4.5 Article

Plastic pollution in freshwater ecosystems: macro-, meso-, and microplastic debris in a floodplain lake

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10661-017-6305-8

关键词

Plastic pollution; Macro-, meso- and microplastic; Floodplain lake; Endanger environment; FT-IR spectrophotometer

资金

  1. Rufford Foundation, UK (RSG) [21232-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plastic pollution is considered an important environmental problem by the United Nations Environment Programme, and it is identified, alongside climate change, as an emerging issue that might affect biological diversity and human health. However, despite research efforts investigating plastics in oceans, relatively little studies have focused on freshwater systems. The aim of this study was to estimate the spatial distribution, types, and characteristics of macro-, meso-, and microplastic fragments in shoreline sediments of a freshwater lake. Food wrappers (mainly polypropylene and polystyrene), bags (high- and low-density polyethylene), bottles (polyethylene terephthalate), and disposable Styrofoam food containers (expanded polystyrene) were the dominant macroplastics recorded in this study. Contrary to other studies, herein macroplastic item surveys would not serve as surrogates for microplastic items. This is disadvantageous since macroplastic surveys are relatively easier to conduct. Otherwise, an average of 25 mesoplastics (mainly expanded polystyrene) and 704 microplastic particles (diverse resins) were recorded per square meter in sandy sediments. Comparisons with other studies from freshwater and marine beaches indicated similar relevance of plastic contamination, demonstrating for the first time that plastic pollution is a serious problem in the Parana floodplain lakes. This study is also valuable from a social/educational point of view, since plastic waste has been ignored in the Parana catchment as a pollutant problem, and therefore, the outcome of the current study is a relevant contribution for decision makers.

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

4.5
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