ArticleEcotoxicology (London, England)2026
Effects of polypropylene micro- and nanoplastics from surgical masks in amphibian and echinoderm models.
Article in Ecotoxicology (London, England), 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Micro- and nanoplastic toxicity is a growing environmental concern, especially in aquatic ecosystems. This study investigates the acute and chronic effects of polypropylene microfibers (PP MFs), derived from artificially aged surgical face masks, on two aquatic species: the freshwater amphibian Xenopus laevis and the marine brittle star Ophiactis virens. Characterisation of the aged PP material revealed both microfibers (mean size: 21.7 ± 13.4 μm × 1.9 ± 0.8 μm) and nanofragments (mean diameter: 176 ± 28 nm), with a nano/micro abundance ratio of 4.3. X. laevis larvae ingested large quantities of PP MFs, resulting in near-complete gut obstruction, while juvenile O. virens did not show internal accumulation. Despite this, both species exhibited some sublethal effects, particularly at the behavioural level and at the highest tested dose (10 µg mL⁻¹). Indeed, X. laevis larvae reduced their swimming activity, whereas O. virens showed impaired righting ability. Moreover, X. laevis larvae grew significantly more than controls at all tested concentrations (0.1–10 µg mL⁻¹). No significant effect was observed at the cell-tissue level, except for a few cases of ultrastructural alteration in X. laevis intestinal epithelium. The LOEC values were 0.1 µg mL⁻¹ for X. laevis and 10 µg mL⁻¹ for O. virens; corresponding NOECs were < 0.1 and 1.0 µg mL⁻¹, respectively. These findings highlight species-specific responses, likely linked to ecological traits and life stage, and caution against generalizing toxicity outcomes across taxa. Overall, the study underscores the environmental legacy of COVID-19-related waste able to release a huge quantity of both micro- and nano-plastics with variable yet significant impacts on aquatic life.
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.