We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Microplastic analysis—are we measuring the same? Results on the first global comparative study for microplastic analysis in a water sample
Summary
Researchers conducted the first international comparative study of analytical methods for microplastic analysis in a water sample and found that comparability between methods was highly limited, underscoring the urgent need for standardized protocols in microplastic research.
This paper presents the results of the first international comparative study of commonly applied analytical methods for microplastic analysis. Although it was shown that the comparability between previously published studies is highly limited, there are ambitious efforts regarding the standardization of microplastic analysis. This comparative study serves as a first step to assess the suitability of frequently used methods in microplastic research. Furthermore, it highlights obstacles when conducting a comparative study for microplastics. Results from 17 laboratories from eight different countries are compared. Samples comprised of five different types of microplastic reference particles with diameters ranging from 8 µm to 140 μm suspended in ultrapure water. Microscopy, Fourier-transform infrared microspectroscopy (μ-FTIR), Raman microspectroscopy (μ-Raman), thermo-extraction-and-desorption- or pyrolysis- combined with gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (Σ-GC/MS), scanning electron microscopy and particle counter were compared regarding results on total particle number, polymer type, number of particles and/or particle mass for each polymer type. In the scope of this comparative study, for the identification of polymer type μ-Raman and Σ-GC/MS performed best. The quantification of polymer mass for identified polymer types was questionable for Σ-GC/MS, whereas other methods failed to determine the correct polymer mass. Quantification of particle number per identified polymer type was evaluated successful for μ-FTIR and the quantification of total particle numbers was best for microscopy and to a lesser extent for μ-FTIR. Remarkable was the large variance of results between the methods but also within the methods. The latter is likely due to individual interpretations of methods and preparation protocols, in particular in regard to the handling of blank values. Results strongly emphasize the need for standardization and validation of analytical methods in microplastic research both on a global scale as well as in the context of individual laboratories.
Sign in to start a discussion.
More Papers Like This
A review of microplastics measuring methods in water and wastewater bodies
This review covers the wide variety of methods used to measure microplastics in water and wastewater, comparing their advantages and limitations. The authors note that lack of standardized methods makes it difficult to compare results across studies and call for international consensus on measurement protocols.
Disparities in Methods Used to Determine Microplastics in the Aquatic Environment: A Review of Legislation, Sampling Process and Instrumental Analysis
This review examined the wide disparities in sampling, processing, and analytical methods used across microplastic studies, highlighting how inconsistent approaches make it difficult to compare results and calling for standardized international protocols and regulatory frameworks.
Comparision protocols for extraction of microplastics in water samples
Researchers compared four different extraction protocols for isolating microplastics from water samples and found significant differences in efficiency and accuracy across methods. Standardized extraction protocols are critical for producing comparable microplastic abundance data across studies. Without consistent methodology, it is difficult to build a reliable global picture of microplastic contamination levels in water.
Monitoring microplastics in drinking water: An interlaboratory study to inform effective methods for quantifying and characterizing microplastics
Researchers conducted an interlaboratory study with 22 labs from six countries to evaluate methods for quantifying microplastics in drinking water, finding significant variability between labs and identifying key areas for method standardization.
Comparison of different methods for MP detection: What can we learn from them, and why asking the right question before measurements matters?
This comparative study evaluated several different analytical methods for detecting and measuring microplastics, finding that the choice of method significantly affects results. The authors emphasize that choosing the right method depends on the specific research question, and that standardization is essential for comparing data across studies.