Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) analysis is at the forefront of today’s most pressing environmental and regulatory challenges, with scientists under increasing pressure to deliver accurate, reproducible data for water, soil, food, and biological samples. Yet the presence of complex matrices—from wastewater and sludge to fish tissue and consumer products—makes PFAS detection and quantification far from straightforward.
In a recent webinar hosted by Separation Science in collaboration with PerkinElmer, Dr. Rainer Lohmann, a Professor at the University of Rhode Island’s Graduate School of Oceanography and Director of the URI-led Superfund Research Program Center on the Sources, Transport, Exposure and Effects of PFAS (STEEP), recently led a detailed technical session, “Experience Maximized Productivity for PFAS Analysis, Even with Complex Matrices.” This session leverages Lohmann's expertise to guide laboratories in overcoming matrix challenges, optimizing PFAS workflows, and ultimately enhancing productivity.
Laying the Foundation of PFAS Analysis
Lohmann begins by stressing that PFAS method design must balance robustness with efficiency. “We cannot treat PFAS analysis as a one-size-fits-all method. Each matrix presents its own set of interferences, and your workflow must adapt accordingly,” he explains. He emphasizes that reproducibility in PFAS testing depends on aligning sample preparation, instrument setup, and validation protocols.
“Productivity does not come from cutting corners—it comes from designing a workflow where every step reinforces confidence in the PFAS data.”
Challenges with Complex Matrices
Lohmann emphasizes that understanding the matrix's chemistry is crucial for accurate PFAS measurements, as it often poses the biggest challenge. Without this understanding, interactions between the matrix and analytes can lead to misinterpretation of the entire data set. Various interferences, including organic matter, suspended solids, and background contaminants, have the potential to distort PFAS measurements.
To illustrate, he describes a case study where a highly contaminated environmental sample contained so much organic matter and background noise that trace-level PFAS compounds were initially invisible. He explains how the team began to suspect matrix effects were obscuring critical PFAS signals, and that adjustments to preparation and extraction would be required to reveal the true picture. “On first pass, the results looked inconsistent. But once we applied cleanup protocols and adjusted extraction techniques, the data revealed the underlying PFAS spectrum.”
This case underscores how hidden matrix effects can fundamentally alter the picture, reinforcing the importance of vigilance and adaptability at every stage of PFAS analysis.
Practical Strategies for Productivity
Lohmann provides a roadmap for systematic optimization:
Sample preparation for PFAS: “Half of PFAS analysis is sample prep. If you neglect it, you double your troubleshooting later,” he cautions. Cleanup, concentration, and extraction protocols are non-negotiable for reliable outcomes.
Instrument configuration: Lohmann stresses validating instrument alignment, calibration with PFAS reference standards, and accounting for background contamination. “A stable baseline is your best insurance against wasted runs,” he notes.
Workflow efficiency in PFAS testing: Automating repeat steps and maintaining detailed logs prevents unnecessary repeats. “Document even the failed attempts. That’s how you avoid going in circles,” Lohmann advises.
Together, these steps form a structured foundation that allows laboratories to build PFAS methods that are both resilient and reproducible.
Troubleshooting and Case Studies
The webinar also explores common pitfalls. Lohmann shares an example where unexpected PFAS signal suppression appeared during routine runs, puzzling the analysts because calibration and setup seemed correct. A closer inspection revealed that background contamination from solvents had infiltrated, obscuring the target PFAS signals and skewing the results. “Sometimes the problem isn’t your method—it’s a contaminated reagent. Always rule out the simple causes before re-engineering the whole protocol,” he emphasizes, highlighting how easily unnoticed contamination can compromise data quality.
In another case, a series of multi-sample PFAS runs began to show unexplained retention shifts that threatened to derail the entire batch. Careful monitoring revealed that the drift was linked to fluctuating laboratory conditions, with temperature and humidity being the primary factors influencing instrument stability. By tightening environmental controls and maintaining a more stable room climate, the team was able to restore consistency. “Environmental conditions are often underestimated. PFAS analysis is sensitive—if the room is unstable, so are your results,” he explains.
Audience Q&A
The live Q&A highlighted recurring issues faced by labs. Questions focused on detecting trace PFAS, handling highly complex environmental samples, and minimizing operator variability. Lohmann responded by underscoring adaptability: “When you face a challenging sample, don’t force your standard workflow. Adjust it. Change the cleanup method, alter the extraction, or refine the measurement settings until the data makes sense.”
The Takeaway
The session drives home a clear message: productivity in PFAS analysis depends on methodical, adaptive workflows that integrate preparation, validation, and continuous troubleshooting. “Complex matrices are not roadblocks—they are tests of how well your workflow can adapt,” Lohmann concludes.
Watch the complete PFAS webinar for a more comprehensive understanding of technical details, method development strategies, and an in-depth look at the case studies.
Meet the Expert
Dr. Rainer Lohmann is a Professor at the University of Rhode Island’s Graduate School of Oceanography. He obtained a degree in Chemical Engineering and a Doctorate in Environmental Science. He is Director of the URI-led Superfund Research Program Center on the Sources, Transport, Exposure and Effects of PFAS (STEEP). His research focuses on the detection, bioaccumulation, transport, and fate of anthropogenic pollutants in the environment, often relying on passive samplers in the process. Since 2000, he has published more than 200 publications and book chapters.