4.8 Article

Microplastic Effect Thresholds for Freshwater Benthic Macroinvertebrates

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 52, Issue 4, Pages 2278-2286

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.7b05367

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Dutch Technology Foundation TTW [13940]
  2. KWR
  3. IMARES
  4. NVVVA
  5. RIKILT
  6. Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment
  7. Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport
  8. Wageningen Food & Biobased Research
  9. STOWA
  10. RI -WA

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Now that microplastics have been detected in lakes, rivers, and estuaries all over the globe, evaluating their effects on biota has become an urgent research priority. This is the first study that aims at determining the effect thresholds for a battery of six freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates with different species traits, using a wide range of microplastic concentrations. Standardized 28 days single species bioassays were performed under environmentally relevant exposure conditions using polystyrene microplastics (20-500 mu m) mixed with sediment at concentrations ranging from 0 to 40% sediment dry weight (dw). Microplastics caused no effects on the survival of Gammarus pulex, Hyalella azteca, Asellus aquaticus, Sphaerium corneum, and Tubifex spp. and no effects were found on the reproduction of Lumbriculus variegatus. No significant differences in growth were found for H. azteca, A. aquaticus, S. corneum, L. variegatus, and Tubifex spp. However, G. pulex showed a significant reduction in growth (EC10 = 1.07% sediment dw) and microplastic uptake was proportional with microplastic concentrations in sediment. These results indicate that although the risks of environmentally realistic concentrations of microplastics may be low, they still may affect the biodiversity and the functioning of aquatic communities which after all also depend on the sensitive species.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available