We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
A Critical Assessment of Microplastics in Molluscan Shellfish with Recommendations for Experimental Protocols, Animal Husbandry, Publication, and Future Research
Summary
This review critically examined over 750 studies on microplastics in shellfish and found that most research contained serious flaws in methodology, with an average quality score below passing. While microplastics are consistently found in shellfish worldwide, the actual levels detected are extremely low, and many alarming claims in the media are based on poorly designed studies. The authors call for much stricter research standards before drawing conclusions about risks to human health from eating shellfish.
Microplastics (MP) are a contaminant of emerging concern and, as such, there has been a rush to action and publication. Over the past two decades, this haste has resulted in a chaotic and cluttered literature rife with inappropriate methodologies, poor experimental protocols, misinterpreted results, overstated significance, and subsequent damaging media stories. This review provides a critical assessment of the current scientific literature on interactions between particle-feeding molluscs and MP and their purported impacts (>750 publications), and recommendations for future efforts. Experimental studies were critically assessed and assigned scores ranging from 0 to 2 as indicators of their veracity. The mean ratio for the 84 papers included in this analysis was 0.9, indicating that most publications contained too many flaws. It is not surprising that MP have been noted in shellfish guts globally. What is surprising is the extremely low level of particles routinely recorded (see Table 1 and references therein). The presence of MP in molluscs has been shown repeatedly, with little regard for quality assurance and control measures. The inconsistencies across studies and lack of proper sampling design have inundated the literature with incomparable studies and inappropriate claims. Common mistakes in field studies from collection through digestion and MP characterization are discussed and identified in 128 studies. Suggestions are made to improve field studies at every stage. The data to date clearly demonstrate extremely low numbers (<10 per individual) of MP in filter-feeding bivalve molluscs globally. There are no data demonstrating presence of MP in these molluscs is a serious risk to human health, and few data to demonstrate negative impacts on the shellfish at environmentally relevant concentrations. Many of the studies on suspension-feeding bivalve molluscs and other invertebrates are weak or fatally flawed. There is a recurring presence in the published literature of misunderstanding of the feeding processes, capabilities for particle selection and rejection, and species-specific differences that all lead to misinformation, misinterpretation, and incorrect assumptions regarding potential impacts. There are major shortcomings to many laboratory studies that examined uptake and accumulation of MP by bivalves and their subsequent effects. The shortcomings have led to a seriously flawed literature on purported interactions and impacts of MP on these animals. If potential investigators do not possess the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out the study, they should engage a collaborator that has the requisite expertise. Bivalves and other particle-feeding molluscs are complex living organisms with extraordinary capabilities for the control of selective capture, ingestion, and egestion of particulate material. They should be recognized and treated as such in any attempt to describe impacts of stressors, including different particle types, on their feeding and ability to accumulate materials. Any future experimental studies need to be focused carefully, based upon clear questions, use standardized analytical procedures, demonstrate a knowledge of the animals being studied, and an understanding of the literature extant. The hype needs to be curtailed and scientists should not imply impacts or potential impacts when there are no data to support the suppositions at environmentally relevant concentrations of MP. The case is further strengthened to stop advocating for the use of bivalve molluscs as reliable indicators of MP in the environment. Recommendations are offered for future efforts including harmonization of methodologies. Finally, a plea is made for editors of scientific journals to make a stronger effort to engage qualified peer-reviewers and stop the flow of poorly done studies and superficial reviews that do nothing more than confuse the literature and reinforce inadequate studies and prior reviews. This review is presented from the viewpoint and consideration of experts in shellfish physiology, and represents the opinions of, and assessments made by, the authors.
Sign in to start a discussion.
More Papers Like This
Microplastic biomonitoring studies in aquatic species: A review & quality assessment framework
This systematic review evaluates the quality of studies that monitor microplastic contamination in marine organisms like fish and shellfish. The researchers found that only 8% of studies met rigorous quality standards, highlighting the need for better research methods so we can accurately understand how much microplastic exposure comes from eating seafood.
A review on microplastics in bivalves: analysis, quantification, and effects
This review synthesized 56 studies on microplastic contamination and effects in bivalves, covering analysis methods, quantification approaches, and biological impacts. The authors found wide variation in reported contamination levels due to methodological differences, and concluded that standardized protocols are urgently needed to assess the food safety and ecological risks of microplastic-contaminated shellfish.
Relevance and reliability of evidence for microplastic contamination in seafood: A critical review using Australian consumption patterns as a case study
Researchers critically reviewed evidence on microplastic contamination in seafood, using Australian consumption patterns as a case study to assess human exposure risk. They found that while microplastics have been documented in many commercial marine species, most contamination is found in tissues that are not typically consumed by humans. The study concludes that current evidence does not support significant dietary microplastic exposure from seafood but calls for better standardized research methods.
Microplastics in global bivalve mollusks: A call for protocol standardization
Researchers reviewed 61 studies on microplastic contamination in bivalve mollusks worldwide, finding that these filter-feeding shellfish consistently contain microplastics regardless of location. The study found significant differences in contamination levels between bivalve families based on their habitats, suggesting that both water-dwelling and sediment-dwelling species can be used to monitor different types of microplastic pollution. The authors call for standardized sampling and analysis protocols to enable meaningful comparisons across future studies.
Quality Criteria for Microplastic Effect Studies in the Context of Risk Assessment: A Critical Review
Researchers developed 20 quality criteria to evaluate 105 published studies on the biological effects of microplastics and found that, on average, studies met less than half the quality benchmarks. No single study scored positively on all criteria, confirming an urgent need for better experimental standards in the field. The review highlights that the most critical improvements needed involve verifying background contamination and using environmentally realistic exposure conditions.