Dispersal of potentially pathogenic bacteria by plastic debris in Guanabara Bay, RJ, Brazil

Silva, Mariana Muniz; Maldonado, Gustavo Carvalho; Castro, Rebeca Oliveira; Felizardo, João Paulo de Sá; Cardoso, Renan Pereira; Anjos, R. M.; Araújo, Fábio Vieira de

doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.02.064

Cited by 113 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst this hinders our ability to draw large-scale conclusions, it offers an opportunity for researchers to ensure that future data collected in these areas are comparable and address these knowledge gaps. We were unable to confirm or reject the suggestions that plastics carry higher abundances of pathogenic hitchhikers, e.g., [23,30,64,[126][127][128], and/or antimicrobial resistance genes, e.g., [39], than control biofilms. We do note, however, that due to their recalcitrance and buoyancy plastics present a higher chance of carrying pathogens or antimicrobial resistance genes across greater distances than most natural surfaces.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 61%

“…Previous studies have indicated the presence of potentially pathogenic hitchhikers in the Plastisphere, e.g., [30,64,[125][126][127][128] however, other studies have found that potentially pathogenic species were actually higher in abundance on natural substrates, such as wood, e.g., [25]. Therefore, we investigated taxa that could potentially be pathogenic and that were more abundant on plastics than other samples.…”

Section: The Plastisphere Includes Potential Plastic Biodegraders Andmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Food or just a free ride? A meta-analysis reveals the global diversity of the Plastisphere

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now indisputable that plastics are ubiquitous and problematic in ecosystems globally. Many suggestions have been made about the role that biofilms colonizing plastics in the environment—termed the “Plastisphere”—may play in the transportation and ecological impact of these plastics. By collecting and re-analyzing all raw 16S rRNA gene sequencing and metadata from 2,229 samples within 35 studies, we have performed the first meta-analysis of the Plastisphere in marine, freshwater, other aquatic (e.g., brackish or aquaculture) and terrestrial environments. We show that random forest models can be trained to differentiate between groupings of environmental factors as well as aspects of study design, but—crucially—also between plastics when compared with control biofilms and between different plastic types and community successional stages. Our meta-analysis confirms that potentially biodegrading Plastisphere members, the hydrocarbonoclastic Oceanospirillales and Alteromonadales are consistently more abundant in plastic than control biofilm samples across multiple studies and environments. This indicates the predilection of these organisms for plastics and confirms the urgent need for their ability to biodegrade plastics to be comprehensively tested. We also identified key knowledge gaps that should be addressed by future studies.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 61%

Section: The Plastisphere Includes Potential Plastic Biodegraders Andmentioning

confidence: 97%

Food or just a free ride? A meta-analysis reveals the global diversity of the Plastisphere

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The surface of plastics might offer a protective niche and an ideal environment also for pathogenic microbial colonizers (Keswani et al, 2016), acting as a potential dissemination vehicle for the spreading of infectious diseases across the marine environment (Keswani et al, 2016;Quero and Luna, 2017;Silva et al, 2019). Specifically for fecal bacteria, plastics may favor their survival in the aquatic environment, offering protection from predation and sunlight, which strongly drive fecal bacterial decay in the aquatic environments (Wanjugi and Harwood, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Major Role of Surrounding Environment in Shaping Biofilm Community Composition on Marine Plastic Debris

Basili

Quero²,

Giovannelli³

et al. 2020

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plastic debris in aquatic environments is colonized by microbes, yet factors influencing biofilm development and composition on plastics remain poorly understood. Here, we explored the microbial assemblages associated with different types of plastic debris collected from two coastal sites in the Mediterranean Sea. All plastic samples were heavily colonized by prokaryotes, with abundances up to 1.9 × 10 7 cells/cm 2. Microbial assemblages on plastics significantly differed between the two geographic areas but not between polymer types, suggesting a major role of the environment as source for the plastisphere composition. Nevertheless, plastic communities differed from those in the surrounding seawater and sediments, indicating a further selection of microbial taxa on the plastic substrates. The presence of potential pathogens on the plastic surface reflected the levels of microbial pollution in the surrounding environment, regardless of the polymer type, and confirmed the role of plastics as carriers for pathogenic microorganisms across the coastal ocean, deserving further investigations.

