We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Potential sources of microplastic contamination in laboratory analysis and a protocol for minimising contamination
AI summary Read the abstract
Scientists identified multiple sources of microplastic contamination that can be accidentally introduced during laboratory analysis of biological samples, including from lab water, chemicals, and air. By filtering reagents, pre-treating glass fiber filters, and using a clean working environment, they reduced lab-introduced contamination by 70–100%. These findings are important for accurate microplastic research: without such precautions, studies can significantly overestimate how much plastic is actually present in animal tissues or environmental samples.
Measurements of microplastics in environmental and biological samples can be overestimated because of contaminants introduced during the analytical process. Knowledge of the potential sources and frequency of contamination during analysis is required to develop a protocol to prevent analytical errors. In this study, potential sources of contamination in the laboratory analysis of biological samples were evaluated, and reliable, inexpensive measures to prevent contamination were tested. Glass fibre filters, water samples, air samples, and chemicals [Fenton's reagent (HO and FeSO), and ZnCl] were tested for the presence of contaminants. Particulate contamination, including microplastics, was found in all samples when tested before application of any preventative measures. The following measures were evaluated for preventing contamination: (1) filtration of the water and chemical solutions using a glass fibre filter, (2) pre-combustion of the glass fibre filters, and (3) use of a clean booth for experimental work. The preventative measures reduced the levels of microplastics in all samples by 70-100%. The dominant polymers identified by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy were polyethylene terephthalate, cellulose fibre (rayon), polystyrene, polyacrylonitrile, and polyethylene. With the preventative measures, the number of microplastics in the laboratory blanks was low enough to set the limit of detection to < 1. This limit of detection would be suitable for examination of microplastics contamination at the individual organism level, even at trace levels. Preventative countermeasures are essential to reduce overestimation of microplastics in biological samples and can be implemented at low cost.
More Papers Like This
Identifying laboratory sources of microplastic and nanoplastic contamination from the air, water, and consumables
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers systematically tested common laboratory materials and procedures for plastic contamination and found that water sources, airflow, dust, and even glassware can introduce significant amounts of micro- and nanoplastics into samples. Surprisingly, glass consumables and aluminum foil, both commonly recommended as contamination controls, were themselves sources of plastic particles. The findings highlight that current best practices for preventing sample contamination in microplastic research may need to be revised.
Common laboratory reagents: Are they a double-edged sword in microplastics research?
AI summary Read the abstract
This study tested whether common laboratory reagents themselves are contaminated with microplastics and found measurable plastic particles in several widely used chemicals, raising the concern that lab reagents could be an overlooked source of contamination in microplastic research.
Plastic-on-Plastic: Underestimated Contamination Risks in Micro- and Nanoplastic Research
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed how the plastic lab equipment, airborne fibers, and purified water used in microplastic and nanoplastic experiments contribute unintended contamination to samples, demonstrating scenarios where laboratory-derived particles can match or exceed intended experimental doses and thereby skew dose-response findings.
Cross-Contamination as a Problem in Collection and Analysis of Environmental Samples Containing Microplastics—A Review
AI summary Read the abstract
This review examines cross-contamination as a systematic problem in microplastic research, finding that synthetic fibers from clothing, laboratory plastics, and airborne particles can contaminate samples during collection and analysis, and reviewing methods to minimize and account for procedural contamination.
How can contamination be prevented during laboratory analysis of atmospheric samples for microplastics?
AI summary Read the abstract
This study tested various laboratory practices to reduce contamination when measuring microplastics in air samples, finding that working under laminar flow reduced background contamination compared to fume hoods or open lab environments. Pre-treating filters by heating them to 450 degrees Celsius cut microplastic counts by 50%, and pre-filtering solutions was essential since working liquids themselves were contaminated. These quality control findings are critical because without proper contamination prevention, studies on airborne microplastics may significantly overcount or misidentify particles.
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.