Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

A modular mechanistic framework for estimating exposure to SVOCs: Next steps for modeling emission and partitioning of plasticizers and PFAS

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology volume 32, pages 356–365 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Estimates of human exposure to semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) such as phthalates, phthalate alternatives, and some per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are required for the risk-based evaluation of chemicals. Recently, a modular mechanistic modeling framework to rapidly predict SVOC emission and partitioning in indoor environments has been presented, in which several mechanistically consistent source emission categories (SECs) were identified. However, not all SECs have well-developed emission models. In addition, data on model parameters are missing even for frequently studied SVOCs. These knowledge gaps impede the comprehensive prediction of the fate of SVOCs indoors. In this paper, sets of high-priority phthalates, phthalate alternatives, and PFAS were identified based on chemical occurrence indoors and additional selection criteria. These high-priority chemicals served as the basis for exploring model parameter availability for existing indoor SVOC emission and partitioning models. The results reveal that additional experimental and modeling work is needed to fully understand the behavior of SVOCs indoors and to predict exposures with greater confidence and lower uncertainty. Modeling approaches to fill some of the identified gaps are proposed. The prioritized sets of chemicals and proposed new modeling approaches will help guide future research. The inclusion of polar phases in the framework will further expand its applicability and scope.

Impact statement

This paper compiles data on high-priority chemicals commonly found indoors and information on the availability of applicable models and model parameters to predict emission, partitioning, and subsequent exposure to these chemicals. Modeling approaches for a selection of the missing SECs (source emission categories) are proposed, to illustrate the path forward. The comprehensive data set helps inform researchers, exposure assessors, and policy makers to better understand the state of the science regarding modeling of indoor exposure to semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Relative distribution of selection criteria points by chemical group.
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Search terms used for Google Scholar search engines are documented in Table S1 in the SI. Further details of the literature review of existing SVOC emission and partitioning models, as well as the equations and a full list of references, can be found in the SI. The complete versions of the lists of high-priority compounds can be found in a separate Excel spreadsheet in the SI.

References

  1. Kapraun DF, Wambaugh JF, Ring CL, Tornero-Velez R. Woodrow setzer R A method for identifying prevalent chemical combinations in the U.S. population. Environ Health Perspect. 2017;125:087017.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Salthammer T, Zhang Y, Mo J, Koch HM, Weschler CJ. Assessing human exposure to organic pollutants in the indoor environment. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2018;57:12228–63.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Egeghy PP, Sheldon LS, Isaacs KK, Özkaynak H, Goldsmith M-R, Wambaugh JF, et al. Computational exposure science: An emerging discipline to support 21st-Century risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124:697–702.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. OECD. Internationally harmonised functional, product and article use categories, 2017.

  5. NASEM. Using 21st-century science to improve risk-related evaluations: Washington, DC, 2017.

  6. Cohen Hubal EA, Wetmore BA, Wambaugh JF, El-Masri H, Sobus JR, Bahadori T. Advancing internal exposure and physiologically-based toxicokinetic modeling for 21st-century risk assessments. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2019;29:11–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thomas RS, Bahadori T, Buckley TJ, Cowden J, Deisenroth C, Dionisio KL, et al. The next generation blueprint of computational toxicology at the U.S. environmental protection agency. Toxicol Sci. 2019;169:317–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Krewski D, Andersen ME, Tyshenko MG, Krishnan K, Hartung T, Boekelheide K, et al. Toxicity testing in the 21st century: Progress in the past decade and future perspectives. Arch Toxicol. 2020;94:1–58.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Anastas P, Teichman K, Cohen Hubal E. Ensuring the safety of chemicals. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2010;20:395–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Eichler CMA, Cohen Hubal EA, Xu Y, Cao J, Bi C, Weschler CJ, et al. Assessing human exposure to SVOCs in materials, products and articles: A modular mechanistic framework. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55:25–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang C, Collins DB, Arata C, Goldstein AH, Mattila JM, Farmer DK, et al. Surface reservoirs dominate dynamic gas-surface partitioning of many indoor air constituents. Sci Adv. 2020;6:1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nazaroff WW, Weschler CJ. Indoor acids and bases. Indoor Air 2020; just accepted.

