A Novel Methodology for the Separation of Known Suspended Microplastics (
1
A Novel Methodology for the Separation of Known Suspended Microplastics (<500µm) from Particulate Organic Matter (POM) THE MICROPLASTIC PROBLEM ! Marine plastic pollution is currently ranked as one of the greatest threats to marine life (Todd et al., 2010; Andrady, 2011). Plastic pollution consists of both macroplastic (> 5 mm) and microplastic (< 5 mm) particles (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2012). Microplastics have been found in the guts of both pelagic and demersal fish species (Lusher et al. 2012). Ingested microplastics may serve as a delivery mechanism for Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) which have a high affinity for the hydrophobic surfaces of the microplastic particles (Mato, 2001). CURRENT SEPARATION METHODS Although useful in separating microplastics from sediment samples, density-based separation methods are inefficient at separating suspended microplastics from POM. Variations in the density of the water samples alters the relative buoyancies of both the suspended microplastics as well as the POM (Coote, unpublished). Previously described methods using nitric acid (Andrady, 2011; Claessens et al., 2013) were inefficient and were found to degrade the microplastics substantially. THE NEED FOR A SEPARATION TECHNIQUE The ability to separate suspended microplastics from POM is essential in order to accurately assess the gut evacuation rates of microplastics, as well as the effects of their prolonged consumption/retention by marine organisms in experimental systems (Lusher et al., 2012). To accurately quantify the amount of microplastics ingested, retained and evacuated, it is necessary to separate them from any particulate organic matter (POM) in the samples. Observational studies of natural systems are unable to accurately correlate the extent of microplastic consumption with any physiological effects on marine organisms due to a high degree of natural variability within these systems (Lusher et al., 2012; Foekema et al., 2013). Such aspects of the eco-physiology of marine organisms may therefore be better examined in aquacultural systems (Clements et al., 2009; Lusher et al., 2012). Literature Cited Andrady, A. L. 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 62 -8. 1596–1605. Claessens, M., Van Cauwenberghe, L., Vandegehuchte, M. B. & Janssen, C. R. 2013. New techniques for the detection of microplastics in sediments and field collected organisms. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 70 -1. 227-233. Coote, M.W. 2014 (Unpublished). The factors affecting the bio-availability of microplastics and their retention in filter-feeding, herbivorous fish (Mugil cephalus L.). Hons. Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal (Westville campus), R.S.A Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R.C. & Thiel, M. 2012. Microplastics in the Marine Environment: A Review of the Methods Used for Identification and Quantification. Environmental Science and Technology. 46. 3060-3075. Ivar do Sul, J. A. & Costa, M. F. 2014. The present and future of microplastic pollution in the marine environment. Environmental Pollution. 185. 352-364. Lusher, A.L., McHugh, M. & Thompson, R.C. 2012. Occurrence of microplastic in the gastrointestinal tract of pelagic and demersal fish from the English Channel. Marine Pollution. 1-6. Martin, A. 1969. Physical pharmacy: Physical chemical principles in the pharmaceutical sciences . Philadelphia. 2 Nd ed. Lea and Febiger. Thompson, R.C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R.P., Davis, A., Rowland, S.J., John, A.W.G., McGonigle, D. & Russell, A.E. 2004. Lost at sea: where is all the plastic? Science 304. 838. Todd, P.A., Ong, X. and Chou, L.M. 2010. Impacts of pollution on marine life in Southeast Asia. Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation. 19. 1063-1082. Matthew. Coote, Dr. Deborah Robertson-Andersson, G.K Moodley University of KwaZulu–Natal – Westville Campus, College of Agriculture, Engineering and Science School of Life Sciences, Private Bag X 54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa ASSESSING THE PROBLEM Although microplastics are considered to be virtually ubiquitous throughout the marine environment, most studies are still thought to be a gross underestimation of the true extent of microplastic pollution in the oceans (Hidalgo-Ruz et al, 2012). The majority of observational studies have focused specifically on visible microplastics (Andrady, 2011). According to Hidalgo-Ruz et al. (2012) current techniques are unable to adequately separate suspended microplastic particles (< 500 μm) from particulate organic matter (POM) due to the similar sizes and densities of the microplastics and the POM. AIM OF THIS STUDY A technique was therefore sought to separate and quantify specific microplastics (< 500 μm) for this purpose. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and Polypropylene (PP) were tested as they were available in the appropriate form. Additionally, UV fluorescent plastics were chosen as they were easily visible in small quantities in order to ensure the accuracy of the separation method during the various stages of separation. RESULTS AND FINDINGS METHODOLOGY The two-phase separation method described by Figure 1 was developed for the separation and quantification of selected microplastics. The addition of a non-polar solvent with a high affinity for the surface of the microplastics serves to draw them into a separate layer, immiscible with the rest of the sample. This layer may then be removed and the microplastics within it can be dried and weighed. RESULTS AND FINDINGS METHODOLOGY Treatment 1 (PET microfibres) recovered 93.95 ± 1.79 % (n=10) of the microplastics Treatment 3 (PP microbeads) recovered 97.23 ± 1.38 % (n=10). Whilst the control group indicated that no POM was recovered by the xylene layer during the treatments In contrast Treatment 2 (PET microbeads) recovered only 1.17 ± 1.13 % (n=10) of the microplastics, most likely the result of the particle density (1.38 g.cm -3 ). Figure 1. Microplastic recovery (mean ± S.D) For PET microfibres and microbeads and PP microbeads. CONCLUSIONS The proposed method for the separation of microplastics (20 - 500 μm) from POM and subsequent quantification thereof, may be applied using specific plastics where appropriate, for experimental purposes with the use of appropriate correction factors. This novel methodology has been successfully applied using PET and PP for microplastic gut evacuation experiments in mullet (M. cephalus L.) (Coote, unpublished) and is currently being employed in further investigations using other marine organisms (e.g. fish and marine invertebrates) as models. VISIT US: MACE Lab @ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/ukznmace
-
Upload
deborah-robertson-andersson -
Category
Science
-
view
143 -
download
2
Transcript of A Novel Methodology for the Separation of Known Suspended Microplastics (
A Novel Methodology for the Separation of Known Suspended Microplastics (<500µm) from Particulate Organic Matter (POM)
THE MICROPLASTIC PROBLEM !
Marine plastic pollution is currently ranked as one of the greatest threats to marine life (Todd et al., 2010; Andrady, 2011).
Plastic pollution consists of both macroplastic (> 5 mm) and microplastic (< 5 mm) particles (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2012).
Microplastics have been found in the guts of both pelagic and demersal fish species (Lusher et al. 2012).
Ingested microplastics may serve as a delivery mechanism for Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) which have a high affinity for the hydrophobic surfaces of the microplastic particles (Mato, 2001).
CURRENT SEPARATION METHODS
Although useful in separating microplastics from sediment samples, density-based separation methods are inefficient at
separating suspended microplastics from POM. Variations in the density of the water samples alters the relative
buoyancies of both the suspended microplastics as well as the POM (Coote, unpublished).
Previously described methods using nitric acid (Andrady, 2011; Claessens et al., 2013) were inefficient and were found to
degrade the microplastics substantially.
THE NEED FOR A SEPARATION TECHNIQUE
The ability to separate suspended microplastics from POM is essential in order to accurately assess the gut evacuation
rates of microplastics, as well as the effects of their prolonged consumption/retention by marine organisms in
experimental systems (Lusher et al., 2012).
To accurately quantify the amount of microplastics ingested, retained and evacuated, it is necessary to separate them from
any particulate organic matter (POM) in the samples.
Observational studies of natural systems are unable to accurately correlate the extent of microplastic consumption with
any physiological effects on marine organisms due to a high degree of natural variability within these systems (Lusher et
al., 2012; Foekema et al., 2013). Such aspects of the eco-physiology of marine organisms may therefore be better
examined in aquacultural systems (Clements et al., 2009; Lusher et al., 2012).
Literature Cited
Andrady, A. L. 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 62 -8. 1596–1605.
Claessens, M., Van Cauwenberghe, L., Vandegehuchte, M. B. & Janssen, C. R. 2013. New techniques for the detection of microplastics in sediments and field collected organisms. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 70 -1. 227-233.
Coote, M.W. 2014 (Unpublished). The factors affecting the bio-availability of microplastics and their retention in filter-feeding, herbivorous fish (Mugil cephalus L.). Hons. Thesis. University of KwaZulu-Natal (Westville campus), R.S.A
Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R.C. & Thiel, M. 2012. Microplastics in theMarine Environment: A Review of the Methods Used for Identification and Quantification. Environmental Science and Technology. 46. 3060-3075.
Ivar do Sul, J. A. & Costa, M. F. 2014. The present and future of microplastic pollution in the marine environment. Environmental Pollution. 185. 352-364.
Lusher, A.L., McHugh, M. & Thompson, R.C. 2012. Occurrence of microplastic in the gastrointestinal tract of pelagic and demersal fish from the English Channel. Marine Pollution. 1-6.
Martin, A. 1969. Physical pharmacy: Physical chemical principles in the pharmaceutical sciences. Philadelphia. 2Nd ed. Lea and Febiger.
Thompson, R.C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R.P., Davis, A., Rowland, S.J., John, A.W.G., McGonigle, D. & Russell, A.E. 2004. Lost at sea: where is all the plastic? Science 304. 838.
Todd, P.A., Ong, X. and Chou, L.M. 2010. Impacts of pollution on marine life in Southeast Asia. Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation. 19. 1063-1082.
Matthew. Coote, Dr. Deborah Robertson-Andersson, G.K Moodley
University of KwaZulu–Natal – Westville Campus, College of Agriculture, Engineering and ScienceSchool of Life Sciences, Private Bag X 54001, Durban, 4000, South Africa
ASSESSING THE PROBLEMAlthough microplastics are considered to be virtually ubiquitous throughout the marine environment, most studies are still
thought to be a gross underestimation of the true extent of microplastic pollution in the oceans (Hidalgo-Ruz et al, 2012).
The majority of observational studies have focused specifically on visible microplastics (Andrady, 2011).
According to Hidalgo-Ruz et al. (2012) current techniques are unable to adequately separate suspended microplastic
particles (< 500 μm) from particulate organic matter (POM) due to the similar sizes and densities of the microplastics
and the POM.
AIM OF THIS STUDYA technique was therefore sought to separate and quantify specific microplastics (< 500 μm) for this purpose.
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and Polypropylene (PP) were tested as they were available in the appropriate form.
Additionally, UV fluorescent plastics were chosen as they were easily visible in small quantities in order to ensure the
accuracy of the separation method during the various stages of separation.
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
METHODOLOGY
The two-phase separation method described by Figure 1 was developed for the separation and quantification of
selected microplastics. The addition of a non-polar solvent with a high affinity for the surface of the microplastics
serves to draw them into a separate layer, immiscible with the rest of the sample. This layer may then be removed
and the microplastics within it can be dried and weighed.
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
METHODOLOGY
Treatment 1 (PET microfibres) recovered 93.95 ± 1.79 % (n=10) of the microplastics
Treatment 3 (PP microbeads) recovered 97.23 ± 1.38 % (n=10).
Whilst the control group indicated that no POM was recovered by the xylene layer during the treatments
In contrast Treatment 2 (PET microbeads) recovered only 1.17 ± 1.13 % (n=10) of the microplastics, most likely the result of the particle density (1.38 g.cm-3).
Figure 1. Microplastic recovery (mean ± S.D) For PET microfibres and microbeads and PP microbeads.
CONCLUSIONS
The proposed method for the separation of microplastics (20 - 500 μm) from POM and subsequent quantification thereof, may be applied using specific plastics where appropriate, for experimental
purposes with the use of appropriate correction factors.
This novel methodology has been successfully applied using PET and PP for microplastic gut evacuation experiments in mullet (M. cephalus L.) (Coote, unpublished) and is currently being
employed in further investigations using other marine organisms (e.g. fish and marine invertebrates) as models.
VISIT US: MACE Lab @ Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/ukznmace
