We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
When Good Intentions Go Bad—False Positive Microplastic Detection Caused by Disposable Gloves
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers tested whether disposable laboratory gloves and common reagents could contaminate microplastic samples, finding that gloves are a significant source of false positives that can be misidentified as microplastics during analysis.
Apart from being considered a potential threat to ecosystems and human health, the ubiquity of microplastics presents analytical challenges. There is a high risk of sample contamination during sampling, sample preparation, and analysis. In this study, the potential of sample contamination or misinterpretation due to substances associated with disposable laboratory gloves or reagents used during sample preparation was investigated. Leachates of 10 different types of disposable gloves were analyzed using Raman microspectroscopy (μ-Raman), Fourier-transform infrared microspectroscopy (μ-FTIR), and pyrolysis-gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (pyr-GC/MS). There appeared to be polyethylene (PE) in almost all investigated glove leachates and with all applied methods. Closer investigations revealed that the leachates contained long-chain compounds such as stearates or fatty acids, which were falsely identified as PE by the applied analytical methods. Sodium dodecyl sulfate, which is commonly applied in microplastic research during sample preparation, may also be mistaken for PE. Therefore, μ-Raman, μ-FTIR, and pyr-GC/MS were further tested for their capability to distinguish among PE, sodium dodecyl sulfate, and stearates. It became clear that stearates and sodium dodecyl sulfates can cause substantial overestimation of PE.
More Papers Like This
Avoiding and Reducing Microplastic False Positives from Dry Glove Contact
AI summary Read the abstract
Standard laboratory gloves can deposit stearate salt residues onto surfaces during sample handling, producing up to 2,000 false-positive microplastic identifications per square millimeter in spectral analysis. The study recommends cleanroom nitrile gloves and provides correction protocols for contaminated datasets — a critical quality-control finding for all microplastic research laboratories.
Scientists may be overestimating the amount of microplastics in the environment – and the culprit is lab gloves
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers found that particles shed from certain laboratory gloves closely resemble microplastics under analysis and can contaminate environmental samples, suggesting that published estimates of microplastic concentrations in nature may be inflated by this widespread lab artifact.
Common laboratory reagents: Are they a double-edged sword in microplastics research?
AI summary Read the abstract
This study tested whether common laboratory reagents themselves are contaminated with microplastics and found measurable plastic particles in several widely used chemicals, raising the concern that lab reagents could be an overlooked source of contamination in microplastic research.
Avoiding and reducing microplastic false positives from dry glove contact
AI summary Read the abstract
Common laboratory gloves release stearate salt residues that produce infrared and Raman spectra closely mimicking microplastics, generating up to 2,000 false positives per mm² under traditional spectral library matching, though cleanroom nitrile gloves reduce this to approximately 100. This methodological finding is critical for microplastic research, as it means published abundance estimates — especially at sub-10 µm size ranges — may be substantially inflated by a routine quality control measure intended to prevent contamination.
Possible Plastic Contamination Does Not Make the Link Between Microplastic and Nanoplastic Exposure and Disease Risk a Hoax
AI summary Read the abstract
A recent lab finding showed that gloves worn during microplastic testing can leave behind residue that looks like plastic under measurement equipment, which may have inflated some counts. This paper argues that problem affects only counting methods, not separate lab experiments where researchers directly expose cells or animals to known plastic particles. It states better measurement tools are needed, but contamination issues do not disprove toxicology studies on microplastics.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.