Microplastics Pollution: Scientists On The Road To Consensus

Microplastics (plastic particles smaller than <5 mm) are an ever-increasing problem around which discoveries of important and unpredicted consequences to society and nature are occurring at an accelerated pace [4]. Studies of microplastics pollution have flourished, helped by efficient science communication [5] until the issue reached policy/decision makers. Techniques to sample and characterize these pollutants in all environmental compartments have been also developed rapidly [6-9]. However, it is still difficult to establish a unique and standardized operation protocol [8].

Microplastics are present in soils, forest litter, sewage sludge, effluents, and all environmental compartments on the continents [15,16], which mainly, through the aquatic systems, become sources to the sea [17,18]. Plastic litter in the sea is a demographical, societal, and economic problem, and microplastics are part of it. We will not end the excess of plastics unless consistent evidence of its harm to the aquatic biota [20,21], especially food resources [22], emerges in a scientifically-proven and consistent way.

Always on my mind

In science, practical observations and measurements take place after questions arise under their simplest and clearest forms. Sampling strategies are crucial when answering scientific questions if they are to become relevant to society [1,2]. Considerable time must be invested in gathering previous information and tracing strategies for scientific knowledge, evolving into virtuous cycles towards pollution source control and mitigation of environmental passives [3]. Microplastics science is no different, and although it has evolved differently at many places around the globe, it will eventually need to be “checked” by peers in order to be validated and accepted as a real advance.

In the field

The marine environment functions according to processes that often follow cycles and/or gradients. Both must be accounted for when planning to study microplastics sources, distribution and fate at sea, thus becoming nearly impossible to answer all the pressing questions at once, or during a single-study effort. A project involves a series of pre-set steps, planning and sampling being the first two of them. Sampling means collecting representative portions of the environment (air, water, sediments, animals, and plants) and then isolating our analyte of interest (microplastics) from the “matrix.” Only then can microplastics be analyzed for confirmation of their composition and associated pollutants.

Each coastal or marine habitat will need a different and particular approach for sampling. Beaches, for example, can be approached from numerous points of view. Do you wish to know how many microplastics arrived with the last tide? Or whether there are microplastics burrowed in the sand? Or whether microplastics tend to accumulate at the backshore? Each of these questions will need a different strategy. In addition, if tidal cycles, seasons, and periods of time are to be considered, replication will also be necessary. Last, but not least, there is interest in investigating interactions between microplastics and the fauna and flora of beaches. Therefore, ecology knowledge and strategies will need to come into play simultaneously. The marine atmosphere, water column, and submerged marine sediments are also special and will need to be studied following techniques that follow the best possible consensus and strictest scientific protocols.

In the lab…

Microplastics quantification and characterization are subject to contamination from the environment and from the operator due to the ubiquity of synthetic polymers [24], and extreme care must be taken, especially as we intend to work with decreasing sizes of particles. Other steps, such as storage and sample cleaning, are also challenging as it always involves risks of contamination and microplastics alterations. The laboratory procedure is also a key feature in microplastics science, as laboratories have widely different working conditions. Therefore, each lab will have different capabilities and needs. To focus on a particular talent (fieldwork, chemical analysis, post-analysis data treatments, etc) is a possibility that encourages interactions with other groups with diverse cultures in order to collaborate when conducing microplastics research!

And finally, on our plates!

When microplastics interact with marine fauna and flora, resulting in detectable and quantifiable harm, their importance for marine conservation and society increase. Toxicological experiments demonstrated that interactions, as ingestion and desorption of pollutants, pose real dangers, especially for animals [21]. The present challenge is the demonstration of such harm in field studies, especially in more complex ecological contexts, as food webs [29-32]. Contaminated seafood (from both aquaculture and fisheries) [33] recently became one of the most important lines of microplastics studies [22]. Bivalves and fish contamination represent a threat to humans and will start to be mandatorily monitored after suitable sentinel organisms are judiciously elected [34]. Therefore, sound sampling, preserving, and examining methodologies must be developed to guarantee the accuracy of this crucial information.

Lessons for young scientists to take home

Microplastics quantification might have a wide reported variation, but the accuracy of sample design and choice of animal models must be highly valued [29,35,36], make ecological sense, and be coupled to environmental changes across time and space. Bearing in mind what microplastics are and how they behave may help in understanding their sources and sinks in the marine environment. Hence, a more ecologically-minded sample design and the addition of other variables will support data in describing habitats and processes involving microplastics are involved, including ecotoxicological effects.

These findings are described in the article entitled, “Sampling of micro(nano)plastics in environmental compartments: How to define standard procedures?” recently published in the journal Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health. This study was conducted by Monica F. Costa from the Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, and João Pinto de Costa and Armando C. Duarte from the University of Aveiro.

