Nano and microplastic interactions with freshwater biota - Current knowledge, challenges and future solutions

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

Standard

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{31aff779b01649e3b9220868e81df8cd,
title = "Nano and microplastic interactions with freshwater biota - Current knowledge, challenges and future solutions",
abstract = "Current understanding of nano- and microplastic movement, propagation and potential effects on biota in freshwater environments is developing rapidly. Still, there are significant disconnects in the integration of knowledge derived from laboratory and field studies. This review synthesises the current understanding of nano- and microplastic impacts on freshwater biota from field studies and combines it with the more mechanistic insights derived from laboratory studies. Several discrepancies between the field and laboratory studies, impacting progress in process understanding, were identified including that the most prevalent plastic morphologies found in the field (fibres) are not those used in most of the laboratory studies (particles). Solutions to overcome these disparities are proposed to aid comparability of future studies. For example, environmental sampling and separation of biota into its constituents is encouraged when conducting field studies to map microplastic uptake preferences. In laboratory studies, recommendations include performing toxicity studies to systematically test possible factors affecting toxicity of nano- and microplastics, including morphology, chemical makeup (e.g., additives) and effects of plastic size. Consideration should be given to environmentally relevant exposure factors in laboratory studies, such as realistic exposure medium and effects of plastic ageing. Furthermore, based on this comprehensive review recommendations of principal toxicity endpoints for each of the main trophic levels (microbes, primary producers, primary consumers and secondary consumers) that should be reported to make toxicity studies more comparable in the future are given.",
author = "Anna Kukkola and Stefan Krause and Iseult Lynch and {Sambrook Smith}, {Gregory H} and Holly Nel",
note = "Funding Information: The authors would like to extend their gratitude towards Chantal Jackson and Dr. Giulio Curioni for their assistance with the graphics and figures, and the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their critical reading of the manuscript and insightful suggestions that led to the improvement of the manuscript. SK and IL are supported by the Institute of Global Innovation at Birmingham University. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Leverhulme Trust grant “PlasticRivers”- The fate and transport of microplastics in rivers (RPG-2017-377). Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Author(s)",
year = "2021",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1016/j.envint.2021.106504",
language = "English",
volume = "152",
journal = "Environment International",
issn = "0160-4120",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Nano and microplastic interactions with freshwater biota - Current knowledge, challenges and future solutions

AU - Kukkola, Anna

AU - Krause, Stefan

AU - Lynch, Iseult

AU - Sambrook Smith, Gregory H

AU - Nel, Holly

N1 - Funding Information: The authors would like to extend their gratitude towards Chantal Jackson and Dr. Giulio Curioni for their assistance with the graphics and figures, and the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their critical reading of the manuscript and insightful suggestions that led to the improvement of the manuscript. SK and IL are supported by the Institute of Global Innovation at Birmingham University. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Leverhulme Trust grant “PlasticRivers”- The fate and transport of microplastics in rivers (RPG-2017-377). Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s)

PY - 2021/7

Y1 - 2021/7

N2 - Current understanding of nano- and microplastic movement, propagation and potential effects on biota in freshwater environments is developing rapidly. Still, there are significant disconnects in the integration of knowledge derived from laboratory and field studies. This review synthesises the current understanding of nano- and microplastic impacts on freshwater biota from field studies and combines it with the more mechanistic insights derived from laboratory studies. Several discrepancies between the field and laboratory studies, impacting progress in process understanding, were identified including that the most prevalent plastic morphologies found in the field (fibres) are not those used in most of the laboratory studies (particles). Solutions to overcome these disparities are proposed to aid comparability of future studies. For example, environmental sampling and separation of biota into its constituents is encouraged when conducting field studies to map microplastic uptake preferences. In laboratory studies, recommendations include performing toxicity studies to systematically test possible factors affecting toxicity of nano- and microplastics, including morphology, chemical makeup (e.g., additives) and effects of plastic size. Consideration should be given to environmentally relevant exposure factors in laboratory studies, such as realistic exposure medium and effects of plastic ageing. Furthermore, based on this comprehensive review recommendations of principal toxicity endpoints for each of the main trophic levels (microbes, primary producers, primary consumers and secondary consumers) that should be reported to make toxicity studies more comparable in the future are given.

AB - Current understanding of nano- and microplastic movement, propagation and potential effects on biota in freshwater environments is developing rapidly. Still, there are significant disconnects in the integration of knowledge derived from laboratory and field studies. This review synthesises the current understanding of nano- and microplastic impacts on freshwater biota from field studies and combines it with the more mechanistic insights derived from laboratory studies. Several discrepancies between the field and laboratory studies, impacting progress in process understanding, were identified including that the most prevalent plastic morphologies found in the field (fibres) are not those used in most of the laboratory studies (particles). Solutions to overcome these disparities are proposed to aid comparability of future studies. For example, environmental sampling and separation of biota into its constituents is encouraged when conducting field studies to map microplastic uptake preferences. In laboratory studies, recommendations include performing toxicity studies to systematically test possible factors affecting toxicity of nano- and microplastics, including morphology, chemical makeup (e.g., additives) and effects of plastic size. Consideration should be given to environmentally relevant exposure factors in laboratory studies, such as realistic exposure medium and effects of plastic ageing. Furthermore, based on this comprehensive review recommendations of principal toxicity endpoints for each of the main trophic levels (microbes, primary producers, primary consumers and secondary consumers) that should be reported to make toxicity studies more comparable in the future are given.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85102475649&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106504

DO - 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106504

M3 - Review article

C2 - 33735690

VL - 152

JO - Environment International

JF - Environment International

SN - 0160-4120

M1 - 106504

ER -