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.
Food & Water
Marine & Wildlife
Policy & Risk
Sign in to save
Fulmar litter monitoring in the Netherlands : Update 2021
2022
4 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.
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
Susanne Kühn,
A. Meijboom,
Susanne Kühn,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Oliver Bittner,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
A. Meijboom,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
A. Meijboom,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Susanne Kühn,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
A. Meijboom,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
Oliver Bittner,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker,
Susanne Kühn,
A. Meijboom,
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Oliver Bittner,
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
Susanne Kühn,
Oliver Bittner,
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker,
J.A. van Franeker
J.A. van Franeker,
Susanne Kühn,
J.A. van Franeker
Summary
This monitoring update reports fulmar stomach content data from the Netherlands through 2021, tracking plastic ingestion rates in northern fulmars as a standardized indicator of marine litter levels in the North Sea, with microplastic fragments remaining a dominant component of ingested debris.
Fulmar Litter Threshold monitoring in the Netherlands -Update 2021Marine debris has serious economic and ecological consequences.Economic impacts are most severe for coastal communities, tourism, shipping and fisheries.Marine wildlife suffers from entanglement and ingestion of debris, with micro-particles potentially affecting marine food chains up to the level of human consumers.In the North Sea, marine litter problems were firmly recognized in 2002 when surrounding states assigned to OSPAR the task to include marine plastic litter in its system of Ecological Quality Objectives (EcoQOs) (North Sea Ministerial Conference 2002).At that time, in the Netherlands, marine litter was already monitored by the abundance of plastic debris in stomachs of a seabird species, the Northern Fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis).In 2020 the fulmar EcoQO was formally replaced and is now called Fulmar Threshold Value (Fulmar-TV or FTV; for more details see Van Franeker et al. 2021 and Kühn et al. 2021a).7.Over the 5-year period 2017-2021, 24% of the birds had ingested paraffin-like substances, with an average mass of 1.8 gram per bird. CONCLUSIONOn the longer term, stomach contents of fulmars beached in the Netherlands indicate that the marine litter situation off the Dutch coast is gradually improving, but still far off the Fulmar Threshold Value.At the current rate of the trend, the Fulmar-TV might be reached around the year 2066.Within 10-year evaluation periods the trend is not consistent, and showed no significant change over the most recent 2012-2021 decade.Future data must reveal if this reflects a temporary deviation, or a reversal in the longer term trend.