4.8 Article

Tracing the Century-Long Evolution of Microplastics Deposition in a Cold Seep

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 10, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202206120

关键词

century-long evolution; cold seep; methane; microplastics; natural gas hydrate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microplastic pollution poses a major threat to marine ecosystems. This study demonstrates the deposition of microplastics in the Haima cold seep since the invention of plastics. It is found that the burial rates of microplastics significantly increased in non-seepage areas, but were lower in methane seepage areas, suggesting the degradation potential of microplastics in cold seeps.
Microplastic (MP) pollution is one of the greatest threats to marine ecosystems. Cold seeps are characterized by methane-rich fluid seepage fueling one of the richest ecosystems on the seafloor, and there are approximately more than 900 cold seeps globally. While the long-term evolution of MPs in cold seeps remains unclear. Here, how MPs have been deposited in the Haima cold seep since the invention of plastics is demonstrated. It is found that the burial rates of MPs in the non-seepage areas significantly increased since the massive global use of plastics in the 1930s, nevertheless, the burial rates and abundance of MPs in the methane seepage areas are much lower than the non-seepage area of the cold seep, suggesting the degradation potential of MPs in cold seeps. More MP-degrading microorganism populations and functional genes are discovered in methane seepage areas to support this discovery. It is further investigated that the upwelling fluid seepage facilitated the fragmentation and degradation behaviors of MPs. Risk assessment indicated that long-term transport and transformation of MPs in the deeper sediments can reduce the potential environmental and ecological risks. The findings illuminated the need to determine fundamental strategies for sustainable marine plastic pollution mitigation in the natural deep-sea environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据