show abstract

“…Other recent studies that have demonstrated that fecal indicator organisms prefer natural substrates such as stone, wood, and seaweed to MP (Miao et al, 2019; Quilliam et al, 2014). Fecal indicators are used as surrogates for monitoring for pathogens and there is a growing body of research to understand the possibility of MPs harboring pathogenic organisms and therefore serving as vectors for harmful microbes to be transported far from their sources (Silva et al, 2019). Potentially pathogenic microbial species such as Vibrio and Pseudomonas were identified in biofilms colonizing microplastic particles found in marine waters and freshwater, respectively (Kirstein et al, 2016; McCormick, Hoellein, Mason, Schluep, & Kelly, 2014; Parrish & Fahrenfeld, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because biofilm is well known to be more resistant to disinfection than planktonic organisms (Bridier, Briandet, Thomas, & Dubois‐Brissonnet, 2011; Kim, Pitts, Stewart, Camper, & Yoon, 2008; Lee, Kim, Kim, de Lannoy, & Lee, 2020), MP biofilms may allow for wastewater bacteria such as Escherichia coli and other fecal indicator organisms to bypass disinfection at a WWTP, as these organisms are known to form biofilms on natural particles as well as manmade particles (Fux, Costerton, Stewart, & Stoodley, 2005; Miao et al, 2019; Song et al, 2020). This may explain why fecal microbes were observed in MP biofilms far from wastewater effluent outfalls (Rodrigues, Oliver, McCarron, & Quilliam, 2019; Silva et al, 2019). Thus, there is some concern that MPs could serve as a vector for pathogenic microorganisms in the freshwater environment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Total coliform and Escherichia coli in microplastic biofilms grown in wastewater and inactivation by peracetic acid

Boni

Parrish

Patil

et al. 2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microplastics (MP) have been proposed as a vector for pathogenic microorganisms in the freshwater environment. The objectives of this study were (a) to compare the fecal indicator growth in biofilms on MP and material control microparticles incubated in different wastewater fractions and (b) to compare MP biofilm, natural microparticle biofilm, and planktonic cell susceptibility to disinfection by peracetic acid (PAA). Biofilms were grown on high‐density polyethylene, low‐density polyethylene, polypropylene MP, or wood chips (as a material control) and incubated in either wastewater influent or pre‐disinfection secondary effluent. Reactors were disinfected with PAA, biofilms were dislodged, and total coliform and Escherichia coli were cultivated. Fecal indicators were quantifiable in both MP and wood biofilms incubated in the wastewater influent but only on the wood biofilms incubated in secondary wastewater effluent. More total coliform grew in the wood biofilms than MP biofilms, and the biofilms grown on MP and woodchips were more resistant to disinfection than planktonic bacteria. Thus, it may be possible to refer to the disinfection literature for fecal indicators in biofilm on other particles to predict behavior on MP. Treatments that remove particles in general would help reduce the potential for fecal indicator bypass of disinfection. Practitioner points MP biofilm had lower concentrations of fecal indicators than wood biofilm Biofilm on MP was not more resistant to disinfection than wood biofilm Biofilms, regardless of substrate, were more resistant to disinfection than planktonic organisms

show abstract

Dispersal of potentially pathogenic bacteria by plastic debris in Guanabara Bay, RJ, Brazil

Cited by 113 publications

References 37 publications

Food or just a free ride? A meta-analysis reveals the global diversity of the Plastisphere

Food or just a free ride? A meta-analysis reveals the global diversity of the Plastisphere

Major Role of Surrounding Environment in Shaping Biofilm Community Composition on Marine Plastic Debris

Total coliform and Escherichia coli in microplastic biofilms grown in wastewater and inactivation by peracetic acid

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About