Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38826048›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences2024

EnderScope: a low-cost 3D printer-based scanning microscope for microplastic detection.

Niamh Burke, Gesine Müller, Vittorio Saggiomo, Amy Ruth Hassett, Jérôme Mutterer, Patrick Ó Súilleabháin, Daniel Zakharov, Donal Healy, Emmanuel G Reynaud, Mark Pickering

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Open, reproducible hardware for microscopy.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. EnderScope: a low-cost 3D printer-based scanning microscope for microplastic detection.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2024
    Article
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

10 authors.

Niamh BurkeSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-9293-6874
Gesine MüllerMultiscale Biology, Johann-Friedrich-Blumenbach Institut für Zoologie und Anthropologie, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen , Gottingen, Niedersachsen, Germany.
Vittorio SaggiomoDepartment of BioNanoTechnology, Wageningen University and Research , Wageningen, Gelderland, The Netherlands.
Amy Ruth HassettSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-3728-9616
Jérôme MuttererInstitut de Biologie Moléculaire des Plantes, CNRS & Strasbourg University , Strasbourg, France.ORCID 0000-0002-0722-5195
Patrick Ó SúilleabháinDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Boston College , Chestnut Hill, PA, USA.
Daniel ZakharovSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0009-0005-0960-9327
Donal HealySchool of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0009-0002-3634-3542
Emmanuel G ReynaudSchool of Biology & Environmental Science, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0003-1502-661X
Mark PickeringSchool of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-2454-2897

Funding

Irish Research CouncilUCD School of Medicine
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Low-cost and scalable technologies that allow people to measure microplastics in their local environment could facilitate a greater understanding of the global problem of marine microplastic pollution. A typical way to measure marine microplastic pollution involves imaging filtered seawater samples stained with a fluorescent dye to aid in the detection of microplastics. Although traditional fluorescence microscopy allows these particles to be manually counted and detected, this is a resource- and labour-intensive task. Here, we describe a novel, low-cost microscope for automated scanning and detection of microplastics in filtered seawater samples-the EnderScope. This microscope is based on the mechanics of a low-cost 3D printer (Creality Ender 3). The hotend of the printer is replaced with an optics module, allowing for the reliable and calibrated motion system of the 3D printer to be used for automated scanning over a large area (>20 × 20 cm). The EnderScope is capable of both reflected light and fluorescence imaging. In both configurations, we aimed to make the design as simple and cost-effective as possible, for example, by using low-cost LEDs for illumination and lighting gels as emission filters. We believe this tool is a cost-effective solution for microplastic measurement. This article is part of the Theo Murphy meeting issue 'Open, reproducible hardware for microscopy'.

Indexed as

3D printingaccessible microscopylow-costmicroplastic pollutionopen-hardware

Identifiers

PMID38826048
PMCPMC11448746

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.