2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.110905
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantification of microplastic ingestion by the decapod crustacean Nephrops norvegicus from Irish waters

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
38
0
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 108 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
3
38
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…However, since this information was missing, we focused our investigation on local MaP and accumulation hotspots so that to test as to whether the quantities of seafloor macroplastic can be a significant indicator of a potentially higher number of contaminated individuals and of ingested particles in nearby areas. Our results showed, indeed, not only that plastic hotspots are important variable that can alter the amount of MiP potentially available to benthic species (La Beur et al, 2019), but also confirms how N. norvegicus represents an efficient bioindicator for MP contamination (Cau et al, 2019;Hara et al, 2020). Indeed, recent studies emphasized how this species faces a considerable accidental ingestion rate, which easily exceeds 80-90% of positive individuals, regardless of the geographical location.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…However, since this information was missing, we focused our investigation on local MaP and accumulation hotspots so that to test as to whether the quantities of seafloor macroplastic can be a significant indicator of a potentially higher number of contaminated individuals and of ingested particles in nearby areas. Our results showed, indeed, not only that plastic hotspots are important variable that can alter the amount of MiP potentially available to benthic species (La Beur et al, 2019), but also confirms how N. norvegicus represents an efficient bioindicator for MP contamination (Cau et al, 2019;Hara et al, 2020). Indeed, recent studies emphasized how this species faces a considerable accidental ingestion rate, which easily exceeds 80-90% of positive individuals, regardless of the geographical location.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…A second explanation could be the used mesh size of at least 300 µm, resulting in the loss of smaller particles, which are included in the study presented herein. Furthermore, no detailed information on the stranding site is given, which would be useful for comparison purpose, since differences in microplastic loads around Ireland (Irish Sea, Celtic Sea and the western coastline facing the open North Atlantic) were determined when the microplastic occurrence was compared at different prawn fishing grounds in 2016 (Hara et al, 2020). Furthermore, the study by Lusher et al (2018), confirmed the microplastic burden in 21 individuals covering six different cetacean species summing up to 528 investigated GITs.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Microplastics were also extensively monitored in shellfish, such as blue mussels, shrimps, and clams [ 11 , 20 , 40 , 45 , 52 , 59 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 , 97 , 98 , 99 ] ( Table 3 ). Unlike fish, soft tissues were dissected and digested to separate microplastics in mussels, clams, and oysters.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The percentage of fibers in isolated microplastics was more than 50% in various food items. For example, the fraction of fibers reached almost 100% of microplastics in sea salts [ 32 ] and edible tissues of fish [ 71 , 74 ] and shellfish [ 74 , 91 , 97 ]. However, a low fraction (<20%) of fibers was identified in lake salts [ 14 ], edible tissues of fish [ 38 , 47 ], mussels [ 81 ], shrimp [ 98 ], and dried fish [ 24 ].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation