Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38053623›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2023

A simple microplastic splitter for subsampling expanded polystyrene particles.

Ryota Nakajima, Noriyuki Isobe, Nisha Singh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Ryota NakajimaJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), 2-15 Natsushima Yokosuka, Kanagawa, Japan.
Noriyuki IsobeJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), 2-15 Natsushima Yokosuka, Kanagawa, Japan.
Nisha SinghJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC), 2-15 Natsushima Yokosuka, Kanagawa, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the high number of microplastic-like particles captured by net hauls including manta or neuston nets, it is often required to subsample in order to decrease sample volume for microplastic enumeration and analysis. Plankton splitter is commonly used to divide microplastic samples. However, current devices such as Folsom plankton splitter and Motoda box splitter have accuracy issues in separating highly buoyant microplastics, namely expanded polystyrene (EPS) as they tend to adhere to the inner walls. Inspired by an apple cutter, we have developed a simple radial splitter made of stainless steel that efficiently divides EPS microplastic samples into precise aliquots. With this simple device, we uniformly divided EPS microplastic samples from marine environments into eight aliquots with no significant differences. The device is a versatile tool to partition all buoyant microplastics including polypropylene and polyethylene microplastics.•The method developed facilitates the precise division of buoyant microplastics into equal aliquots.•The method is specifically effective in splitting expanded polystyrene particles with high buoyancy.

Indexed as

DividingEPSMicroplasticsPlastic particlesRadial microplastic splitterSplitting

Identifiers

PMID38053623
PMCPMC10694595

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.