Fulmar Litter EcoQO monitoring in the Netherlands : Update 2017

Franeker, J.A. van; Kühn, Susanne

doi:10.18174/458857

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 76 publications

(88 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In vergelijking met op de Nederlandse kust gevonden noordse stormvogels (van Franeker & Kühn, 2018) hebben de zeekoeten van de massasterfte na het MSC Zoe incident slechts kleine hoeveelheden plastic in het maagdarmstelsel en lijkt een directe relatie met sterfte op individueel niveau hoogst onwaarschijnlijk.…”

Section: Resultatenunclassified

De Zoe en de zeekoet : een onderzoek naar de doodsoorzaak en de herkomst van de zeekoeten die massaal strandden op de Nederlandse kust in januari en februari 2019

Leopold¹,

Kik²,

Tulden³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultatenunclassified

De Zoe en de zeekoet : een onderzoek naar de doodsoorzaak en de herkomst van de zeekoeten die massaal strandden op de Nederlandse kust in januari en februari 2019

Leopold¹,

Kik²,

Tulden³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, a predominance of immatures or adults could bias sample averages higher or lower, respectively, so the inclusion of demographic profiles are recommended for spatiotemporal comparisons [1,10]. The significance of demography was highlighted by a recent analysis of a 17-year data series from the North Sea that indicated the percent of fulmar adults in yearly samples added significantly to a model of a decreasing temporal trend in a proxy for plastic mass in stomachs [6,9,10]. This appears to indicate plastic loads were related to the percent of adults in pooled samples, confirming general conclusions [10].…”

Section: Demographics Of Fulmar Plastic Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Noting the constraints on ventricular loads and that adults contain less plastic than immatures [1,9,13,15,26,27], we surmised that the difference in the amount of proventricular plastic in pooled samples accounts for much of the variation in loads and the difference between age groups.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Plastic found in stomachs of dead seabirds has been used as a bioindicator of spatiotemporal trends in plastic pollution [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Although finding stomach plastic is now the norm in some seabird species (e.g., Northern Fulmar, Fulmarus glacialis), surprisingly little is known about dynamics of ingestion, retention, and elimination [3,[11][12][13][14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Demographic Differences in the Quantity, Mass, and Anatomical Location of Ingested Plastic in Northern Fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis): A Review and Reconsideration of NE Pacific Ocean Samples

Shugart¹,

Nania²

2021

AEER

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the Washington and Oregon coast of the NE Pacific Ocean from 2008-2015, we found that juveniles represented 83% of Northern Fulmars that were beached. In comparison to older birds, juveniles averaged more mass and pieces of plastic in stomachs. This reflected relatively larger plastic loads in the cranial stomach section, the proventriculus, which we found was associated with relatively large accumulations in the caudal stomach section, the ventriculus. We estimate that the proventriculus could retain almost 10 times as much plastic as the ventriculus and that retention of proventricular plastic largely accounted for the difference in juveniles versus older birds. Our findings contrast with published Atlantic Ocean reports where the proportion of immatures was lower and plastic was retained mostly in ventriculi. The differences in demography and gastric distribution between NE Pacific and Atlantic fulmars may reflect the different sizes of plastic particles that were available. The preponderance of juveniles in NE Pacific Ocean samples and associated relatively large plastic loads overestimate the load for the species. Without accounting for age and gastric distribution, comparison to other regions is ill-advised. An unrecognized complication in stomach-based sampling is that differences in size of plastic at spatiotemporal scales could affect the utility of stomach samples as bioindicators of oceanic plastic pollution.

show abstract

“…The impacts of meso-or macroplastics have been reviewed for numerous marine species; particularly mammals, birds or turtles (Laist 1997, Derraik 2002, Gall and Thompson 2015. Encounters between organisms and macroplastic litter can negatively affect individuals, and a substantial proportion of some populations; for example, over 40% of sperm whales beached on North Sea coasts had marine litter including, ropes, foils and packaging material found in their gastro-intestinal tract (Unger et al 2016), while over 95% of the population of norther fulmars (Fulmar glacialis) may contain plastic litter in some European waters (Van Franeker et al 2016). Even though the data on impacts form macroitems of plastic debris is relatively extensive scaling up evidence from impacts on individuals to population-level consequences is challenging, since it is almost impossible to isolate the effects of plastic debris.…”

Section: Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microplastics in the Environment

Thompson¹,

Napper²

2018

Plastics and the Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microplastics are small pieces of plastic debris <5 mm in diameter. These particles have accumulated in the environment as a consequence of: the direct release of small particles; such as those used in cosmetics; or as a consequence of wear, for example fibres released from textiles. The main source of microplastic is considered to be the fragmentation of larger items of plastics in the environment. Microplastics are widely distributed in freshwater and marine environments including remote locations such as the arctic and deep sea. A wide range of organisms are known to ingest microplastics and laboratory studies indicate the potential for harmful effects.Plastic debris can also transport co-contaminants including chemical additives and pollutants sorbed from sea water. These chemicals can be released to organisms upon ingestion, but there is little evidence that plastics provide an important pathway leading to toxicological effects in environmentally relevant scenarios. Removing microplastics form the environment is impractical and the most effective solutions are to minimise the release of plastics to the environment as litter. In this regard much could be achieved by actions to reduce the accumulation of larger items of litter such as packaging which will eventually fragment into microplastics.

show abstract

Fulmar Litter EcoQO monitoring in the Netherlands : Update 2017

Cited by 9 publications

References 76 publications

De Zoe en de zeekoet : een onderzoek naar de doodsoorzaak en de herkomst van de zeekoeten die massaal strandden op de Nederlandse kust in januari en februari 2019

De Zoe en de zeekoet : een onderzoek naar de doodsoorzaak en de herkomst van de zeekoeten die massaal strandden op de Nederlandse kust in januari en februari 2019

Demographic Differences in the Quantity, Mass, and Anatomical Location of Ingested Plastic in Northern Fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis): A Review and Reconsideration of NE Pacific Ocean Samples

Microplastics in the Environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About