Environmental Management

, Volume 61, Issue 1, pp 1–8 | Cite as

Are We Underestimating Microplastic Contamination in Aquatic Environments?

  • Jeremy L. Conkle
  • Christian D. Báez Del Valle
  • Jeffrey W. Turner
Article

Abstract

Plastic debris, specifically microplastic in the aquatic environment, is an escalating environmental crisis. Efforts at national scales to reduce or ban microplastics in personal care products are starting to pay off, but this will not affect those materials already in the environment or those that result from unregulated products and materials. To better inform future microplastic research and mitigation efforts this study (1) evaluates methods currently used to quantify microplastics in the environment and (2) characterizes the concentration and size distribution of microplastics in a variety of products. In this study, 50 published aquatic surveys were reviewed and they demonstrated that most (~80%) only account for plastics ≥ 300 μm in diameter. In addition, we surveyed 770 personal care products to determine the occurrence, concentration and size distribution of polyethylene microbeads. Particle concentrations ranged from 1.9 to 71.9 mg g−1 of product or 1649 to 31,266 particles g−1 of product. The large majority ( > 95%) of particles in products surveyed were less than the 300 μm minimum diameter, indicating that previous environmental surveys could be underestimating microplastic contamination. To account for smaller particles as well as microfibers from synthetic textiles, we strongly recommend that future surveys consider methods that materials < 300 μm in diameter.

Keywords

Plastic debris Polyethylene microbeads Aquatic environments Oceans Environmental loading 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Student support was provided by the Department of Homeland Security Science, Technology, Engineering & Math (DHS-STEM) Scholars from Universidad del Este-Carolina, Puerto Rico.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Supplementary material

267_2017_947_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (2.9 mb)
Supplementary Information