  13. ASTM. Standard Guide for Selecting Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) Emission Testing Methods to Determine Emission Parameters for Modeling of Indoor Environments. In: ASTM D8141-17. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International, 2017.

  14. ISO. 16000-6 Indoor air -- Part 6: Determination of volatile organic compounds in indoor and test chamber air by active sampling on Tenax TA sorbent, thermal desorption and gas chromatography using MS or MS-FID. In: 1304020 - Ambient atmospheres: International Organization for Standardization, 2011.

  15. WHO. Indoor air quality: Organic pollutants. World Health Organization: Copenhagen, NL, 1989.

  16. Weschler CJ, Salthammer T, Fromme H. Partitioning of phthalates among the gas phase, airborne particles and settled dust in indoor environments. Atmos Environ. 2008;42:1449–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Donahue NM, Kroll JH, Pandis SN, Robinson AL. A two-dimensional volatility basis set – Part 2: Diagnostics of organic-aerosol evolution. Atmos Chem Phys. 2012;12:615–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu Z, Little JC. Semivolatile organic compounds (SVOCs): phthalates and flame retardants. In: Pacheco-Torgal F, Jalali S, Fucic A (eds). Toxicity of Building Material; https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-85709-122-2.50017-6. Woodhead Publishing Limited: Philadelphia, PA, 2012, pp 122–37.

  19. Weschler CJ. Changes in indoor pollutants since the 1950s. Atmos Environ. 2009;43:153–69.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW. Semivolatile organic compounds in indoor environments. Atmos Environ. 2008;42:9018–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW. Growth of organic films on indoor surfaces. Indoor Air. 2017;27:1101–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tang X, Misztal PK, Nazaroff WW, Goldstein AH. Siloxanes are the most abundant volatile organic compound emitted from engineering students in a classroom. Environ Sci Techol Lett. 2015;2:303–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Duncan SM, Sexton KG, Turpin BJ. Oxygenated VOCs, aqueous chemistry, and potential impacts on residential indoor air composition. Indoor Air. 2018;28:198–212.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Adams RI, Lymperopoulou DS, Misztal PK, De Cassia Pessotti R, Behie SW, Tian Y, et al. Microbes and associated soluble and volatile chemicals on periodically wet household surfaces. Microbiome. 2017;5:1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Farmer DK, Vance ME, Abbatt JPD, Abeleira A, Alves MR, Arata C et al. Overview of HOMEChem: House observations of microbial and environmental chemistry. Environ Sci: Process Impacts 2019;21:1280–1300.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Hodas N, Loh M, Shin H-M, Li D, Bennett D, McKone TE, et al. Indoor inhalation intake fractions of fine particulate matter: Review of influencing factors. Indoor Air. 2016;26:836–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hodas N, Turpin BJ. Shifts in the gas-particle partitioning of ambient organics with transport into the indoor environment. Aerosol Sci Technol. 2014;48:271–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Xu Y, Zhang J. Understanding SVOCs. ASHRAE J. 2011;53:121–25.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zhang X, Arnot JA, Wania F. Model for screening-level assessment of near-field human exposure to neutral organic chemicals released indoors. Environ Sci Technol. 2014;48:12312–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Li L, Arnot JA, Wania F. How are humans exposed to organic chemicals released to indoor air? Environ Sci Technol. 2019;53:11276–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lakey PSJ, Eichler CMA, Wang C, Little JC, Shiraiwa M. Kinetic multi-layer model of film formation, growth, and chemistry (KM-FILM): Boundary layer processes, multi-layer adsorption, bulk diffusion, and heterogeneous reactions. Indoor Air 2021; Early View.

