We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Microplastic analysis in soils: A comparative assessment
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers compared six different analytical methods for detecting and measuring microplastics in soil, testing them across different soil types and plastic materials. Fluorescence microscopy achieved the highest recovery rates for larger particles, while mass-based techniques like pyrolysis gas chromatography were better suited for detecting very small microplastics. The study highlights that no single method works best for all situations, and combining techniques may be necessary for accurate microplastic assessment in soil.
Microplastic (MiP) contamination poses environmental risks, but harmonizing data from different quantification methods and sample matrices remains challenging. We compared analytical protocols for MiP quantification in soil, consisting of Digital, Fluorescence, Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR), and Raman Microscopy as well as quantitative Pyrolysis-Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy (Py-GC-MS) and 1-proton nuclear magnetic resonance (H NMR) spectroscopy as detection techniques. Each technique was coupled with a specific extraction procedure and evaluated for three soils with different textures and organic carbon contents, amended with eight types of large MiPs (0.5-1 mm) - high- and low-density polyethylene (HDPE and LDPE), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene (PS), polyamide (PA), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and a biodegradable mulch film product composed of polybutylene adipate-co-terephthalate/ polylactic acid (PBAT/ PLA). In addition, we included two types of small MiPs (20-250 µm) composed of either LDPE or PBAT/ PLA in the tests. The results showed that protocols for Digital, Fluorescence, and ATR-FTIR microscopy recovered 74-98 % of the large MiPs, with fluorescence yielding the highest recoveries. Raman spectroscopy was most sensitive to soil organic matter residues, requiring more sophisticated sample pretreatment. Fluorescence staining with subsequent Fluorescence microscopy detection effectively recovered most small-sized LDPE-MiP but missed 56-93 % of small PBAT/ PLA particles. For the latter, reliable quantification was achieved only using Soxhlet extraction combined with H NMR spectroscopic quantification. Pyrolysis-GC-MS showed intermediate results, displaying low sensitivity to plastic type and lower recoveries as soil clay content increased. We conclude that different methods have different sensitivities for different MiP materials in different soils, i.e. comparisons of MiP loads and threshold settings for MiP loads across methodologies require careful consideration. Yet, our data indicate that adding stained large MiP as an internal standard could enhance extraction control, while Soxhlet-extraction with subsequent H NMR analysis is most powerful for controlling future thresholds of small MiP from biodegradable materials.
More Papers Like This
A Review of Analytical Methods for Microplastics in Soils
AI summary Read the abstract
This review systematically examines analytical methods for detecting and quantifying microplastics in soil, including visual analysis, chemical analysis, spectroscopic techniques, microscopy, and mass spectrometry. The authors evaluate the advantages, limitations, and scope of each method, noting that no single technique covers all particle sizes and polymer types. The review calls for continued innovation in analytical methods to provide more effective tools for addressing soil microplastic pollution.
Microplastics in soils: A comparative review on extraction, identification and quantification methods
AI summary Read the abstract
This review compares the various methods scientists use to extract, identify, and measure microplastics in soil, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each approach. Soil is a particularly challenging material to work with because its organic matter and complex structure can interfere with accurate microplastic detection. The authors recommend combining multiple techniques and minimizing harsh chemical steps that could accidentally destroy the very plastic particles being measured.
Microplastics in soil: a comprehensive review of analytical techniques
AI summary Read the abstract
This comprehensive review evaluates the various analytical techniques used to identify and quantify microplastics in soil, including sieving, density separation, chemical digestion, and spectroscopic methods like FTIR and Raman spectroscopy. The authors found significant inconsistencies across studies in how soil microplastics are measured, making it difficult to compare results between different research groups. The review calls for standardized protocols to improve the reliability of soil microplastic assessments.
Research Progress on Separation and Detection Methods of Microplastics in Soil Environment
AI summary Read the abstract
This review summarizes methods for separating and detecting microplastics in soil environments, identifying the most effective analytical approaches and highlighting the need for standardization to improve comparability across studies.
Innovations in analytical methods to assess the occurrence of microplastics in soil
AI summary Read the abstract
This review summarizes emerging techniques for extracting, analyzing, and characterizing microplastics in soil, noting that soil matrix complexity makes standardized methods challenging. Researchers found that globally, soil microplastic concentrations ranged up to 690,000 particles per kilogram, though most data comes from China. The study highlights the urgent need for standardized analytical methods to enable meaningful comparison of microplastic soil contamination across different studies and laboratories.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.