References:

1. Costa MF, Duarte AC: Microplastics sampling and sample handling. In Characterization and analysis of microplastics. Edited by da Rocha-Santos Teresa, da Costa Duarte Armando, Comprehensive analytical chemistry series, vol. 75. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2017:1–24, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.coac.2016.11.002.
2. Underwood AJ: Experiments in ecology – their logical design and interpretation using analysis of variance. 1997. Cambridge.
3. Widmer WM: A Importância da Abordagem Experimental para o Progresso da Gestão Costeira Integrada. Rev Gestão Costeira Integr 2009, 9:7–16, https://doi.org/10.5894/rgci142.
4. GESAMP: Sources, fate and effects of microplastics in the marine environment: A global assessment. In (IMO/FAO/ UNESCO-IOC/UNIDO/WMO/IAEA/UN/UNEP/UNDP Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection). Rep. Stud. GESAMP No. 90. Edited by Kershaw PJ; 2015:96.
5. Hidalgo-Ruz V, Thiel M: The contribution of citizen scientists to the monitoring of marine litter. In Marine anthropogenic litter. Springer International Publishing; 2015:429–447, https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_16.
6. Löder MGJ, Gerdts G: Methodology used for the detection and identification of microplastics—a critical appraisal. In Marine anthropogenic litter. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015:201–227, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_8.
7. Rocha-Santos T, Duarte AC: A critical overview of the analytical approaches to the occurrence, the fate and the behavior of microplastics in the environment. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 2014, 65:47–53, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2014.10.011.
8. Besley A, Vijver MG, Behrens P, Bosker T: A standardized method for sampling and extraction methods for quantifying microplastics in beach sand. Mar Pollut Bull 2017, 114(1): 77–83, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.08.055.
9. Coppock RL, Cole M, Lindeque PK, Queirós AM, Galloway TS: A small-scale, portable method for extracting microplastics from marine sediments. Environ Pollut 2017, 230:829–837, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.07.017.
10. Koelmans AA, Besseling E, Shim WJ: Nanoplastics in the aquatic environment. Critical review. In Marine anthropogenic litter. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015:325–340, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_12.
11. Costa JP, Santos PSM, Duarte AC, Rocha-Santos TA: (Nano) plastics in the environment – sources, fates and effects. Sci Total Environ 2016, 566–567:15–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. scitotenv.2016.05.041.
12. Bosker T, Behrens P, Vijverz MG: Determining global distribution of microplastics by combining citizen science and indepth case studies. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2017, 13(3): 536–541.
13. Cigliano JA, Meyer R, Ballard HL, Freitag A, Phillips TB, Wasser A: Making marine and coastal citizen science matter. Ocean Coast Manag 2015, 115:77–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ocecoaman.2015.06.012.
14. Underwood AJ, Chapman MG, Browne MA, Hobbs G, Lednev IK, Kurtz SM, et al.: Some problems and practicalities in design and interpretation of samples of microplastic waste. Anal Methods 2017, 9:1332–1345, https://doi.org/10.1039/C6AY02641A. 
15. Horton AA, Waltona A, Spurgeon DJ, Lahive E, Svendsen C: Microplastics in freshwater and terrestrial environments: Evaluating the current understanding to identify the knowledge gaps and future research priorities. Sci Total Environ 2017, 586: 127–141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.190.
16. Bläsing M, Amelung W: Plastics in soil: analytical methods and possible sources. Sci Total Environ 2018, 612:422–435, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.086.
17. McCormick AR, Hoellein TJ: Anthropogenic litter is abundant, diverse, and mobile in urban rivers: insights from cross ecosystem analyses using ecosystem and community ecology tools. Limnol Oceanogr 2016, 61(5):1718–1734.
18. Mahon AM, Officer R, Nash R, O’Connor I: Scope, fate, risks and impacts of microplastic pollution in Irish freshwater systems, (2014-HW-DS-2) – EPA final report. EPA RESEARCH PROGRAMME 2014–2020. Ireland: Published by the Environmental Protection Agency; 2017, ISBN 978-1-84095-705-1.
19. Acampora H, Newton S, O’Connor I: Opportunistic sampling to quantify plastics in the diet of unfledged Black Legged Kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla), Northern Fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis) and Great Cormorants (Phalacrocorax carbo). Mar Pollut Bull 2017, 119:171–174, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.04.016.
20. Cole M, Lindeque PK, Fileman E, Clark J, Lewis C, Halsband C, Galloway TS: Microplastics alter the properties and sinking rates of zooplankton faecal pellets. Environ Sci Technol 2016, https://pubs.acs.org/action/cookieAbsent. acs.est.5b05905.
21. EFSA-CONTAM Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain: Presence of microplastics and nanoplastics in food, with particular focus on seafood 2016, 14, https://doi.org/10.2903/ j.efsa.2016.4501.
22. Lima ARA, Barletta M, Costa MF: Seasonal distribution and interactions between plankton and microplastics in a tropical estuary. Estuar Coast Shelf Sci 5 November 2015, 165:213–225, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2015.05.018.
23. Cole M: A novel method for preparing microplastic fibers. Sci Rep 2016, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep34519.
24. Cole M, Webb H, Lindeque PK, Fileman ES, Halsband C, Galloway TS: Isolation of microplastics in biota-rich seawater samples and marine organisms. Sci Rep 2014, 4, https:// doi.org/10.1038/srep04528.
25. Wagner J, Rochman C, Gassel M: A novel method for the extraction and identification of microplastics in ocean trawl and fish Gut matrices. Anal Methods 2016.
26. Barrows APW, Neumann CA, Berger ML, Shaw SD: Grab vs. neuston tow net: a microplastic sampling performance comparison and possible advances in the field. Anal Methods 2016, https://doi.org/10.1039/C6AY02387H.
27. Mouneyrac C, Lagarde F, Châtel A, Khan FR, Syberg K, Palmqvist A: The role of laboratory experiments in the validation of field data. In Rocha-Santos Teresa, Duarte Armando, vol. 75. Elsevier; 2017, ISBN 9780444638984.
28. Ferreira GVB, Barletta M, Lima ARA, Dantas DV, Justino AKS, Costa MF: Plastic debris contamination in the life cycle of Acoupa weakfish (Cynoscion acoupa) in a tropical estuary. ICES J Mar Sci J 2016, https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsw108.
29. Lima ARA, Barletta M, Costa MF: Seasonal-dial shifts of ichthyoplankton assemblages and plastic debris around an equatorial atlantic archipelago. Front Environ Sci 2016, 4, https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2016.00056.
30. Lima ARA, Costa MF, Barletta M: Distribution patterns of microplastics within the plankton of a tropical estuary. Environ Res 2014, 132:146–155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2014.03.031.
31. Gusmão F, Domenico M, Amaral ACZ, Martínez A, Gonzalez BC, Worsaae K, Ivar do Sul JA, Lana PC: In situ ingestion of microfibres by meiofauna from sandy beaches. Environ Pollut 2016, 216:584–590.
32. Van Cauwenberghe L, Claessens M, Vandegehuchte MB, Janssen CR: Microplastics are taken up by mussels (Mytilus edulis) and lugworms (Arenicola marina) living in natural habitats. Environ Pollut 2015, 199:10–17, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.envpol.2015.01.008.
33. Fossi MC, Pedà C, Ferrer MC, Tsangaris C, Mascaró CA, Claro F, Ioakeimidis C, Galgani F, Hema T, Deuderod S, Romeo T, Battaglia P, Andaloro F, Caliani I, Casini S, Panti C, Baini M: Biondicators for monitoring marine litter ingestion and impacts on Mediterranean biodiversity. Environ Pollut 2017, 237: 1023-1040, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.019
34. Possatto FE, Barletta M, Costa MF, Ivar do Sul JA, Dantas DV: Plastic debris ingestion by marine catfish: an unexpected fisheries impact. Mar Pollut Bull 2011, 62:1098–1102, https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.01.036.
35. Rochman CM, Hoh E, Kurobe T, Teh SJ: Ingested plastic transfers hazardous chemicals to fish and induces hepatic stress. Sci. Rep 2013, 3, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03263.
36. Turra A, Manzano AB, Dias RJS, Mahiques MM, Barbosa L, Balthazar-Silva D, Moreira FT: Three-dimensional distribution of plastic pellets in sandy beaches: shifting paradigms. Sci Rep 2014a, 4, https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04435.
37. Hidalgo-Ruz V, Gutow L, Thompson RC, Thiel M: Microplastics in the marine environment: a review of the methods used for identification and quantification. Environ Sci Technol 2012, 46: 3060–3075, https://pubs.acs.org/action/cookieAbsent.
38. Masura J: Laboratory methods for the analysis of microplastics in the marine environment: recommendations for quantifying synthetic particles in waters and sediments. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS-OR&R-48. 2015.
39. Barletta M, Dantas DV: Environmental gradients. In Encyclopedia of estuaries. Edited by Kennish M, Springer; 2016: 237–242, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8801-4_136.
40. Zalasiewicz J, Waters CN, Ivar do Sul JA, Corcoran PL, Barnosky AD, Cearreta A, Edgeworth M, Gauszka A, Jeandel C, Leinfelder R, McNeill JR, Steffen W, Summerhayes C, Wagreich M, Williams M, Wolfe AP, Yonan Y: The geological cycle of plastics and their use as a stratigraphic indicator of the Anthropocene. Anthropocene 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.ancene.2016.01.002.