"Experiment 3. Male and female white‐footed mice were exposed daily to 6:2 FTS (9/sex/dose), PFNA (9/sex/dose), or PFHxS (6–9/sex/dose) via oral gavage for 28 consecutive days. Solutions of 0.25, 1.0, and 2.0 mg/mL were prepared for 6:2 FTS and PFNA and corresponded to 2.5, 10, and 20 mg/kg‐d (see Supplemental Data)... Solutions/suspensions were stored at room temperature and prepared every 2 wk."

"Representative 6:2 FTS dosing solutions were verified via LC‐MS/MS by 3M. Dosing solutions with a reported recovery of 70 to 130% of nominal concentrations are reported as nominal. Those with a reported recovery below the 70% threshold criteria are reported as actual concentrations... In addition, suspect screening analysis was performed to determine occurrence of contaminants in the 6:2 FTS dosing solutions by the Colorado School of Mines via liquid chromatography‐quadrupole timeof‐flight‐mass spectrometry (LC‐QTOF‐MS). The suspect screening analysis involved using an in‐house PFAS extracted ion chromatogram (XIC) list that contained 1742 PFAS and an in‐house PFAS high‐resolution mass spectrometry (HR‐MS) spectral library that contained 416 PFAS and 815 spectra. The level of confidence in identification was based on the following criteria: authentic standard verification, spectral library match (>70%), mass error (<5 ppm), retention time (>3.5 min), and isotope ratio difference (<20%)." ...

"Analytical verification of dosing solutions. Comparison of the measured concentrations of 6:2 FTS in solution to the nominal concentrations revealed 72% accuracy for the solution 0.25 mg/mL 6:2 FTS, approximately 58 to 65% accuracy for 1mg/mL 6:2 FTS and approximately 60 to 62% accuracy for 2mg/mL 6:2 FTS at days 9 and 29 (see Supplemental Data). Notably, the quantified concentrations of 4:2 and 8:2 FTS were 3 times greater than that of 6:2 FTS (see Supplemental Data)...Therefore, the doses administered in experiment 3 were 2.5, 6, and 12.5 mg/kg/d 6:2 FTS..."

Female White-Footed Mice