Microplastic Intake, Its Biotic Drivers, and Hydrophobic Organic Contaminant Levels in the Baltic Herring

Ogonowski, Martin; Wenman, Viktoria; Barth, Andreas; Hamacher-Barth, Evelyne; Danielsson, Sara; Gorokhova, Elena

doi:10.3389/fenvs.2019.00134

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second pathway for exposure could be through direct engulfment alongside target prey species. Habitat use has been identified as a potential driver of plastic ingestion for other elasmobranch species, including whale sharks and manta rays 41 , as well as bony fish species 82 . The sharks analysed in this study all display similar strategies while feeding in their demersal habitat, in that to swallow their prey, they engulf it whole using suction feeding 83,84 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the presence of microplastics in demersal sharks of the North-East Atlantic

Parton

Godley

Santillo

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microplastic pollution is ubiquitous in the marine environment and is ingested by numerous marine species. Sharks are an understudied group regarding their susceptibility to microplastic ingestion. Here, we provide evidence of ingestion of microplastic and other anthropogenic fibres in four demersal sharks species found in the waters of the United Kingdom and investigate whether body burdens of contamination vary according to species, sex or size. Sharks were collected from the northEast Atlantic. Stomachs and digestive tracts of 46 sharks of 4 species were examined and 67% of samples contained at least one contaminant particle. Although we acknowledge modest sample size, estimated particle burden increased with body size but did not vary systematically with sex or species. A total of 379 particles were identified, leading to median estimates ranging from 2 to 7.5 ingested contaminants per animal for the 4 species. The majority were fibrous in nature (95%) and blue (88%) or black (9%) in colour. A subsample of contaminants (N = 62) were subject to FT-IR spectroscopy and polymers identified as: synthetic cellulose (33.3%), polypropylene (25%), polyacrylamides (10%) and polyester (8.3%). The level of risk posed to shark species by this level of contamination is unknown. Nevertheless, this study presents the first empirical evidence and an important baseline for ingestion of microplastics and other anthropogenic fibres in native UK shark species and highlights the pervasive nature of these pollutants. plastics in the marine environment. Research on plastic in the marine environment has accelerated rapidly in the last decade, with numerous publications describing its impact on ecosystems and marine taxa 1-7. It is estimated that between 4.8 and 12.7 million tonnes of plastic enter the oceans every year from a variety of sources 6. Plastic is a popular material due to its durability, low production cost and efficiency in its uses 8. It is these properties, alongside its often disposable nature that leads to its prevalence in the environment for many years 9. Microplastics (defined as plastic particles < 5 mm) 10 are ubiquitous in the marine environment 11-13. Despite this knowledge, quantitative assessments of their abundance are still fairly limited 14 , although some estimates place their abundance at 5.25 trillion particles globally, weighing in at over 250,000 tonnes 5. Microplastics, in the form of fibres, fragments or beads/spheres, assimilate in the marine ecosystem via multiple avenues. Larger pieces of plastic can disintegrate over time due to UV radiation exposure, wave action and physical abrasion, eventually fragmenting into microscopic particles 15. Microplastics are also found in many everyday items used by humans including cosmetic products and can be produced by clothing wear 16-19. These can then reach the oceans via wastewater treatment plants 20. ingestion of microplastics in marine species. Ingestion of microplastics is reported in many marine species including turtles, marine mammals and fish 1,21...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the presence of microplastics in demersal sharks of the North-East Atlantic

Parton

Godley

Santillo

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Microplastic in fish varies across the Baltic Sea and with fish species. Particles were detected in 3.4 % of demersal to 10.7 % of pelagic fish in the North Sea and southern Baltic Sea (Rummel et al, 2016), in 22 % of western Baltic herring (Ogonowski et al, 2019), and up to 1.8 % in different northern Baltic Sea fish (Budimir et al, 2018). Long-term microplastic exposure in early life stages of sea trout showed no effects on hatching rate, larvae survival or growth.…”

Section: Marine Litter and Microplasticsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Human impacts and their interactions in the Baltic Sea region

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Coastal environments, in particular heavily populated semi-enclosed marginal seas and coasts like the Baltic Sea region, are strongly affected by human activities. A multitude of human impacts, including climate change, affect the different compartments of the environment, and these effects interact with each other. As part of the Baltic Earth Assessment Reports (BEAR), we present an inventory and discussion of different human-induced factors and processes affecting the environment of the Baltic Sea region, and their interrelations. Some are naturally occurring and modified by human activities (i.e. climate change, coastal processes, hypoxia, acidification, submarine groundwater discharges, marine ecosystems, non-indigenous species, land use and land cover), some are completely human-induced (i.e. agriculture, aquaculture, fisheries, river regulations, offshore wind farms, shipping, chemical contamination, dumped warfare agents, marine litter and microplastics, tourism, and coastal management), and they are all interrelated to different degrees. We present a general description and analysis of the state of knowledge on these interrelations. Our main insight is that climate change has an overarching, integrating impact on all of the other factors and can be interpreted as a background effect, which has different implications for the other factors. Impacts on the environment and the human sphere can be roughly allocated to anthropogenic drivers such as food production, energy production, transport, industry and economy. The findings from this inventory of available information and analysis of the different factors and their interactions in the Baltic Sea region can largely be transferred to other comparable marginal and coastal seas in the world.

show abstract

“…A fundamental element of assessing ecological risk is the availability of a suite of standardized test systems and analytical tools and methods, which enable the application of dose–response relationships relating environmental exposure to effect threshold concentrations that are consistent and of sufficient quality. − This also applies to the relatively young field of MP risk assessment, where many studies have emphasized the need to improve the quality of data needed to inform risks assessment(s). ,− Efforts to assess the quality of data emerging from studies reporting on exposure concentrations of MPs in biota and in surface and drinking water, adopting methods similar to the existing Klimisch and CRED approaches, , have recently been developed and applied. , Whereas these systems and aspects of these systems start to be adopted and recommended in the literature, − currently, a similar evaluation method for assessing the quality of MP effect studies is lacking.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality Criteria for Microplastic Effect Studies in the Context of Risk Assessment: A Critical Review

Ruijter

Redondo‐Hasselerharm

Gouin

et al. 2020

Environ. Sci. Technol.

207

224

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the literature, there is widespread consensus that methods in plastic research need improvement. Current limitations in quality assurance and harmonization prevent progress in our understanding of the true effects of microplastic in the environment. Following the recent development of quality assessment methods for studies reporting concentrations in biota and water samples, we propose a method to assess the quality of microplastic effect studies. We reviewed 105 microplastic effect studies with aquatic biota, provided a systematic overview of their characteristics, developed 20 quality criteria in four main criteria categories (particle characterization, experimental design, applicability in risk assessment, and ecological relevance), propose a protocol for future effect studies with particles, and, finally, used all the information to define the weight of evidence with respect to demonstrated effect mechanisms. On average, studies scored 44.6% (range 20–77.5%) of the maximum score. No study scored positively on all criteria, reconfirming the urgent need for better quality assurance. Most urgent recommendations for improvement relate to avoiding and verifying background contamination, and to improving the environmental relevance of exposure conditions. The majority of the studies (86.7%) evaluated on particle characteristics properly, nonetheless it should be underlined that by failing to provide characteristics of the particles, an entire experiment can become irreproducible. Studies addressed environmentally realistic polymer types fairly well; however, there was a mismatch between sizes tested and those targeted when analyzing microplastic in environmental samples. In far too many instances, studies suggest and speculate mechanisms that are poorly supported by the design and reporting of data in the study. This represents a problem for decision-makers and needs to be minimized in future research. In their papers, authors frame 10 effects mechanisms as “suggested”, whereas 7 of them are framed as “demonstrated”. When accounting for the quality of the studies according to our assessment, three of these mechanisms remained. These are inhibition of food assimilation and/or decreased nutritional value of food , internal physical damage , and external physical damage . We recommend that risk assessment addresses these mechanisms with higher priority.

show abstract

Microplastic Intake, Its Biotic Drivers, and Hydrophobic Organic Contaminant Levels in the Baltic Herring

Cited by 17 publications

References 55 publications

Investigating the presence of microplastics in demersal sharks of the North-East Atlantic

Investigating the presence of microplastics in demersal sharks of the North-East Atlantic

Human impacts and their interactions in the Baltic Sea region

Quality Criteria for Microplastic Effect Studies in the Context of Risk Assessment: A Critical Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About