  32. Jaakkola JJ, Parise H, Kislitsin V, Lebedeva NI, Spengler JD. Asthma, wheezing, and allergies in Russian schoolchildren in relation to new surface materials in the home. Am J Public Health. 2004;94:560–2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Matsumoto M, Hirata-Koizumi M, Ema M. Potential adverse effects of phthalic acid esters on human health: A review of recent studies on reproduction. Regul Toxicol Pharm. 2008;50:37–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Schossler P, Schripp T, Salthammer T, Bahadir M. Beyond phthalates: Gas phase concentrations and modeled gas/particle distribution of modern plasticizers. Sci Total Environ. 2011;409:4031–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Eichler CMA, Little JCA. Framework to model exposure to Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances in indoor environments. Environ Sci: Process Impacts. 2020;22:500–11.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sunderland EM, Hu XC, Dassuncao C, Tokranov AK, Wagner CC, Allen JG. A review of the pathways of human exposure to poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and present understanding of health effects. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2019;29:131–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sznajder-Katarzynska K, Surma M, Cieslik IA. Review of Perfluoroalkyl Acids (PFAAs) in terms of sources, applications, human exposure, dietary intake, toxicity, legal regulation, and methods of determination. J Chem. 2019;2019:1–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang Z, DeWitt JC, Higgins CP, Cousins ITA. Never-Ending Story of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs)? Environ Sci Technol. 2017;51:2508–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Bălan SA, Mathrani VC, Guo DF, Algazi AM. Regulating PFAS as a chemical class under the California safer consumer products program. Environ Health Perspect. 2021;129:025001.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. USEPA. Phthalates Action Plan. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2012.

  41. OECD. Prioritisation of chemicals using the integrated approaches for testing and assessment (IATA)-based ecological risk classification. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2018.

  42. USEPA. Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List (CCL) and Regulatory Determination. In: US Environmental Protection Agency, 2021.

  43. Patlewicz G, Richard AM, Williams AJ, Grulke CM, Sams R, Lambert J, et al. A chemical category-based prioritization approach for selecting 75 Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) for tiered toxicity and toxicokinetic testing. Environ Health Perspect. 2019;127:014501:014501–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Liang Y, Bi C, Wang X, Xu Y. A general mechanistic model for predicting the fate and transport of phthalates in indoor environments. Indoor Air. 2019;29:55–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Xu Y, Little JC. Predicting emissions of SVOCs from polymeric materials and their interaction with airborne particles. Environ Sci Technol. 2006;40:456–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Little JC, Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW, Liu Z, Cohen Hubal EA. Rapid methods to estimate potential exposure to semivolatile organic compounds in the indoor environment. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46:11171–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Eichler CMA, Wu Y, Cao J, Shi S, Little JC. Equilibrium relationship between SVOCs in PVC products and the air in contact with the product. Environ Sci Technol. 2018;52:2918–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Salthammer T, Schripp T. Application of the Junge- and Pankow-equation for estimating indoor gas/particle distribution and exposure to SVOCs. Atmos Environ. 2015;106:467–76.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Ahrens L, Harner T, Shoeib M, Lane DA, Murphy JG. Improved characterization of gas-particle Partitioning for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances in the atmosphere using annular diffusion denuder samplers. Environ Sci Technol. 2012;46:7199–206.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Licina D, Morrison GC, Bekö G, Weschler CJ, Nazaroff WW. Clothing-mediated exposures to chemicals and particles. Environ Sci Technol. 2019;53:5559–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Cordner A, Goldenman G, Birnbaum LS, Brown P, Miller MF, Mueller R, et al. The true cost of PFAS and the benefits of acting now. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55:9630–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Arp HPH, Goss K-U. Gas/Particle partitioning behavior of Perfluorocarboxylic Acids with terrestrial aerosols. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43:8542–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Winkens K, Giovanoulis G, Koponen J, Vestergren R, Berger U, Karvonen AM, et al. Perfluoroalkyl acids and their precursors in floor dust of children’s bedrooms – Implications for indoor exposure. Environ Int. 2018;119:493–502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Shoeib M, Harner T, Wilford BH, Jones KC, Zhu J. Perfluorinated Sulfonamides in indoor and outdoor air and indoor dust: occurrence, partitioning, and human exposure. Environ Sci Technol. 2005;39:6599–606.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Pellizzari ED, Woodruff TJ, Boyles RR, Kannan K, Beamer PI, Buckley JP, et al. Identifying and prioritizing chemicals with uncertain burden of exposure: Opportunities for biomonitoring and health-related research. Environ Health Perspect. 2019;127:126001:126004–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Cao J, Zhang X, Zhang Y. Predicting dermal exposure to gas-phase Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs): A further study of SVOC mass transfer between clothing and skin surface lipids. Environ Sci Technol. 2018;52:4676–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. WHO. Environmental Health Criteria 235: Dermal absorption, 2006.

  58. USEPA. Chapter 7 - Dermal Exposure Factors. In: Exposure Factors Handbook. US Environmental Protection Agency, 2011.

  59. Pelletier M, Bonvallot N, Ramalho O, Blanchard O, Mercier F, Mandin C, et al. Dermal absorption of semivolatile organic compounds from the gas phase: Sensitivity of exposure assessment by steady state modeling to key parameters. Environ Int. 2017;102:106–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Garrido JA, Parthasarathy S, Moschet C, Young TM, McKone TE, Bennett DH. Exposure assessment for air-to-skin uptake of Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SVOCs) indoors. Environ Sci Technol. 2019;53:1608–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Morrison G, Li H, Mishra S, Buechlein M. Airborne phthalate partitioning to cotton clothing. Atmos Environ. 2015;115:149–52.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Morrison GC, Weschler CJ, Beko G. Dermal uptake of phthalates from clothing: Comparison of model to human participant results. Indoor Air. 2017;27:642–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ernstoff AS, Fantke P, Csiszar SA, Henderson AD, Chung S, Jolliet O. Multi-pathway exposure modeling of chemicals in cosmetics with application to shampoo. Environ Int. 2016;92–93:87–96.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Csiszar SA, Ernstoff AS, Fantke P, Jolliet O. Stochastic modeling of near-field exposure to parabens in personal care products. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2017;27:152–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Kristensen K, Lunderberg DM, Liu Y, Misztal PK, Tian Y, Arata C, et al. Sources and dynamics of semivolatile organic compounds in a single‐family residence in northern California. Indoor Air. 2019;29:645–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Petry T, Vitale D, Joachim FJ, Smith B, Cruse L, Mascarenhas R, et al. Human health risk evaluation of selected VOC, SVOC and particulate emissions from scented candles. Regul Toxicol Pharm. 2014;69:55–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Raju MP, T’Ien JS. Modelling of candle burning with a self-trimmed wick. Combust Theory Model. 2008;12:367–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Buck RC, Franklin J, Berger U, Conder JM, Cousins IT, de Voogt P, et al. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the environment: terminology, classification, and origins. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2011;7:513–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Net S, Sempéré R, Delmont A, Paluselli A, Ouddane B. Occurrence, fate, behavior and ecotoxicological state of phthalates in different environmental matrices. Environ Sci Technol. 2015;49:4019–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Nazaroff WW, Weschler CJ. Indoor acids and bases. Indoor Air. 2020;30:559–644.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Schwarzenbach RP, Gschwend PM, Imboden DM. Environmental Organic Chemistry, 3rd Edition. 2016.

  72. Bi C, Wang X, Li H, Li X, Xu Y. Direct transfer of phthalate and alternative plasticizers from indoor source products to dust: Laboratory measurements and predictive modeling. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55:341–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Kang L, Wu S, Liu K, Wang X, Zhou X. Direct and non-direct transfer of phthalate esters from indoor sources to settled dust: Model analysis. Building Environ. 2021;202:108012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank John Bucher at the National Toxicology Program (NTP) for his support and valuable insights.

Funding

Funding for this work was provided by the National Toxicology Program (NTP). CMAE also acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation (NSF) Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Virginia Tech, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Blacksburg, VA, USA

    Clara M. A. Eichler, Chenyang Bi, Chunyi Wang & John C. Little

  2. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Chapel Hill, NC, USA

    Clara M. A. Eichler

Authors
  1. Clara M. A. Eichler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chenyang Bi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chunyi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John C. Little
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CMAE was responsible for designing and managing the project, conducting the literature reviews concerning PFAS, writing the manuscript, and creating the tables, spreadsheets, and Fig. 1. CB was responsible for conducting the literature reviews concerning phthalates and phthalate alternatives, contributing to the manuscript, and developing the models and Fig. 2. CW provided feedback to the literature reviews. JCL was responsible for acquisition of funding, provided feedback during all stages of the project and contributed to the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clara M. A. Eichler.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required for this study because the compiled and analyzed data originated only from published scientific research articles or from freely available sources.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eichler, C.M.A., Bi, C., Wang, C. et al. A modular mechanistic framework for estimating exposure to SVOCs: Next steps for modeling emission and partitioning of plasticizers and PFAS. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 32, 356–365 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-022-00419-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-022-00419-8

Keywords

Search

Advanced search

Quick links