ArticleChemical engineering journal (Lausanne, Switzerland : 1996)2024
Establishing freshwater sediment sample pretreatment methods for monitoring microplastics and its challenges.
Article in Chemical engineering journal (Lausanne, Switzerland : 1996), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microplastics (MPs) have been detected in various environmental matrices, drinking water, and food, and their presence is an ecological and human health concern. Most research on MPs has focused solely on their detection and analysis. However, sample pretreatment methods are critical for accurate MP analysis and must be properly established. In particular, freshwater sediment contains more impurities than other environment samples, thus requiring more elaborate sample pretreatment. Therefore, research on this media and corresponding pretreatment needs to be performed. Herein, we present a sample pretreatment method for analyzing MPs in freshwater sediments. Detailed factors in arriving at this pretreatment process were evaluated and discussed. Using this established pretreatment method, a total average recovery of six types of standard MPs (HDPE, LDPE, PS, PP, PET, and PVC) for sizes of ≥ 100 μm, 20-100 μm, and 1-20 μm was 94.0%, 90.2%, and 82.5%, respectively. After recovery validation, a modular pretreatment device was developed and combined with the established pretreatment method. The developed device performs density separation and organic matter removal, resulting in about 80% recovery of standard MPs. In addition, natural freshwater sediment samples were prepared using an established pretreatment method, and MPs in streams were analyzed using FTIR, TED-GC-MS, and Pyr-GC-MS. The device affords a low-cost, simple, efficient tool for sample pretreatment steps and easy MP recovery. Thus, it has great potential to simplify sample pretreatment steps for easy MP monitoring, especially for freshwater sediment samples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.