0
Review ? 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. Environmental Sources Human Health Effects Sign in to save

Are We Underestimating Anthropogenic Microfiber Pollution? A Critical Review of Occurrence, Methods, and Reporting

Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 2021 250 citations ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 55 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Lisa M. Erdle, Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Samantha N. Athey Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Samantha N. Athey Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Lisa M. Erdle, Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey Samantha N. Athey

Summary

This critical review examines whether anthropogenic microfiber pollution is being underestimated due to inconsistent research methods and reporting practices. Researchers found that natural and semisynthetic fibers like cotton and wool, which are often excluded from microplastic counts, contain chemical additives that make them persistent environmental contaminants. The study argues that all anthropogenic microfibers, not just synthetic ones, should be included in pollution assessments for a more accurate picture of contamination levels.

Anthropogenic microfibers, a ubiquitous environmental contaminant, can be categorized as synthetic, semisynthetic, or natural according to material of origin and production process. Although natural fibers, such as cotton and wool, originated from natural sources, they often contain chemical additives, including colorants (e.g., dyes, pigments) and finishes (e.g., flame retardants, antimicrobial agents, ultraviolet light stabilizers). These additives are applied to textiles during production to give textiles desired properties like enhanced durability. Anthropogenically modified "natural" and semisynthetic fibers are sufficiently persistent to undergo long-range transport and accumulate in the environment, where they are ingested by biota. Although most research and communication on microfibers have focused on the sources, pathways, and effects of synthetic fibers in the environment, natural and semisynthetic fibers warrant further investigation because of their abundance. Because of the challenges in enumerating and identifying natural and semisynthetic fibers in environmental samples and the focus on microplastic or synthetic fibers, reports of anthropogenic microfibers in the environment may be underestimated. In this critical review, we 1) report that natural and semisynthetic microfibers are abundant, 2) highlight that some environmental compartments are relatively understudied in the microfiber literature, and 3) report which methods are suitable to enumerate and characterize the full suite of anthropogenic microfibers. We then use these findings to 4) recommend best practices to assess the abundance of anthropogenic microfibers in the environment, including natural and semisynthetic fibers. By focusing exclusively on synthetic fibers in the environment, we are neglecting a major component of anthropogenic microfiber pollution. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:822-837. © 2021 SETAC.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper