Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36532855›Full record

ArticleMicroplastics and nanoplastics2022

Plastic recycling plant as a point source of microplastics to sediment and macroinvertebrates in a remote stream.

Emilie M F Kallenbach, Tor Erik Eriksen, Rachel R Hurley, Dean Jacobsen, Cecilie Singdahl-Larsen, Nikolai Friberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microplastics and nanoplastics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Emilie M F KallenbachNIVA Denmark Water Research, Njalsgade 76, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark.
Tor Erik EriksenNIVA, Økernveien 94, 0579 Oslo, Norway.
Rachel R HurleyNIVA, Økernveien 94, 0579 Oslo, Norway.
Dean JacobsenUniversity of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 4, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Cecilie Singdahl-LarsenNIVA, Økernveien 94, 0579 Oslo, Norway.
Nikolai FribergNIVA Denmark Water Research, Njalsgade 76, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microplastic is now ubiquitous in freshwater, sediment and biota, globally. This is as a consequence of inputs from, for example, waste mismanagement, effluents from wastewater treatment plants and surface runoff from agricultural areas. In this study, we investigated point source pollution of plastic to an upland stream, originating from a recycling plant that recycles polyethylene film in a remote area of Norway. Sediment (~2 kg) and macroinvertebrates (549 individuals in total) were sampled at one site upstream and two sites downstream of the recycling plant to study microplastic deposition and food web uptake. In total, 340 microplastic films were identified through a combination of visual and µFTIR analysis in the sediment samples. This corresponded to a concentration of 0.23 (± 0.057) items per g sediment upstream of the plastic recycling plant and 0.45 (± 0.017) and 0.58 (± 0.34) items per g downstream. The dominant plastic polymer was polyethylene, which increased significantly downstream of the plastic recycling plant. This indicates the role of the plastic recycling plant as a point source for microplastic in this catchment. Among the three sites investigated, a fairly constant concentration of polypropylene was found, indicating a diffuse source of polypropylene films across the catchment possibly relating to low-intensity agricultural land-use. Low levels of polyethylene were also observed upstream, which may be linked to either local or longer-distance atmospheric transport. Despite the considerable presence of microplastic in sediments, concentrations in macroinvertebrates were extremely low with only a single microplastic particle identified in the total of 549 macroinvertebrates-belonging to three different feeding groups-investigated. Our study suggests that: 1) microplastic pollution can be transferred to remote areas as unintended losses from recycling facilities, 2) remote areas with limited land-use pressure still have detectable levels of microplastic and 3) microplastic is only taken up by stream macroinvertebrates to a limited degree despite relatively high sediment concentrations, and thus there are no strong indications for ecological risks posed by microplastic to this ecological group at this location. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43591-022-00045-z.

Indexed as

BiotaFreshwaterPlastic productionPlastic wasteSize

Identifiers

PMID36532855
PMCPMC9734615

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.