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. Policy & Risk Sign in to save

The influence of complex matrices on method performance in extracting and monitoring for microplastics

Chemosphere 2023 28 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count.
Leah M. Thornton Hampton, Hannah De Frond, Kristine Gesulga, Syd Kotar, Wenjian Lao, Cindy Matuch, Stephen B. Weisberg, Charles S. Wong, Susanne M. Brander, Silke Christansen, Cayla R. Cook, Fangni Du, Sutapa Ghosal, Andrew B. Gray, Jeanne Hankett, Paul A. Helm, Kay T. Ho, Timnit Kefela, Gwendolyn L. Lattin, Amy Lusher, Lei Mai, Rachel E. McNeish, Odette Mina, Elizabeth C. Minor, Sebastian Primpke, Keith Rickabaugh, Violet Compton Renick, Samiksha Singh, Bert van Bavel, Florian Vollnhals, Chelsea M. Rochman

Summary

Fifteen laboratories tested microplastic extraction from four complex matrices (drinking water, fish tissue, sediment, surface water), finding recovery rates of only 60-70% for particles above 212 microns and as low as 2% for particles below 20 microns, with sediment being the most challenging matrix.

Study Type Environmental

Previous studies have evaluated method performance for quantifying and characterizing microplastics in clean water, but little is known about the efficacy of procedures used to extract microplastics from complex matrices. Here we provided 15 laboratories with samples representing four matrices (i.e., drinking water, fish tissue, sediment, and surface water) each spiked with a known number of microplastic particles spanning a variety of polymers, morphologies, colors, and sizes. Percent recovery (i.e., accuracy) in complex matrices was particle size dependent, with ∼60-70% recovery for particles >212 μm, but as little as 2% recovery for particles <20 μm. Extraction from sediment was most problematic, with recoveries reduced by at least one-third relative to drinking water. Though accuracy was low, the extraction procedures had no observed effect on precision or chemical identification using spectroscopy. Extraction procedures greatly increased sample processing times for all matrices with the extraction of sediment, tissue, and surface water taking approximately 16, 9, and 4 times longer than drinking water, respectively. Overall, our findings indicate that increasing accuracy and reducing sample processing times present the greatest opportunities for method improvement rather than particle identification and characterization.

Share this paper