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. Environmental Sources Remediation Sign in to save

Microplastic polymer type impacts water infiltration and its own transport in soil

iScience 2025 1 citation ? Citation count from OpenAlex, updated daily. May differ slightly from the publisher's own count. Score: 53 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
Qihang Li, Qihang Li, Qihang Li, Anna Bogush Qihang Li, Anna Bogush Qihang Li, Anna Bogush Anna Bogush Anna Bogush Anna Bogush Anna Bogush Anna Bogush Marco Van De Wiel, Anna Bogush Marco Van De Wiel, Marco Van De Wiel, Marco Van De Wiel, Marco Van De Wiel, Pan Wu, Anna Bogush Pan Wu, Pan Wu, Pan Wu, Pan Wu, Pan Wu, Ran Holtzman, Ran Holtzman, Ran Holtzman, Ran Holtzman, Ran Holtzman, Anna Bogush Pan Wu, Anna Bogush

Summary

Researchers examined how different types of microplastics move through soil and affect water infiltration. They found that polypropylene, being more hydrophobic, impeded water flow more strongly than polyethylene terephthalate, while PET was more mobile in the soil column. The study suggests that a microplastic's surface properties and density play key roles in determining both how it travels through soil and how much it disrupts water movement.

Microplastics (MPs) pose a substantial threat to humans and ecosystems. How MPs move in soils is controlled by a large number of coupled parameters, including MPs and soil properties as well as hydrological and geochemical conditions. We conduct laboratory experiments where two commonly MPs types found in soils-polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polypropylene (PP)-are leached into an idealized soil analog (glass beads). We use time-lapse imaging to analyze the water flow pathways and spectroscopy to measure the MPs transport. We find that MPs impede water infiltration into preferential pathways, with a stronger effect for the more hydrophobic PP, and that PET is more mobile than PP. We explain this by the stronger impedance of PP on water flow that carries the MPs (the driving force), as well as PP surface charge enhancing its adsorption onto soil particles, and its lower density that limits downward transport. These findings advance our understanding the mechanisms underlying MP transport in soils.

Sign in to start a discussion.

Share this paper