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 Environmental Sources Sign in to save

A first estimation of uncertainties related to microplastic sampling in rivers

The Science of The Total Environment 2020 1 citation ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 30 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Antoine Bruge, Marius Dhamelincourt, Laurent Lanceleur, Mathilde Monperrus, Johnny Gaspéri, Bruno Tassin

Summary

Researchers collected 16 water samples from a French river to test how sampling strategy affects microplastic concentration estimates. Results showed wide variability depending on net deployment time, highlighting that standardized methods are essential before data from different studies can be reliably compared.

Study Type Environmental

Many studies have been conducted to quantify microplastic contamination, but only a few of them have actually the sampling methodology and associated uncertainties. This study seeks to examine the influence of sampling strategy on the confidence interval of river microplastic estimates. 16 samples are collected in the Gave de Pau River (southwestern France) during a three-hour window with a 330-μm mesh size net. Three different exposure times (3, 5 and 7 min) allow for a respective filtration rate by the net of 35.6 m (3 samples), 59.4 m (10 samples), and 83.2 m (3 samples) of water. Organic matter contained in samples is removed by hydrogen peroxide oxidation. The plastic particles are then counted and classified under a binocular microscope. The microplastic concentrations vary between 2.64 and 4.24 microplastics/m, with a median value of 3.26 microplastics/m. Statistical analysis does not show differences in microplastic concentrations for the three exposure times. This result seems to demonstrate that a filtration of approx. 35 m of water is sufficient under similar conditions (similar flow condition and degree of microplastic contamination) and can help reduce sampling and sample processing time. Other analyses, based on 10 filtrations of 59.4 m, show that the higher the number of samples, the lower the confidence interval. For triplicates, the mean confidence interval reaches 15% of the median value. Thus, collecting triplicates would seem to offer a reasonable optimum, in combining an acceptable error percentage and time efficiency. These results might depend on the microplastic load of the river, therefore making it necessary to conduct similar analyses on other rivers. This study reports for the first time uncertainties related to microplastic sampling in rivers. Such findings will serve to set up long term monitoring, highlight spatial differences between sites and improve the accuracy of annual microplastic fluxes in rivers.

Sign in to start a discussion.

More Papers Like This

Article Tier 2

Variance and precision of microplastic sampling in urban rivers

Researchers assessed the variance and precision of microplastic sampling methods in urban rivers, finding that high spatial and temporal variability in microplastic concentrations requires carefully designed sampling strategies to obtain representative measurements and reliable data for river microplastic assessments.

Article Tier 2

Is There a Difference in Yield? A Comparative Analysis of Microplastics Sampling Techniques in River Water with a Low-Velocity Flow

Researchers compared three microplastic sampling techniques in low-velocity river water, quantifying differences in particle abundance and characteristics to evaluate which method most accurately captures microplastic concentrations in surface water environments.

Meta Analysis Tier 1

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

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.

Article Tier 2

Assessment of Different Sampling, Sample Preparation and Analysis Methods Addressing Microplastic Concentration and Transport in Medium and Large Rivers Based on Research in the Danube River Basin

Monitoring microplastics in rivers is hampered by the lack of standardized methods, making it difficult to compare results across studies. This research tested three common sampling approaches on the Danube River and its tributaries, finding that each method produced meaningfully different estimates of microplastic concentrations and transport. The results underscore the urgent need for agreed-upon protocols so that data from different countries and research groups can be reliably combined to track river-to-ocean plastic pollution.

Article Tier 2

Experimental uncertainty assessment of meso- and microplastic concentrations in rivers based on net sampling

Researchers developed a method to account for net-clogging uncertainty when sampling meso- and microplastics in rivers, finding that a Weibull reliability function model can predict optimal filtration durations and keep concentration measurement errors below 12% in urban river conditions.

Share this paper