Agricultural lands have been identified as plastic sinks. One source is plastic mulches, which are a source of micro- and nano-sized plastics in agricultural soils. Because of their persistence,... Show moreAgricultural lands have been identified as plastic sinks. One source is plastic mulches, which are a source of micro- and nano-sized plastics in agricultural soils. Because of their persistence, there is now a push towards developing biodegradable plastics, which are designed to undergo (partial) breakdown after entering the environment. Yet, limited research has investigated the impacts of both conventional and biodegradable plastics on distinct plants. Moreover, comparisons among studies are difficult due to differences in experimental design. This study directly compares the effects of artificially weathered conventional polyethylene (PE) and starch-based biodegradable polybutylene adipate terephthalate (PBAT) on four food crops, including two monocots (barley, Hordeum vulgare, and wheat, Triticum aestivum L.) and two dicots (carrot, Daucus carota, and lettuce, Lactuca sativa L.). We investigated the effects of environmentally relevant low, medium, and high (0.01 %, 0.1 %, 1 % w/w) concentrations of PE and starch-PBAT blend on seed germination (acute toxicity), and subsequently on plant growth and chlorophyll through a pot-plant experiment (chronic toxicity). Germination of all species was not affected by both plastics. However, root length was reduced for lettuce and wheat seedlings. No other effects were recorded on monocots. We observed a reduction in shoot length and bud wet weight of carrot seedlings for the highest concentration of PE and starch-PBAT blend. Chronic exposure resulted in a significant decrease in shoot biomass of barley and lettuce. Additionally, a positive increase in the number of leaves of lettuce was observed for both plastics. Chlorophyll content was increased in lettuce when exposed to PE and starch-PBAT blend. Overall, adverse effects in dicots were more abundant than in monocots. Importantly, we found that the biodegradable plastic caused more commonly adverse effects on plants compared to conventional plastic, which was confirmed by a mini-review of studies directly comparing the impact of conventional and biodegradable microplastics. Show less
Not a territory escapes contamination. Microplastics have infiltrated agricultural soils and therefore potentially what we eat. Recently, in the Netherlands, researchers are studying the extent of... Show moreNot a territory escapes contamination. Microplastics have infiltrated agricultural soils and therefore potentially what we eat. Recently, in the Netherlands, researchers are studying the extent of the phenomenon. And for now, they have more questions than answers. Show less
Zantis, L.J.; Borchi, C.; Vijver, M.G.; Peijnenburg, W.J.G.M.; Di Lonardo, S.; Bosker, T. 2023
Over the last years there has been significant research on the presence and effects of plastics in terrestrial systems. Here we summarize current research findings on the effects of nano- and... Show moreOver the last years there has been significant research on the presence and effects of plastics in terrestrial systems. Here we summarize current research findings on the effects of nano- and microplastics (NMPs) on terrestrial plants, with the aim to determine patterns of response and sensitive endpoints. We conducted a systematic review (based on 78 studies) on the effects of NMPs on germination, plant growth and biochemical biomarkers. This review highlights that the majority of studies to date have used pristine polystyrene or polyethylene particles, either in a hydroponic or pot-plant setup. Based on these studies we found that effects on plants are widespread. We noted similar responses between and within monocots and dicots to NMPs, except for consistent lower germination seen in dicots exposed to NMPs. During early development, germination and root growth are more strongly affected compared to shoot growth. NMPs induced similar adverse growth effects on plant biomass and length in the most tested plant species (lettuce, wheat, corn, and rice) irrespective of the polymer type and size used. Moreover, biomarker responses were consistent across species; chlorophyll levels were commonly negatively affected, while stress indicators (e.g., ROS or free radicals) and stress respondents (e.g., antioxidant enzymes) were consistently upregulated. In addition, effects were commonly observed at environmentally relevant levels. These findings provide clear evidence that NMPs have wide-ranging impacts on plant performance. However, as most studies have been conducted under highly controlled conditions and with pristine plastics, there is an urgent need to test under more environmentally realistic conditions to ensure the lab-based studies can be extrapolated to the field. Show less
Large filter-feeding animals are potential sentinels for understanding the extent of microplastic pollution, as their mode of foraging and prey mean they are continuously sampling the environment.... Show moreLarge filter-feeding animals are potential sentinels for understanding the extent of microplastic pollution, as their mode of foraging and prey mean they are continuously sampling the environment. However, there is considerable uncertainty about the total and mode of exposure (environmental vs trophic). Here, we explore microplastic exposure and ingestion by baleen whales feeding year-round in coastal Auckland waters, New Zealand. Plastic and DNA were extracted concurrently from whale scat, with 32 ± 24 (mean ± SD, n = 21) microplastics per 6 g scat sample detected. Using a novel stochastic simulation modeling incorporating new and previously published DNA diet information, we extrapolate this to total microplastic exposure levels of 24,028 (95% CI: 2119, 69,270) microplastics per mouthful of prey, or 3,408,002 microplastics (95% CI: 295,810, 10,031,370) per day, substantially higher than previous estimates for large filter-feeding animals. Critically, we find that the total exposure is four orders of magnitude more than expected from microplastic measurements of local coastal surface waters. This suggests that trophic transfer, rather than environmental exposure, is the predominant mode of exposure of large filter feeders for microplastic pollution. Measuring plastic concentration from the environment alone significantly underestimates exposure levels, an important consideration for future risk assessment studies. Show less
Zantis, L.J.; Carroll, E.L.; Nelms, S.E.; Bosker, T. 2021
Microplastics receive significant societal and scientific attention due to increasing concerns about their impact on the environment and human health. Marine mammals are considered indicators for... Show moreMicroplastics receive significant societal and scientific attention due to increasing concerns about their impact on the environment and human health. Marine mammals are considered indicators for marine ecosystem health and many species are of conservation concern due to a multitude of anthropogenic stressors. Marine mammals may be vulnerable to microplastic exposure from the environment, via direct ingestion from sea water, and indirect uptake from their prey. Here we present the first systematic review of literature on microplastics and marine mammals, composing of 30 studies in total. The majority of studies examined the gastrointestinal tracts of beached, bycaught or hunted cetaceans and pinnipeds, and found that microplastics were present in all but one study, and the abundance varied between 0 and 88 particles per animal. Additionally, microplastics in pinniped scats (faeces) were detected in eight out of ten studies, with incidences ranging from 0% of animals to 100%. Our review highlights considerable methodological and reporting deficiencies and differences among papers, making comparisons and extrapolation across studies difficult. We suggest best practices to avoid these issues in future studies. In addition to empirical studies that quantified microplastics in animals and scat, ten studies out of 30 (all focussing on cetaceans) tried to estimate the risk of exposure using two main approaches; i) overlaying microplastic in the environment (water or prey) with cetacean habitat or ii) proposing biological or chemical biomarkers of exposure. We discuss advice and best practices on research into the exposure and impact of microplastics in marine mammals. This work on marine ecosystem health indicator species will provide valuable and comparable information in the future. Show less
