Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2026 Apr 3.
Published in final edited form as: Environ Sci Technol Lett. 2025 Sep 18;12(10):1437–1444. doi: 10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00699

High-Throughput Small-Scale Platform for Synthesis, Characterization, and Modeling of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Analogs

Kai-Hung Huang 1,2,†, Namita Narendra 1, Kaili Yap 1, Nicolás M Morato 3, Kitmin Chen 2, Yunfei Feng 2, R Graham Cooks 2, Tillmann Kubis 1, Christina R Ferreira 4,†
PMCID: PMC13045709  NIHMSID: NIHMS2157621  PMID: 41938835

Abstract

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a global challenge due to their exceptional thermal and chemical durability which leads to environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxicity. Tackling this challenge is a complex endeavor as the ever-expanding number of emerging PFAS hinders their monitoring while current countermeasures remain limited. Thus, there is a need for rapid strategies that can transform PFAS into safer, degradable analogs or expand libraries for untargeted monitoring. Here, we describe the implementation of a high-throughput (1 Hz) desorption electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (HT-DESI-MS) platform for the chemical transformation of perfluorocarboxylic acids (PFCAs) via a data-driven workflow that led to 915 new PFCA analogs (89% success rate) and revealed reactivity trends. Tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) enabled online structural confirmation and diagnostic fragment identification, supporting standard-free LC-MS/MS analysis. Further integration with ion mobility spectrometry (IMS) provided drift time measurements correlating with molecular size and shape, adding a new dimension that can improve feature annotation in untargeted PFAS analysis. Complementary quantum mechanical calculations of dipole moment and HOMO− LUMO gap predicted polarity and electronic reactivity, guiding analog selection. Collectively, this workflow combines rapid synthesis, structural annotation, and multidimensional profiling, with potential to discover safer PFAS and enhance environmental monitoring.

Introduction

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been widely incorporated into industrial products since the 1950s as they possess exceptional thermal stability, chemical resistance, and surfactant properties. (1–3) However, these characteristics have contributed to their environmental persistence, bioaccumulation, and associated toxicity, prompting global concern from the early 2000s onward. (4–9) Multiple efforts are being pursued to tackle the crisis generated by these so-called “forever chemicals”. For instance, short-chain alternatives and structurally modified legacy PFAS have been developed as replacements, yet their environmental implications and toxicological profiles remain similar or even unknown. (10–15) Remediation strategies such as pollutant removal by adsorption (16,17) or decomposition (18–21) are still challenging due to the requirement of adsorbent disposal or incomplete defluorination and unknown toxicology of degradation products. On top of this, the broad-coverage monitoring of PFAS is still a challenge despite of the wide range of emerging analytical methodologies (22–35) that now detect sizable fractions of previously unidentified organofluorides, as many newly formed PFAS still remain uncharacterized. (30)

The ability to broadly diversify PFAS structures through chemical transformations is relevant to tackling this crisis as it provides opportunities to (i) develop safer analogs for industrial use, (36,37) (ii) introduce motifs that enhance chemical degradation and reduce bioaccumulation, (38,39) and (iii) enlarge the synthetic PFAS libraries that underpin untargeted analytical workflows (27–31) used to assess environmental transformations in soil or wastewater. (32) To fulfill these goals, a pipeline for PFAS diversification requires rapid reactions that allow for efficient chemical space exploration using minimal substrate amounts to avoid generating further contaminants, as well as computational assistance to guide the evaluation of high-value modifications toward specific physicochemical properties.

Here we report the implementation of a workflow for the rapid generation of PFAS analogs through the combination of high-throughput (HT) experimentation with quantum mechanical calculations using perfluoroalkyl carboxylic acids (PFCA) as model PFAS. Within this pipeline, HT nanogram-scale synthesis is carried out via desorption electrospray ionization (DESI), (40–42) a unique ionization method which serves as a synthetic tool via accelerated microdroplet reactions. (43–53) This acceleration, often orders of magnitude faster than bulk-phase chemistry, (44) arises from the unique interfacial properties in microdroplets, including partial solvation, (50,51) strong electric fields, (52) and the presence of reactive species. (53) As a result, products are formed within milliseconds in DESI droplets and can be directly detected by mass spectrometry (MS) for combined synthesis and screening. HT-DESI-MS is then achieved through fast (~1 s per reaction) sampling of a high-density array of small-volume (50 nL) reaction mixtures. (54–56) This fully automated approach has already found broad application in drug discovery, both for label-free biological assays (57–61) as well as for rapid diversification of drug molecules. (62–64) The usefulness of the vast data sets obtained with this platform was demonstrated by successfully informing a liquid chromatography (LC) tandem mass spectrometry (MS/MS) methodology, which is the gold standard for PFAS analysis. (24–26) Additionally, we show that coupling DESI with ion mobility spectrometry (IMS), an emerging technique for PFAS analysis, (22,31) can provide complementary information for further characterization of the newly synthesized PFCA analogs. Finally, we demonstrate the integration of theoretical calculations of dipole moments (μ) and HOMO–LUMO gaps (EH-L) as an efficient strategy for prioritizing promising analogues and guide cost-effective experimental coverage of the vast PFAS chemical space.

Experimental Section

HT-DESI-MS(/MS) Synthesis

The automated HT-DESI-MS platform combines a robotic liquid handling system and a mass spectrometer equipped with a DESI source, integrated via custom hardware and software. A detailed description of the platform can be found in the Supporting Information (SI) as well as in published manuscripts. (55,56) Briefly, the synthesis workflow involves the automated preparation of reaction mixture arrays (16 replicates per reaction, 50 nL each) onto a PTFE-coated glass slide that is then automatically transferred to the DESI stage where a charged solvent (methanol) spray is used to desorb the reaction mixtures, carrying them in secondary splashed microdroplets where accelerated reactions occur, thus providing on-the-fly the synthesis of analogs at a throughput of 1 s per reaction. Hits were determined using the signal-to-noise and conversion ratios (SNR and CR, respectively; see SI for details). Online structural confirmation of the products was conducted by revisiting the hit spots for HT-DESI-MS/MS analysis at a throughput of 10 s per reaction.

LC-MS(/MS) and DESI-IMS-MS

All the reaction mixtures were incubated (12 h), and eight reaction mixtures were pooled together by selecting nonisobaric products to increase the LC-MS analysis efficiency. LC-MS/MS was carried out in the multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode and was conducted by setting up the MRM transitions rapidly obtained via HT-DESI-MS/MS. Reaction mixtures were deposited (1 μL) onto a PTFE-coated glass slide and screened using DESI via a line scan using a traveling wave ion mobility spectrometry (TWIMS) coupled to MS.

Theoretical Calculations

The geometries of the PFCA derivatives were obtained through a two-step process. First, Open Babel (65) was used to generate 50 conformers for each compound and to select the lowest energy conformer using the Merck Molecular Force Field (MMFF94). (66) Next, the selected lowest energy conformer was optimized in the gas phase at the density functional level of theory using Gaussian16 (67) package. All the quantum mechanical calculations were carried out using B3LYP functional and 6–31G(d,p) basis sets.

Results and Discussion

Small-Scale Diversification of PFCAs via HT-DESI-MS(/MS)

The HT-DESI-MS platform was used to rapidly derivatize PFCAs via amide-forming coupling between carboxylic acids and amines (Figure 1A, Table S1). A stepwise data-driven screening workflow (63) was utilized so that only conditions or functionalization reagents found successful in an initial screen are used in a subsequent screening stage. The first screen involved four coupling reagents and 14 representative amines that were tested using perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) as model PFCA to identify the most effective activator (Figures S1–S2). EDC (1-ethyl-3-(3-(dimethylamino)propyl)carbodiimide hydrochloride) and diamino containing amines showed superior reactivity (Figure S2), therefore, eight diamines were selected and proceeded to the second screening stage for determination of optimal reaction conditions (Figure S3). Seven conditions, including two different forms of EDC, different orders of mixing reagents, and the use of additives, were screened. Mixing PFOA with HCl-EDC before adding the amine and omitting any additives (see Condition 1 in Figure S3) was found optimal. We expanded the screening (third stage) to C3–C12 PFCAs with 103 different amines spanning seven functional classes (Table S1, A1-A103; Figure 1B and Figures S4–S5).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

HT-DESI-MS screening of PFCAs with a large set of amines. (A) Reaction scheme for the coupling reaction between PFCAs (PFCA3-PFCA12) with 103 amines (see Supporting Information Figure S4 and Table S1 for the full list of amines and their structures). The amine structures shown are related to the different groups as described in Figure S4. (B) Heatmap of conversion ratio (CR) for the screening results of PFCAs with amines. (C) Representative spectra of the reactions of different PFCAs with N,N-dimethylethylenediamine (A26). (D) representative spectra of the reactions of PFOA with (1R,2R)-(−)-1,2-diaminocyclohexane (A8), N-methylpropane-1,3-diamine (A18), (1-benzylpyrrolidin-3-yl)methanamine (A56), N,N′-dimethylethylenediamine (A79), 4-piperidinopiperidine (A93), 2-(4-Methyl-piperazin-1-yl)-ethylamine (A100), and 2-amino-N,N,N-trimethylethanaminium chloride hydrochloride (A102). R.A.: relative abundance.

In total, 1030 distinct transformations including 16,480 individual measurements, were carried out in less than 4.5 h. This campaign yielded 915 PFCA analogs (88.8% success rate) with picomole-level reagent consumption via accelerated reactions in DESI microdroplets, thus without the need for any lengthy incubation (Figure 1B and Figure S5). The screen also provided insights into broad reactivity trends. For example, longer chain PFCAs generally had better reactivity than shorter chain ones (Figure 1B, C), likely due to higher surface affinity (68) and hence stronger microdroplet interfacial effects. Primary amines (G1–G3 and G6 classes, e.g., A8, A18, A56, A100 in Figure 1D) out-performed secondary amines (G4–G5, e.g., A79) because of reduced steric hindrance, whereas charged amines (G7, e.g., A102) were largely inert. Note that despite the high speed and tiny sample size, HT-DESI-MS provides high-quality spectra (Figure 1C, D) and high-precision CR values (Figure S6).

To benchmark this DESI-based synthetic methodology, we carried out standard bulk reactions with overnight incubation for PFOA with 103 amines followed by LC-MS analysis (Figure 2A and Figure S7). Eight reaction mixtures were pooled together in a single LC-MS run to achieve more efficient analysis (Figure 2A, see SI for details). Overall, 99 out of 103 reaction products were detected (Figure S7), validating the reaction screening results by HT-DESI-MS, which provided all 103 hits (96% agreement). Importantly, this similar performance is obtained despite HT-DESI-MS being at least 300-fold faster (see SI, Section II) than conventional bulk reactions followed by LC-MS.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

(A) LC-MS full mass chromatogram of reaction mixture containing eight reactions (bottom). TIC of the LC-MS analysis and (top) EIC of the expected m/z of each product. (B) HT-DESI-MS/MSof reaction products of PFOA with 2,2-dimethylpropane-1,3-diamine (A7), N-isopropylethylenediamine (A17), 3-(dimethylamino)propylamine (A31), and N1,N3-dimethylpropane-1,3-diamine (A81). Note that the fragmented site forming the neutral loss (NL) is indicated in arrows. (C) LC-MRM (normalized for each species) guided by HT-DESI-MS/MS without need of database or authentic standards. The transitions of A7 (499→482), A17 (499→440), A31 (499→454), and A81 (499→468) were selected by the product ions observed in (B).

The automated platform also enables rapid structural confirmation via online MS/MS, a crucial capability in PFAS structural analysis. (26) Microdroplet reaction products from hit spots were subjected to MS/MS and the spectra obtained provided diagnostic neutral losses (NLs) rich in structural information. With this information, regioisomers arising from multivalent amines were distinguished (Figure S8). For instance, the MS/MS spectrum of the product from the reaction between PFOA and N-methylethylenediamine showed two different fragments: (i) NL 31 Da (−NH2CH3) indicating amide formation via the primary amine, and (ii) NL 17 Da (−NH3) consistent with a secondary-amine attack and a free primary amino group. Analog controls with ethylenediamine and N,N′-dimethylethylenediamine validated these assignments (Figure S8B). Diagnostic NLs also differentiated isomeric products as in the case of the reactions between PFOA and amines A31, A7, A17, and A81, which all lead to a product of m/z 499 (Figure 2B and Figure S9).

This information can also be used to guide LC-MRM analysis, which is typically used for PFAS detection and commonly depend on standards or databases, both of which can be limited. Four pooled reaction mixtures that could not be assigned by full-scan MS due to their isobaric products (Figure S9), were fully resolved and assigned once the transitions derived from HT-DESI-MS/MS were applied (Figure 2C). Additionally, as homologous PFCAs fragment similarly, MRM transitions defined for PFOA analogues can be transferred directly to all the PFCAs evaluated (Figure S10). For instance, the MS/MS spectrum of the PFOA analogs generated through reaction with N,N-dibutyl-1,3-propanediamine (DBPA, A35) showed two fragments (NL 129 Da and NL 157 Da) in HT-DESI-MS/MS. Implementing these same NLs for the other PFCAs as MRM transitions allows for the ten DBPA-derived products to be detected and assigned with high specificity without the need for any analytical standards (Figure S10). Thus, HT-DESI-MS/MS does not only provide online structural confirmation of the synthesized analogs but also gives immediately usable transitions for LC-MRM analysis, thus enabling standard-free retention time assignments for new molecules.

DESI-IMS-MS Evaluation of PFCA Derivatives

As a tool for synthesis and analysis, DESI can also be readily coupled to both IMS and MS, thereby introducing a gas-phase separation that precedes mass analysis and provides additional information on the shape or size of the ions. (69) When combined with MS, IMS enhances the resolution of complex mixtures making it particularly useful for nontargeted PFAS analysis. (22,27)

A total of 40 PFCA analogs, synthesized in situ via DESI, were selected for in depth characterization of their molecular properties via IMS and exact mass analysis (Table 1, Tables S2–S3 and Figures S11–S12). This set included all the DBPA-derived PFCAs together with 29 amine-derived PFOA analogues. The observed IMS drift times increased linearly with the PFCA chain length in the DBPA series (Figure S11), aligning with the expectation of larger collision cross sections corresponding to longer perfluoroalkyl chains. Importantly, for isomeric products, subtle structural differences generated measurable drift time shifts (Figure S12). For instance the drift time of the 1,3-bis(aminomethyl)cyclohexane (A10) derived product (3.17 ms) was found longer than that of the 2-(1-methylpiperidin-4-yl)ethanamine (A66) derived product (3.02 ms), reflecting the more extended geometry (i.e., larger cross-section) of the cyclohexyl core likely due to the rigid structure of the cycle and the presence of an additional substituent. Another interesting example is the (1-benzylpyrrolidin-3-yl)methanamine (A56) functionalized PFOA (m/z 587), which despite being heavier than the DBPA-derived PFOA analog (m/z 583) has a shorter drift time, illustrating how a compact conformation can offset the effect of the ion mass (Table 1). These observations demonstrate that coupling DESI-based microdroplet synthesis with IMS extends the experimental data set accessible via HT experiments from m/z and MS/MS fragmentation pattern to cross sections (which can be calculated with drift time calibration), an attribute that can be correlated with blood–brain-barrier permeability or incorporated into spectral libraries for nontargeted PFAS monitoring. (70)

Table 1.

Property Table for Products of PFOA Derivatives with Selected Amines. The full list can be found in Tables S2–S3.

Index Name Measured m/z Error (ppm) RT (min) DT (ms) EH-L (eV) μ (Debye)
A2 1,3-Diaminopropane 471.0548 −1.3 12.25 2.55 5.95 3.41
A18 N-Methylpropane-1,3-diamine 485.0708 −0.4 12.43 2.58 6.64 5.67
A13 1,3-Diamino-2-propanol 487.0500 −0.6 11.91 2.67 6.99 6.16
A25 N-(2-Hydroxyethyl)-1,3-propanediamine 515.0817 0.2 12.24 2.86 6.10 1.63
A24 2-(2-Aminoethylamino)-ethanol 501.0654 −1.2 12.11 2.77 5.78 4.60
A23 3-(Benzylamino)propylamine 561.1013 −1.8 13.87 3.36 5.78 3.12
A35 3-(Dibutylamino)propylamine 583.1811 0.9 15.06 3.70 5.51 4.64
A10 1,3-Bis(aminomethyl)cyclohexane 539.1133 −8.7 13.50 3.19 5.94 3.02
A66 2-(1-Methylpiperidin-4-yl)ethanamine 539.1173 −6.3 13.11 3.02 5.10 3.44
A65 (1-Benzyl-1,2,3,6-tetrahydropyridin-4-yl)methanamine 579.1450 −7.4 13.85 3.47 5.46 4.13
A68 1-Benzylpiperidin-4-amine 587.1131 −8.3 14.15 3.52 5.73 3.78
A56 (1-Benzylpyrrolidin-3-yl)methanamine 587.1173 −1.2 14.02 3.51 5.37 3.55

Note that for the unmodified PFOA, EH-L is 7.33 eV, and μ is 2.07 D. RT stands for retention time, and DT stands for drift time.

EH-L and μ Calculations

To complement the experimental descriptors, electronic properties such as EH-L and μ were computed for the selected set of 40 derivatives using Gaussian16 (Tables S2–S3 and Figure S13). These properties provide essential information about the polarity as well as the chemical and photochemical reactivity of the newly formed PFCA analogs. For the DBPA derivatives, μ increased markedly across the PFCA series whereas EH-L modestly decreased (Table S2). Further insights into the effect of structural differences on these electronic properties were obtained by comparing products of different amines with PFOA (Table 1 and Table S3). In general, the derivatized PFOAs exhibited higher μ and reduced EH-L than unmodified PFOA, however, minor structural modifications produced disproportionate electronic effects across the reaction products. For example, similar amine-derived products, such as A2, A13, and A18, which differ only by a methyl or hydroxyl group, displayed widely spaced μ values. Even when EH-L values were found nearly identical, a single −CH2– insertion (cf. A24 and A25) or a positional isomer change (cf. A21 and A22) altered μ appreciably. Note that the fact that the PFOA derivatives showed lower EH-L, especially those generated with amines containing aromatic groups (A56, A65, and A68), indicates greater chemical reactivity or easier electron transfer. Thus, these simulations have the potential to support the rational modification of PFAS toward specific physicochemical properties.

In summary, this study demonstrates that HT-DESI-MS/MS, together with LC-MRM, IMS, and computational modeling, can operate within a unified workflow that links rapid synthesis with multidimensional PFAS characterization. As shown, this combined approach, which can be expanded to diverse chemical space, (63) has the potential to accelerate the discovery of new analogs with specific properties, facilitate the construction of databases (25) for untargeted PFAS analysis of environmental samples, or even lead to the development and testing of remediation strategies such as precipitation (71) or photosensitization by chemical transformation. It is also worth noting that considering microdroplets, viz. aerosols, are of major importance in the environment, the accelerated reaction methodology presented here provides a system suitable for investigating environmentally relevant PFAS chemistry. (72,73)

Supplementary Material

Supporting Information

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) through the New Chemistries for Undrugged Targets through ASPIRE Collaborative Research Program (UH3 TR004139). N.M.M. and R.G.C. acknowledge support from the Purdue Institute for Cancer Research (NIH P30 CA023168). C.R.F. acknowledges support from Trask Innovation funding (FP80005237). The authors acknowledge the use of the High-Throughput DESIMS facility and the LC-MS platform at the Metabolite Profiling Facility (MPF) at the Bindley Biosciences Center, a core facility of the NIH-funded Indiana CTSI. The authors thank Myles Edwards for insightful discussions

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  • 1.Buck RC; Franklin J; Berger U; Conder JM; Cousins IT; De Voogt P; Jensen AA; Kannan K; Mabury SA; Van Leeuwen SP Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in the Environment: Terminology, Classification, and Origins. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 2011, 7 (4), 513– 541, DOI: 10.1002/ieam.258 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lindstrom AB; Strynar MJ; Libelo EL Polyfluorinated Compounds: Past, Present, and Future. Environ. Sci. Technol 2011, 45 (19), 7954– 7961, DOI: 10.1021/es2011622 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Kwiatkowski CF; Andrews DQ; Birnbaum LS; Bruton TA; DeWitt JC; Knappe DRU; Maffini MV; Miller MF; Pelch KE; Reade A; Soehl A; Trier X; Venier M; Wagner CC; Wang Z; Blum A Scientific Basis for Managing PFAS as a Chemical Class. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett 2020, 7 (8), 532– 543, DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.0c00255 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sonne C; Bank MS; Jenssen BM; Cieseielski TM; Rinklebe J; Lam SS; Hansen M; Bossi R; Gustavson K; Dietz R PFAS Pollution Threatens Ecosystems Worldwide. Science 2023, 379 (6635), 887– 888, DOI: 10.1126/science.adh0934 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zhou Y; Hu L-W; Qian Z; Geiger SD; Parrish KL; Dharmage SC; Campbell B; Roponen M; Jalava P; Hirvonen M-R; Heinrich J; Zeng X-W; Yang B-Y; Qin X-D; Lee YL; Dong G-H Interaction Effects of Polyfluoroalkyl Substances and Sex Steroid Hormones on Asthma among Children. Sci. Rep 2017, 7 (1), 899, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01140-5 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Evich MG; Davis MJB; McCord JP; Acrey B; Awkerman JA; Knappe DRU; Lindstrom AB; Speth TF; Tebes-Stevens C; Strynar MJ; Wang Z; Weber EJ; Henderson WM; Washington JW Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances in the Environment. Science 2022, 375 (6580), eabg9065 DOI: 10.1126/science.abg9065 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Fenton SE; Ducatman A; Boobis A; DeWitt JC; Lau C; Ng C; Smith JS; Roberts SM Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Toxicity and Human Health Re: Current State of Knowledge and Strategies for Informing Future Research. Environ. Toxicol. Chem 2020, 40 (3), 606– 630, DOI: 10.1002/etc.4890 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Rahman MF; Peldszus S; Anderson WB Behaviour and Fate of Perfluoroalkyl and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in Drinking Water Treatment: A Re. Water Res. 2014, 50, 318– 340, DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.045 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Giesy JP; Kannan K Global Distribution of Perfluorooctane Sulfonate in Wildlife. Environ. Sci. Technol 2001, 35 (7), 1339– 1342, DOI: 10.1021/es001834k [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Scheringer M; Trier X; Cousins IT; De Voogt P; Fletcher T; Wang Z; Webster TF Helsingør Statement on Poly- and Perfluorinated Alkyl Substances (PFASs). Chemosphere 2014, 114, 337– 339, DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2014.05.044 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Wang Z; Cousins IT; Scheringer M; Hungerbühler K Fluorinated Alternatives to Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl Carboxylic Acids (PFCAs), Perfluoroalkane Sulfonic Acids (PFSAs) and Their Potential Precursors. Environ. Int 2013, 60, 242– 248, DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2013.08.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Wang Z; Cousins IT; Scheringer M; Hungerbuehler K Hazard Assessment of Fluorinated Alternatives to Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl Acids (PFAAs) and Their Precursors: Status Quo, Ongoing Challenges and Possible Solutions. Environ. Int 2015, 75, 172– 179, DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2014.11.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Gomis MI; Vestergren R; Borg D; Cousins IT Comparing the Toxic Potency in Vivo of Long-Chain Perfluoroalkyl Acids and Fluorinated Alternatives. Environ. Int 2018, 113, 1– 9, DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.01.011 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Gaballah S; Swank A; Sobus JR; Howey XM; Schmid J; Catron T; McCord J; Hines E; Strynar M; Tal T Evaluation of Developmental Toxicity, Developmental Neurotoxicity, and Tissue Dose in Zebrafish Exposed to GenX and Other PFAS. Environ. Health Perspect 2020, 128 (4), 047005, DOI: 10.1289/EHP5843 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Pan Y; Zhang H; Cui Q; Sheng N; Yeung LWY; Sun Y; Guo Y; Dai J Worldwide Distribution of Novel Perfluoroether Carboxylic and Sulfonic Acids in Surface Water. Environ. Sci. Technol 2018, 52 (14), 7621– 7629, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b00829 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Mian MM; Zhu J; Jiang X; Deng S Recent Advances in Activated Carbon Driven PFAS Removal: Structure-Adsorption Relationship and New Adsorption Mechanisms. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng 2025, 19 (6), 78, DOI: 10.1007/s11783-025-1998-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Vakili M; Cagnetta G; Deng S; Wang W; Gholami Z; Gholami F; Dastyar W; Mojiri A; Blaney L Regeneration of Exhausted Adsorbents after PFAS Adsorption: A Critical Re. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2024, 471, 134429, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.134429 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Verma S; Lee T; Sahle-Demessie E; Ateia M; Nadagouda MN Recent Advances on PFAS Degradation via Thermal and Nonthermal Methods. Chemical Engineering Journal Advances 2023, 13, 100421, DOI: 10.1016/j.ceja.2022.100421 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Castracane E; Molnar BT; Lambert A; Harvey BG; Estevez JE; Fedick PW Improved Boron Nitride Nanomaterial Morphologies for the Enhanced Photocatalytic Remediation of Perfluorooctanoic Acid. Chemosphere 2025, 382, 144466, DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2025.144466 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Yin S; Calvillo Solís JJ; Sandoval-Pauker C; Puerto-Diaz D; Villagrán D Advances in PFAS Electrochemical Reduction: Mechanisms, Materials, and Future Perspectives. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2025, 491, 137943, DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.137943 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Tabatabaei M; Cho D-W; Fahad S; Jeong D-W; Hwang J-H Photocatalytic Innovations in PFAS Removal: Emerging Trends and Advances. Science of The Total Environment 2025, 980, 179567, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179567 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Kirkwood-Donelson KI; Dodds JN; Schnetzer A; Hall N; Baker ES Uncovering Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) with Nontargeted Ion Mobility Spectrometry–Mass Spectrometry Analyses. Sci. Adv 2023, 9 (43), eadj7048 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adj7048 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Newton SR; Bowden JA; Charest N; Jackson SR; Koelmel JP; Liberatore HK; Lin AM; Lowe CN; Nieto S; Godri Pollitt KJ; Robuck AR; Rostkowski P; Townsend TG; Wallace MAG; Williams AJ Filling the Gaps in PFAS Detection: Integrating GC-MS Non-Targeted Analysis for Comprehensive Environmental Monitoring and Exposure Assessment. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett 2025, 12 (2), 104– 112, DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00930 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kee KH; Seo JI; Kim SM; Shiea J; Yoo HH Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS): Trends in Mass Spectrometric Analysis for Human Biomonitoring and Exposure Patterns from Recent Global Cohort Studies. Environ. Int 2024, 194, 109117, DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.109117 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Liu Y; D’Agostino LA; Qu G; Jiang G; Martin JW High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry (HRMS) Methods for Nontarget Discovery and Characterization of Poly- and per-Fluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in Environmental and Human Samples. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry 2019, 121, 115420, DOI: 10.1016/j.trac.2019.02.021 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Charbonnet JA; McDonough CA; Xiao F; Schwichtenberg T; Cao D; Kaserzon S; Thomas KV; Dewapriya P; Place BJ; Schymanski EL; Field JA; Helbling DE; Higgins CP Communicating Confidence of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance Identification via High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett 2022, 9 (6), 473– 481, DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.2c00206 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Song X-C; Canellas E; Dreolin N; Goshawk J; Lv M; Qu G; Nerin C; Jiang G Application of Ion Mobility Spectrometry and the Derived Collision Cross Section in the Analysis of Environmental Organic Micropollutants. Environ. Sci. Technol 2023, 57 (51), 21485– 21502, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c03686 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Schymanski EL; Zhang J; Thiessen PA; Chirsir P; Kondic T; Bolton EE Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in PubChem: 7 Million and Growing. Environ. Sci. Technol 2023, 57 (44), 16918– 16928, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c04855 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Lauria MZ; Sepman H; Ledbetter T; Plassmann M; Roos AM; Simon M; Benskin JP; Kruve A Closing the Organofluorine Mass Balance in Marine Mammals Using Suspect Screening and Machine Learning-Based Quantification. Environ. Sci. Technol 2024, 58 (5), 2458– 2467, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.3c07220 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Shen Y; Wang L; Ding Y; Liu S; Li Y; Zhou Z; Liang Y Trends in the Analysis and Exploration of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) in Environmental Matrices: A Re. Critical Res in Analytical Chemistry 2024, 54 (8), 3171– 3195, DOI: 10.1080/10408347.2023.2231535 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Smolinski R; Koelmel JP; Stelben P; Weil D; Godri D; Schiessel D; Kummer M; Stow SM; Mohsin S; Royer L; McKenzie-Coe A; Lubinsky T; DeBord D; Chevallier O; Rennie EE; Godri Pollitt KJ; McDonough C FluoroMatch IM: An Interactive Software for PFAS Analysis by Ion Mobility Spectrometry. Environ. Sci. Technol 2025, 59 (13), 6636– 6648, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.4c13846 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Lutes D; Zhang J; Sethi L; Boyd A; Arnseth R; Ross I; Liu J Transformation of Polyfluoroalkyl Precursors in AFFF-Contaminated Concrete. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett 2025, 12, 747– 753, DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.5c00251 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Dodds JN; Hopkins ZR; Knappe DRU; Baker ES Rapid Characterization of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) by Ion Mobility Spectrometry–Mass Spectrometry (IMS-MS). Anal. Chem 2020, 92 (6), 4427– 4435, DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b05364 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Jiao Z; Taniyasu S; Yu N; Wang X; Yamashita N; Wei S Two-Layer Homolog Network Approach for PFAS Nontarget Screening and Retrospective Data Mining. Nat. Commun 2025, 16 (1), 688, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-025-56035-1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Forster ALB; Geiger TC; Pansari GO; Justen PT; Richardson SD Identifying PFAS Hotspots in Surface Waters of South Carolina Using a New Optimized Total Organic Fluorine Method and Target LC-MS/MS. Water Res. 2024, 256, 121570, DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2024.121570 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Figuière R; Miaz LT; Savvidou E; Cousins IT An Over of Potential Alternatives for the Multiple Uses of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances. Environ. Sci. Technol 2025, 59 (4), 2031– 2042, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.4c09088 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Mahoney H; Xie Y; Brinkmann M; Giesy JP Next Generation Per- and Poly-Fluoroalkyl Substances: Status and Trends, Aquatic Toxicity, and Risk Assessment. Eco-Environment & Health 2022, 1 (2), 117– 131, DOI: 10.1016/j.eehl.2022.05.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Licul-Kucera V; Frömel T; Kruså M; Van Wezel AP; Knepper TP Finding a Way out? Comprehensive Biotransformation Study of Novel Fluorinated Surfactants. Chemosphere 2023, 339, 139563, DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.139563 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Yang Y; Yang Z; Pang X; Cao H; Sun Y; Wang L; Zhou Z; Wang P; Liang Y; Wang Y Molecular Designing of Potential Environmentally Friendly PFAS Based on Deep Learning and Generative Models. Science of The Total Environment 2024, 953, 176095, DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176095 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Takáts Z; Wiseman JM; Gologan B; Cooks RG Mass Spectrometry Sampling Under Ambient Conditions with Desorption Electrospray Ionization. Science 2004, 306 (5695), 471– 473, DOI: 10.1126/science.1104404 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Cooks RG; Ouyang Z; Takats Z; Wiseman JM Ambient Mass Spectrometry. Science 2006, 311 (5767), 1566– 1570, DOI: 10.1126/science.1119426 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Morato NM; Cooks RG Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry: 20 Years. Acc. Chem. Res 2023, 56 (18), 2526– 2536, DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.3c00382 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Girod M; Moyano E; Campbell DI; Cooks RG Accelerated Bimolecular Reactions in Microdroplets Studied by Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Chem. Sci 2011, 2 (3), 501– 510, DOI: 10.1039/C0SC00416B [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Yan X; Bain RM; Cooks RG Organic Reactions in Microdroplets: Reaction Acceleration Revealed by Mass Spectrometry. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed 2016, 55 (42), 12960– 12972, DOI: 10.1002/anie.201602270 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Wei Z; Li Y; Cooks RG; Yan X Accelerated Reaction Kinetics in Microdroplets: Over and Recent Developments. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem 2020, 71 (1), 31– 51, DOI: 10.1146/annurev-physchem-121319-110654 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Lee JK; Nam HG; Zare RN Microdroplet Fusion Mass Spectrometry: Accelerated Kinetics of Acid-Induced Chlorophyll Demetallation. Q. Rev. Biophys 2017, 50, 1– 7, DOI: 10.1017/S0033583517000014 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.LaCour RA; Heindel JP; Zhao R; Head-Gordon T The Role of Interfaces and Charge for Chemical Reactivity in Microdroplets. J. Am. Chem. Soc 2025, 147 (8), 6299– 6317, DOI: 10.1021/jacs.4c15493 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Li J; Sun J; Wang Y; Liu J; Cheng H Spontaneous Catalytic Paal–Knorr Reactions for N -Substituted Pyrrole Synthesis by Microdroplet Chemistry. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng 2025, 13 (1), 571– 582, DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.4c08638 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Song X; Zang Q; Li C; Zhou T; Zare RN Immuno-Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry Imaging Identifies Functional Macromolecules by Using Microdroplet-Cleavable Mass Tags. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed 2023, 62, e202216969 DOI: 10.1002/anie.202216969 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Judd KD; Parsons SW; Eremin DB; Fokin VV; Dawlaty JM Visualizing Partial Solvation at the Air–Water Interface. Chem. Sci 2024, 15 (22), 8346– 8354, DOI: 10.1039/D4SC01311E [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Qiu L; Wei Z; Nie H; Cooks RG Reaction Acceleration Promoted by Partial Solvation at the Gas/Solution Interface. ChemPlusChem. 2021, 86 (10), 1362– 1365, DOI: 10.1002/cplu.202100373 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Xiong H; Lee JK; Zare RN; Min W Strong Electric Field Observed at the Interface of Aqueous Microdroplets. J. Phys. Chem. Lett 2020, 11 (17), 7423– 7428, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c02061 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Qiu L; Cooks RG Spontaneous Oxidation in Aqueous Microdroplets: Water Radical Cation as Primary Oxidizing Agent. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed 2024, 63 (17), e202400118 DOI: 10.1002/anie.202400118 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Logsdon DL; Li Y; Paschoal Sobreira TJ; Ferreira CR; Thompson DH; Cooks RG High-Throughput Screening of Reductive Amination Reactions Using Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Org. Process Res. Dev 2020, 24 (9), 1647– 1657, DOI: 10.1021/acs.oprd.0c00230 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Morato NM; Le MPT; Holden DT; Cooks RG Automated High-Throughput System Combining Small-Scale Synthesis with Bioassays and Reaction Screening. SLAS Technol. 2021, 26 (6), 555– 571, DOI: 10.1177/24726303211047839 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Sobreira TJP; Avramova L; Szilagyi B; Logsdon DL; Loren BP; Jaman Z; Hilger RT; Hosler RS; Ferreira CR; Koswara A; Thompson DH; Cooks RG; Nagy ZK High-Throughput Screening of Organic Reactions in Microdroplets Using Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry (DESI-MS): Hardware and Software Implementation. Anal. Methods 2020, 12 (28), 3654– 3669, DOI: 10.1039/D0AY00072H [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Morato NM; Holden DT; Cooks RG High-Throughput Label-Free Enzymatic Assays Using Desorption Electrospray-Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed 2020, 59 (46), 20459– 20464, DOI: 10.1002/anie.202009598 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kulathunga SC; Morato NM; Zhou Q; Cooks RG; Mesecar AD Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry Assay for Label-Free Characterization of SULT2B1b Enzyme Kinetics. ChemMedChem. 2022, 17 (9), e202200043 DOI: 10.1002/cmdc.202200043 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Morato NM; Brown HM; Garcia D; Middlebrooks EH; Jentoft M; Chaichana K; Quiñones-Hinojosa A; Cooks RG High-Throughput Analysis of Tissue Microarrays Using Automated Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. Sci. Rep 2022, 12 (1), 1– 10, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-22924-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Feng Y; Morato NM; Huang K-H; Lin M; Cooks RG High-Throughput Label-Free Opioid Receptor Binding Assays Using an Automated Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry Platform. Chem. Commun 2024, 60 (63), 8224– 8227, DOI: 10.1039/D4CC02346C [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Cooks RG; Feng Y; Huang K; Morato NM; Qiu L Re-Imagining Drug Discovery Using Mass Spectrometry. Isr. J. Chem 2023, 63 (7–8), e202300034 DOI: 10.1002/ijch.202300034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Huang K; Morato NM; Feng Y; Cooks RG High-Throughput Diversification of Complex Bioactive Molecules by Accelerated Synthesis in Microdroplets. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed 2023, 62 (22), e202300956 DOI: 10.1002/anie.202300956 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Huang K-H; Morato NM; Feng Y; Toney A; Cooks RG Rapid Exploration of Chemical Space by High-Throughput Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. J. Am. Chem. Soc 2024, 146 (48), 33112– 33120, DOI: 10.1021/jacs.4c11037 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Ghosh J; Morato NM; Feng Y; Cooks RG High-Throughput Drug Derivatization and Bioassay by Desorption Electrospray Ionization Mass Spectrometry. ChemPlusChem. 2025, 90, 2500164, DOI: 10.1002/cplu.202500164 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.O’Boyle NM; Banck M; James CA; Morley C; Vandermeersch T; Hutchison GR Open Babel: An Open Chemical Toolbox. J. Cheminform 2011, 3 (1), 33, DOI: 10.1186/1758-2946-3-33 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Halgren TA Merck Molecular Force Field. I. Basis, Form, Scope, Parameterization, and Performance of MMFF94. J. Comput. Chem 1996, 17 (5–6), 490– 519. [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Frisch MJ; Trucks GW; Schlegel HB; Scuseria GE; Robb MA; Cheeseman JR; Scalmani G; Barone V; Petersson GA; Nakatsuji H; Li X; Caricato M; Marenich AV; Bloino J; Janesko BG; Gomperts R; Mennucci B; Hratchian HP; Ortiz JV; Izmaylov AF; Sonnenber JL; Williams-Young D; Ding F; Lipparini F; Egidi F; Goings J; Peng B; Petrone A; Henderson T; Ranasinghe D; Zakrzewsk VG; Gao J; Rega N; Zheng G; Liang W; Hada M; Ehara M; Toyota K; Fukuda R; Hasegawa J; Ishida M; Nakajima T; Honda Y; Kitao O; Nakai H; Vreven T; Throssell K; Montgomery JA Jr.; Peralta JE; Ogliaro F; Bearpark MJ; Heyd JJ; Brothers EN.; Kudin KN; Staroverov VN; Keith TA; Kobayashi R; Normand J; Raghavachari K; Rendell AP; Burant JC; Iyengar SS; Tomasi J; Cossi M; Millam JM; Klene M; Adamo C; Cammi R; Ochterski JW; Martin RL; Morokuma K; Farkas O; Foresman JB; Fox DJ Gaussian 16; Gaussian, Inc.: Wallingford, CT, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Abraham JEF; Mumford KG; Patch DJ; Weber KP Retention of PFOS and PFOA Mixtures by Trapped Gas Bubbles in Porous Media. Environ. Sci. Technol 2022, 56 (22), 15489– 15498, DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.2c00882 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Dodds JN; Baker ES Ion Mobility Spectrometry: Fundamental Concepts, Instrumentation, Applications, and the Road Ahead. J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom 2019, 30 (11), 2185– 2195, DOI: 10.1007/s13361-019-02288-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Guntner AS; Thalhamer B; Klampfl C; Buchberger W Collision Cross Sections Obtained with Ion Mobility Mass Spectrometry as New Descriptor to Predict Blood-Brain Barrier Permeation by Drugs. Sci. Rep 2019, 9 (1), 19182, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-55856-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Maisto SK; Hong D; Griffith AJ; Fortner JD Simple, Green Pathway to Precipitate Perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) via Transformation to an Insoluble Ester. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett 2024, 11 (4), 364– 369, DOI: 10.1021/acs.estlett.4c00144 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Ge Q; Liu Y; Li K; Xie L; Ruan X; Wang W; Wang L; Wang T; You W; Zhang L Significant Acceleration of Photocatalytic CO2 Reduction at the Gas-Liquid Interface of Microdroplets. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed 2023, 62 (27), e202304189, DOI: 10.1002/anie.202304189 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Hsu S-H; Lin F-Y; Huang GG; Chang Y-P Accelerated Sulfur Oxidation by Ozone on Surfaces of Single Optically Trapped Aerosol Particles. J. Phys. Chem. C 2023, 127 (13), 6248– 6261, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jpcc.2c06831 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting Information

RESOURCES