4.7 Article

First assessment of debris pollution in the gastrointestinal content of juvenile Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) stranded on the west south Atlantic coasts

Journal

MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN
Volume 188, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114628

Keywords

Magellanic penguins; Plastic debris; Marine birds; Mesoplastics; Macroplastics; Microplastics; Microfibers

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper presents the first evidence of plastic debris in stranded juvenile Magellanic penguins on the Atlantic coast of southern Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. The study found that 100% of the analyzed birds had macro-, meso-, and microplastics on them, with debris abundance ranging from 33 to 200 items per bird. Microplastics accounted for 91% of the total debris, with fibers being the most common type.
This paper provides the first evidence of debris pollution, including plastic, in juvenile Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) found stranded on the Atlantic coast of southern Buenos Aires Province, Argentina. Macro-, meso- and microparticles of anthropogenic origin were observed in 100 % of the studied birds, with debris abundance ranging between 33 and 200 items/bird. Microparticles represented 91 % of the total debris and 97 % of them were fibers. Black particles were the most abundant (30 %), followed by transparent (26 %), blue (14 %), yellow (10.3 %), and red (10 %). Infrared and Raman spectroscopy identified 62.7 % of the total particles as plastics, with polypropylene (27.8 %) and polyester (21.6 %) being the most abundant polymers. Semi-synthetic cellulosic fibers, metallic particles, and pigments were also found. The presence of metallic microparticles was suggested for the first time in penguins. Stranded juvenile Magellanic penguins are proposed as promising bioindicators of plastic pollution in the South Atlantic.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available