References

  1. Beach WJ (1972) Skin Cleaner. United States Patent U.S. Patent #3,645,904,Google Scholar
  2. Browne MA, Crump P, Niven SJ, Teuten E, Tonkin A, Galloway T, Thompson R (2011) Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines woldwide: sources and sinks. Environ Sci Technol 45:9175–9179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Browne MA, Dissanayake A, Galloway TS, Lowe DM, Thompson RC (2008) Ingested microscopic plastic translocates to the circulatory system of the mussel, Mytilus edulis (L). Environ Sci Technol 42:5026–5031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carr SA, Liu J, Tesoro AG (2016) Transport and fate of microplastic particles in wastewater treatment plants. Water Res 91:174–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cole M, Galloway TS (2015) Ingestion of nanoplastics and microplastics by Pacific Oyster larvae. Environ Sci Technol 49:14625–14632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cole M, Lindeque P, Halsband C, Galloway TS (2011) Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: a review. Mar Pollut Bull 62:2588–2597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cozar A et al. (2014) Plastic debris in the open ocean. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111:10239–10244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cozar A et al. (2015) Plastic accumulation in the Mediterranean sea. PLoS ONE 10:e0121762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davidson K, Dudas SE (2016) Microplastic ingestion by wild and cultured manila clams (Venerupis philippinarum) from Baynes sound, British Columbia. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 71:147–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davies RM, Ellwood RP, Davies GM (2003) The rational use of fluoride toothpaste. Int J Dent Hyg 1:3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eerkes-Medrano D, Thompson RC, Aldridge DC (2015) Microplastics in freshwater systems: a review of the emerging threats, identification of knowledge gaps and prioritisation of research needs. Water Res 75:63–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eriksen M et al. (2014) Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans: More than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS ONE 9:e111913CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farrell P, Nelson K (2013) Trophic level transfer of microplastic: Mytilus edulis (L.) to Carcinus maenas (L.). Environ Pollut 177:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Green DS (2016) Effects of microplastics on European flat oysters, Ostrea edulis and their associated benthic communities. Environ Pollut 216:95–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Green DS, Boots B, Sigwart J, Jiang S, Rocha C (2016) Effects of conventional and biodegradable microplastics on a marine ecosystem engineer (Arenicola marina) and sediment nutrient cycling. Environ Pollut 208:426–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hall NM, Berry KLE, Rintoul L, Hoogenboom MO (2015) Microplastic ingestion by scleractinian corals. Mar Biol 162:725–732CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hamer J, Gutow L, Kohler A, Saborowski R (2014) Fate of microplastics in the marine isopod Idotea emarginata. Environ Sci Technol 48:13451–13458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hoellein T, Rojas M, Pink A, Gasior J, Kelly J (2014) Anthropogenic litter in urban freshwater ecosystems: distribution and microbial interactions. PLoS ONE 9:e98485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jambeck JR et al. (2015) Marine pollution. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347:768–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Karami A, Golieskardi A, Keong Choo C, Larat V, Galloway TS, Salamatinia B (2017) The presence of microplastics in commercial salts from different countries. Sci Rep 7:46173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klein S, Worch E, Knepper TP (2015) Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in river shore sediments of the Rhine-Main area in Germany. Environ Sci Technol 49:6070–6076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kosuth M, Wattenberg EV, Mason SA, Tyree C, Morrison D (2017) Synthetic polymer contamination in global drinking water. Orb https://orbmedia.org/stories/Invisibles_plastics/multimedia
  23. Law KL, Moret-Ferguson S, Maximenko NA, Proskurowski G, Peacock EE, Hafner J, Reddy CM (2010) Plastic accumulation in the North Atlantic subtropical gyre. Science 329:1185–1188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee KW, Shim WJ, Kwon OY, Kang JH (2013) Size-dependent effects of micro polystyrene particles in the marine copepod Tigriopus japonicus. Environ Sci Technol 47:11278–11283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Leslie HA, Brandsma SH, van Velzen MJM, Vethaak AD (2017) Microplastics en route: Field measurements in the Dutch river delta and Amsterdam canals, wastewater treatment plants, North Sea sediments and biota. Environ Int 101:133–142Google Scholar
  26. Löder MGJ, Gerdts G (2015) Methodology used for the detection and identification of microplastics—a critical appraisal. In: Bergmann M, Gutow L, Klages M (eds) Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 201–227.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_8
  27. Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015 (2015) vol 114–114Google Scholar
  28. Napper IE, Bakir A, Rowland SJ, Thompson RC (2015) Characterisation, quantity and sorptive properties of microplastics extracted from cosmetics. Mar Pollut Bull 99:178–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pirc U, Vidmar M, Mozer A, Krzan A (2016) Emissions of microplastic fibers from microfiber fleece during domestic washing. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 23:22206–22211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. PlasticsEurope (2016) Plastics - the Facts 2016: an Analysis of European plastics production, demand and waste dataGoogle Scholar
  31. Rochman CM (2013) Plastics and priority pollutants: a multiple stressor in aquatic habitats. Environ Sci Technol 47:2439–2440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rochman CM, Cook AM, Koelmans AA (2016a) Plastic debris and policy: Using current scientific understanding to invoke positive change. Environ Toxicol Chem 35:1617–1626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rochman CM, Browne MA, Underwood AJ, van Franeker JA, Hompson RCT, Amaral-Zettler LA (2016b) The ecological impacts of marine debris: unraveling the demonstrated evidence from what is perceived. Ecology 97:302–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rochman CM et al. (2015a) Scientific evidence supports a ban on microbeads. Environ Sci Technol 49:10759–10761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rochman CM et al. (2015b) Anthropogenic debris in seafood: Plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish and bivalves sold for human consumption. Sci Rep 5:14340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ryan PG, Moore CJ, van Franeker JA, Moloney CL (2009) Monitoring the abundance of plastic debris in the marine environment. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 364:1999–2012Google Scholar
  37. Setala O, Fleming-Lehtinen V, Lehtiniemi M (2014) Ingestion and transfer of microplastics in the planktonic food web. Environ Pollut 185:77–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Talvitie J, Heinonen M, Paakkonen JP, Vahtera E, Mikola A, Setala O, Vahala R (2015) Do wastewater treatment plants act as a potential point source of microplastics? Preliminary study in the coastal Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea. Water Sci Technol 72:1495–1504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thompson RC, Moore CJ, vom Saal FS, Swan SH (2009) Plastics, the environment and human health: current consensus and future trends. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 364:2153–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Van Cauwenberghe L, Janssen CR (2014) Microplastics in bivalves cultured for human consumption. Environ Pollut 193:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. World Economic Forum (2016) The new plastics economy. Rethinking the future of plasticsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physical & Environmental SciencesTexas A&M University-Corpus ChristiCorpus ChristiUSA
  2. 2.School of Science and TechnologyUniversidad Del EsteCarolinaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Life SciencesTexas A&M University-Corpus ChristiCorpus ChristiUSA

Personalised recommendations