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 Sign in to save

Are we contaminating our samples? A preliminary study to investigate procedural contamination during field sampling and processing for microplastic and anthropogenic microparticles

Marine Pollution Bulletin 2021 50 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 45 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett Claire Gwinnett Rachael Z. Miller, Claire Gwinnett

Summary

A pilot study investigated procedural contamination during field sampling and laboratory processing of water samples for microplastics, finding that synthetic clothing and air exposure during processing introduced measurable levels of synthetic fibers into samples, arguing for standardized contamination controls.

Methods for sampling, analysis and interpretation of fresh and saltwater microplastics and anthropogenic microfibers have improved since 2004, but techniques for reducing and monitoring procedural contamination are still limited. Quantifying the amount of procedural contamination introduced to samples improves the robustness of counts of microplastics and anthropogenic microfibers in the environment. This pilot study investigates procedural contamination introduced into water samples when rigorous QA/QC anti-contamination protocols are used and removed. Procedural contamination accounted for 33.8% of the total microfibers and microplastics found in samples when protocols were used (n = 81), but 70.7% when they were not (n = 8). With the use of extensive control sampling and full characterization of samples (morphological, optical and chemical) it was possible to identify the predominant sources of contamination (crew clothing) and make recommendations for anti-contamination and procedural contamination identification/reduction protocols for shoreline and small/medium sized vessel sampling for microplastics and anthropogenic microfibers.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper