0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Detection Methods Environmental Sources Marine & Wildlife Sign in to save

Investigating microplastic contamination and biomagnification in a remote area of South Australia

Marine and Freshwater Research 2023 10 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 40 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Solomon O. Ogunola, Solomon O. Ogunola, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Bronwyn M. Gillanders Patrick Reis‐Santos, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Nina Wootton, Nina Wootton, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Bronwyn M. Gillanders Patrick Reis‐Santos, Patrick Reis‐Santos, Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Bronwyn M. Gillanders Patrick Reis‐Santos, Bronwyn M. Gillanders

Summary

A study in a remote area of South Australia found microplastics in 35% of water samples, 45% of sediment samples, and 39% of marine biota including molluscs, crustaceans, and fish. Polyester and polyethylene fibers dominated the samples. Importantly, the study found no evidence of biomagnification — microplastic loads did not increase as you moved up the food chain — suggesting that oysters and similar filter feeders may be poor indicators of broader environmental contamination.

Polymers
Study Type Environmental

Context Microplastics are widespread in aquatic ecosystems and are commonly recorded in water, sediment and a broad spectrum of marine biota. Yet, the extent to which organisms ingest microplastics directly or indirectly by trophic transfer is largely unknown. Aims This study characterises microplastic abundance across intertidal water, sediment, and marine biota species of different trophic levels, and investigates whether biomagnification occurs. Methods Water, sediment, molluscs, crustaceans and fish were sampled from a single area in southern Australia. Key results Microplastics were recorded in 35% of water, 45% of sediment and 39% of biota samples. Plastic load was 0.36 ± 0.08 microplastics g-1 DW for sediment, 0.50 ± 0.17 microplastics L-1 for water, and 0.70 ± 0.25 microplastics individual-1 for biota. Biomagnification was not found, although similarities in plastic characteristics across biota may imply trophic transfer. Most of the microplastics were fibres (97.5%) of blue, black and transparent colour. Spectral analysis (µ-FTIR) indicated that polyester (50%) and polyethylene (42.3%) dominated the polymer compositions. Conclusions There were no significant differences in microplastic contamination among biota species, with no biomagnification identified. Implications We provide information on biomagnification of microplastics alongside a still uncommon characterisation of contamination in water, sediment and biota.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper