Combining Nontargeted Analysis with Computer-Based Hazard Comparison Approaches to Support Prioritization of Unregulated Organic Contaminants in Biosolids.

Biosolids are a byproduct of wastewater treatment that can be beneficially applied to agricultural land as a fertilizer. While U.S. regulations limit metals and pathogens in biosolids intended for land applications, no organic contaminants are currently regulated. Novel techniques can aid in detection, evaluation, and prioritization of biosolid-associated organic contaminants (BOCs). For example, nontargeted analysis (NTA) can detect a broad range of chemicals, producing data sets representing thousands of measured analytes that can be combined with computational toxicological tools to support human and ecological hazard assessment and prioritization. We combined NTA with a computer-based tool from the U.S. EPA, the Cheminformatics Hazard Comparison Module (HCM), to identify and prioritize BOCs present in U.S. and Canadian biosolids (n = 16). Four-hundred fifty-one features were detected in at least 80% of samples, with identities of 92 compounds confirmed or assigned probable structures. These compounds were primarily categorized as endogenous compounds, pharmaceuticals, industrial chemicals, and fragrances. Examples of top prioritized compounds were p-cresol and chlorophene, based on human health end points, and fludioxonil and triclocarban, based on ecological health end points. Combining NTA results with hazard comparison data allowed us to prioritize compounds to be included in future studies of the environmental fate and transport of BOCs.

Establishing performance metrics for quantitative non-targeted analysis: a demonstration using per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

Non-targeted analysis (NTA) is an increasingly popular technique for characterizing undefined chemical analytes. Generating quantitative NTA (qNTA) concentration estimates requires the use of training data from calibration "surrogates," which can yield diminished predictive performance relative to targeted analysis. To evaluate performance differences between targeted and qNTA approaches, we defined new metrics that convey predictive accuracy, uncertainty (using 95% inverse confidence intervals), and reliability (the extent to which confidence intervals contain true values). We calculated and examined these newly defined metrics across five quantitative approaches applied to a mixture of 29 per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). The quantitative approaches spanned a traditional targeted design using chemical-specific calibration curves to a generalizable qNTA design using bootstrap-sampled calibration values from "global" chemical surrogates. As expected, the targeted approaches performed best, with major benefits realized from matched calibration curves and internal standard correction. In comparison to the benchmark targeted approach, the most generalizable qNTA approach (using "global" surrogates) showed a decrease in accuracy by a factor of ~4, an increase in uncertainty by a factor of ~1000, and a decrease in reliability by ~5%, on average. Using "expert-selected" surrogates (n = 3) instead of "global" surrogates (n = 25) for qNTA yielded improvements in predictive accuracy (by ~1.5×) and uncertainty (by ~70×) but at the cost of further-reduced reliability (by ~5%). Overall, our results illustrate the utility of qNTA approaches for a subclass of emerging contaminants and present a framework on which to develop new approaches for more complex use cases.