We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Blueprint for the design, construction, and validation of a plastic and phthalate-minimised laboratory.
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers designed and validated a laboratory workspace with minimal plastic and phthalate contamination for use in microplastics research, providing a practical blueprint including materials choices, workflow protocols, and contamination monitoring to reduce background interference in analytical studies.
Micro and nanosized plastics (MNPs), and a range of associated additive chemicals, have become pervasive contaminants that humans and the environment are exposed to everyday. However, one of the principal challenges in their analysis is adequate strategies to minimise background contamination. Here a blueprint for a specialised plastics and additive-minimised clean room laboratory built for this purpose is presented. Common laboratory construction materials (n = 23) were tested, including acoustic baffles, ceiling materials, floor materials, glazing rubber, and silicone sealant. The % polymer content ranged from 2-76% w/w while the sum concentration of six phthalates ranged from 0.81 (0.73-0.86) to 21000 (15000-27000) mg/kg, assigning many of these materials as inappropriate for use in a clean room environment. The final design of the laboratory consisted of three interconnected rooms, operated under positive pressure with the inner rooms constructed almost entirely of stainless steel. Background concentrations of MNPs and phthalates in the new laboratory were compared to two Physical Containment Level 2 (PC2) laboratory environments, with concentrations of MNPs reduced by > 100 times and phthalates reduced by up to 120 times. This study reports the first known clean room of its kind and provides a blueprint for reference and use by future plastics research.
More Papers Like This
Plastic-on-Plastic: Underestimated Contamination Risks in Micro- and Nanoplastic Research
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers reviewed how the plastic lab equipment, airborne fibers, and purified water used in microplastic and nanoplastic experiments contribute unintended contamination to samples, demonstrating scenarios where laboratory-derived particles can match or exceed intended experimental doses and thereby skew dose-response findings.
Potential sources of microplastic contamination in laboratory analysis and a protocol for minimising contamination
AI summary Read the abstract
Scientists identified multiple sources of microplastic contamination that can be accidentally introduced during laboratory analysis of biological samples, including from lab water, chemicals, and air. By filtering reagents, pre-treating glass fiber filters, and using a clean working environment, they reduced lab-introduced contamination by 70–100%. These findings are important for accurate microplastic research: without such precautions, studies can significantly overestimate how much plastic is actually present in animal tissues or environmental samples.
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.
Cross-contamination pathways in the analysis of plastics and related chemical compounds: Good laboratory practices and tips
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers identified six major cross-contamination pathways in analytical workflows for microplastics and plastic-related chemicals — spanning laboratory materials, environmental sources, human handling, solvents, sample preparation, and instrumentation — and provide practical good laboratory practices to improve data reliability at trace levels.
Identifying laboratory sources of microplastic and nanoplastic contamination from the air, water, and consumables
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers systematically tested common laboratory materials and procedures for plastic contamination and found that water sources, airflow, dust, and even glassware can introduce significant amounts of micro- and nanoplastics into samples. Surprisingly, glass consumables and aluminum foil, both commonly recommended as contamination controls, were themselves sources of plastic particles. The findings highlight that current best practices for preventing sample contamination in microplastic research may need to be revised.
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.