emerging ones in Fen and Wei River basins in central and western China. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 377: 78-87.
doi: S0304-3894(19)30584-9 pmid: 31151043
[62]   Zushi Y, Masunaga S. 2009. First-flush loads of perfluorinated compounds in stormwater runoff from Hayabuchi River basin, Japan served by separated sewerage system. Chemosphere, 76(6): 833-840.
[63]   Zushi Y, Ye F, Motegi M, et al. 2012. Spatial distribution and loading amounts of particle sorbed and dissolved perfluorinated compounds in the basin of Tokyo Bay. Chemosphere, 88(11): 1353-1357.
doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.05.038 pmid: 22698375
[1] CHANG Sen, WEI Yaqi, DAI Zhenzhong, XU Wen, WANG Xing, DUAN Jiajia, ZOU Liang, ZHAO Guorong, REN Xiaoying, FENG Yongzhong. Landscape ecological risk assessment and its driving factors in the Weihe River basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(5): 603-614.
[2] LI Haocheng, LI Junfeng, QU Wenying, WANG Wenhuai, Muhammad Arsalan FARID, CAO Zhiheng, MA Chengxiao, FENG Xueting. A novel framework of ecological risk management for urban development in ecologically fragile regions: A case study of Turpan City, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2024, 16(11): 1604-1632.
[3] WU Jingyan, LUO Jungang, ZHANG Han, YU Mengjie. Driving forces behind the spatiotemporal heterogeneity of land-use and land-cover change: A case study of the Weihe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(3): 253-273.
[4] WEN Xiaohu, LI Leiming, WU Jun, LU Jian, SHENG Danrui. Multiple assessments, source determination, and health risk apportionment of heavy metal(loid)s in the groundwater of the Shule River Basin in northwestern China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(11): 1355-1375.
[5] XIE Shicheng, LAN Tian, XING An, CHEN Chen, MENG Chang, WANG Shuiping, XU Mingming, HONG Mei. Spatial distribution and ecological risk of heavy metals and their source apportionment in soils from a typical mining area, Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2023, 15(10): 1196-1215.
[6] WU Changxue, QIU Dexun, GAO Peng, MU Xingmin, ZHAO Guangju. Application of the InVEST model for assessing water yield and its response to precipitation and land use in the Weihe River Basin, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2022, 14(4): 426-440.
[7] WU Changxue, Xu Ruirui, QIU Dexun, DING Yingying, GAO Peng, MU Xingmin, ZHAO Guangju. Runoff characteristics and its sensitivity to climate factors in the Weihe River Basin from 2006 to 2018[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2022, 14(12): 1344-1360.
[8] Shanhu JIANG, Liliang REN, Meng ZHOU, Bin YONG, Yu ZHANG, Mingwei MA. Drought monitoring and reliability evaluation of the latest TMPA precipitation data in the Weihe River Basin, Northwest China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2017, 9(2): 256-269.
[9] WANG Wei, LAI Yingshuai, MA Yuanyuan, LIU Zilong, WANG Shufen, HONG Chenglin. Heavy metal contamination of urban topsoil in a petrochemical industrial city in Xinjiang, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2016, 8(6): 871-880.
[10] WAN Honglian, HUANG Chunchang, PANG Jiangli. Major elements in the Holocene loess-paleosol sequence in the upper reaches of the Weihe River valley, China[J]. Journal of Arid Land, 2016, 8(2): 197-206.