0
Meta Analysis ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 1 ? Systematic review or meta-analysis. Synthesizes findings across many studies. Strongest evidence. Detection Methods Environmental Sources Marine & Wildlife Policy & Risk Sign in to save

Microplastics in the riverine environment: Meta-analysis and quality criteria for developing robust field sampling procedures

The Science of The Total Environment 2022 33 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 50 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, James Lofty, Pablo Ouro Catherine Wilson, Pablo Ouro Catherine Wilson, Catherine Wilson, Catherine Wilson, Catherine Wilson, Catherine Wilson, Pablo Ouro Catherine Wilson, Pablo Ouro Pablo Ouro Pablo Ouro Pablo Ouro Catherine Wilson, Pablo Ouro Pablo Ouro

Summary

This meta-analysis reviews how microplastics are sampled in rivers and finds that current methods are inconsistent, making it hard to compare results across studies. Better standardized sampling approaches are needed to accurately measure how much microplastic pollution flows through rivers that supply drinking water to communities.

Study Type Review

Current sampling approaches for quantifying microplastics (MP) in the riverine water column and riverbed are unstandardised and fail to document key river properties that impact on the hydrodynamic and transport processes of MP particles, hindering our understanding of MP behaviour in riverine systems. Using ten criteria based on the reportage of the catchment area, river characteristics of sampling sites and approach, we reviewed the sampling procedures employed in 36 field-based river studies that quantify MP presence in the water column and benthic sediment. Our results showed that a limited number of studies conducted reliable sampling procedures in accordance with the proposed quality criteria, with 35 of the 36 studies receiving a score of zero for at least one criterion, indicating the omission of critical information relating to the study's sample size and the physical and hydraulic characteristics of the sampled river. On the other hand, a good number of studies adequately documented the spatial information of the sampling sites, the vertical location of sample collection, and sampling equipment used. An idealised MP sampling approach is presented to ensure that future studies are harmonised and variables underpinning MP transport in rivers are reported. In addition, a meta-analysis on MP particle characteristics from these studies found that concentrations in the riverine water column and benthic sediment are highly variable, varying by five and seven orders of magnitude respectively, and are heavily dependent on the sampling equipment used. Polypropylene (PP), polyethene, (PE), polystyrene (PS), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) were the most frequently reported MP polymers, while irregular-shaped particles, fibres, spheres, and films were the most commonly reported shapes in the river studies. These results highlight the urgent need to standardise sampling procedures and include key contextual information to improve our understanding of MP behaviour and transport in the freshwater environment.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper