4.4 Review

Micro- and Nanoplastic-Mediated Pathophysiological Changes in Rodents, Rabbits, and Chickens: A Review

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD PROTECTION
Volume 84, Issue 9, Pages 1480-1495

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.4315/JFP-21-117

Keywords

Chickens; In vivo toxicity; Microplastics; Nanoplastics; Rabbits; Rodents

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The presence of micro- and nanoplastics poses a potential threat to human health, especially through their entry into the human food chain. Animal studies have shown that micro- and nanoplastics can cause various pathophysiological effects, including intestinal barrier compromise, organ accumulation, and gut dysbiosis.
Plastics provide tremendous societal benefits and are an indispensable part of our lives. However, fragmented plastics or those intentionally manufactured in small sizes (microplastics and nanoplastics) are of concern because they can infiltrate soils and enter the human food chain through trophic transfer. The pathophysiological impacts of micro- and nanoplastics in humans are not characterized, but their effects in terrestrial mammals may help elucidate their potential effects in humans. Rodent studies have demonstrated that micro- and nanoplastics can breach the intestinal barrier, accumulate in various organs, cause gut dysbosis, decrease mucus secretion, induce metabolic alterations, and cause neurotoxicity, among other pathophysiologic effects. Larger mammals such as rabbits can also absorb microplastics orally. In farm animals such as chickens, microplastics have been detected in the gut, thereby raising food safety concerns. This review mostly focuses on studies conducted to assess effects of micro- and nanoplastic exposure through food and water in terrestrial mammals and farm animals including rodents, rabbits, and chickens; identifies main knowledge gaps; and provides recommendations for further research to understand foodborne micro- and nanoplastic toxicity in humans.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available