Supplementary Content

Supplementary content

Behaviour of sartans (hypertension drugs) in wastewater treatment plants and their risk for the aquatic environment

Anne Bayer, Robert Asner, Walter Schüssler, Willi Kopf, Klaus Weiß, Manfred Sengl,

Marion Letzel

Analytical methods

MS-conditions for target analysis (result of automatic optimization by software Analyst 1.5,

Applied Biosystems) are given in Table S1 in detail. Results for direct injection and standard addition method are compared in Table S2.

Table S 1 MS-conditions for target analysis (1 = quantifier, 2 = qualifier)

cell exit collision declustering retention dwell time Precursor product potential energy potential time 20 msec m/z (M+H) ion CXP [V] CE [eV] DP [V] [min] candesartan 1 441.2 263 6 21 66 20.9 candesartan 2 441.2 207 10 41 66 20.9 eprosartan 1 425.2 207 16 37 81 15.2 eprosartan 2 425.2 107 6 77 81 15.2 eprosartan-d4 1 429.3 139 8 45 106 15.2 eprosartan-d4 2 429.3 111 6 79 106 15.2 irbesartan 1 429.3 207 16 35 101 18.8 irbesartan 2 429.3 180 12 59 101 18.8 irbesartan-d4 1 433.3 211 16 37 76 18.8 irbesartan-d4 2 433.3 195 14 31 76 18.8 losartan 1 423.2 207 4 35 81 19.1

1 losartan 2 423.2 180 12 57 81 19.1 olmesartan 1 447.3 207 12 39 81 15.2 olmesartan 2 447.3 180 16 57 81 15.2 olmesartan-d4 1 451.3 211 16 41 71 15.2 olmesartan-d4 2 451.3 180 14 85 71 15.2 telmisartan 1 515.3 497 28 51 126 18,5 telmisartan 2 515.3 276 2 67 126 18,5 telmisartan-d3 1 518.3 500 14 49 126 18,5 telmisartan-d3 2 518.3 279 8 73 126 18,5 valsartan 1 436.3 291 16 21 76 20.1 valsartan 2 436.3 306 8 21 76 20.1

Table S 2 Comparison of results for direct injection and standard addition methods

river water [ng L-1] wastewater [ng L-1]

direct standard addition direct standard addition injection method injection method

candesartan 85 73 600 600

eprosartan 42 56 2500 overflow

irbesartan 130 83 1200 1200

losartan <50 <50 400 400

olmesartan 370 350 1700 overflow

telmisartan <50 <50 650 750

valsartan <50 <50 60 <50

2 Monitoring

The different sampling sites of wastewater effluents and rivers in Bavaria, Germany, are described in detail in Table S3 and S4, respectively.

Table S 3 Sampling sites with population equivalents (PE) and a short description of the sewage treatment plants (STP), all with C and N elimination

STP PE Description of the STP

STP A 1,400,000 biological treatment

two-staged biological treatment, downstream sand filter, wastewater STP B 1,000,000 disinfection via UV-radiation between 15th April - 30th September

STP C 430,000 biological treatment, downstream filter

STP D 250,000 biological treatment, downstream sand filter

STP E 125,000 biological treatment

STP F 50,000 biological treatment

Table S 4 Sampling sites with a short characterisation of rivers including the proportion of treated municipal wastewater at average discharge assumed with a greater model

proportion of geographic catchment area average length treated municipal Cartesian River in Germany discharge [km] wastewater at coordinates (UTM) [km²] [m3 s-1] average discharge northing/easting

Ebrach 23 48 <1 7% 5326683/4499475

Regnitz 58 7,500 33 5% 5506049/4431254 site A

Regnitz 51.8 5% 5522519/4423938 site B

Wuerm 35 386 4.7 5% 5349781/4461098

Franconian Rezat site 64 376 0.7 3% 5451777/4419061 A 3 Franconian Rezat site 3% 5450540/4428127 B

Main 524 27,300 225 3% 5526196/4327351

Danube 2857 65,000 1,490 2% 5421027/4501128

Isar site A 259 7,965 22.7 5% 5363390/4483663

Isar site B 175 2% 5404149/4565117

not influenced by Wern 64 602 0.31 5546385/4369505 wastewater