4.7 Article

Amberstripe scad Decapterus muroadsi (Carangidae) fish ingest blue microplastics resembling their copepod prey along the coast of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) in the South Pacific subtropical gyre

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 586, 期 -, 页码 430-437

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.175

关键词

Microplastic contamination; Rapa Nui (Easter Island); Planktivorous fish; South Pacific subtropical gyre; Copepod prey

资金

  1. FONDECYT from the Chilean Ministry of Education [3150636]
  2. Chilean Millennium Initiative [NC120030]
  3. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (FCT-PT) [UID/IVIAR/04292/2013]
  4. [SFRH/BSAB/113789/2015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An increasing number of studies have described the presence of microplastics (<= 5 mm) in many different fish species, raising ecological concerns. The factors influencing the ingestion of microplastics by fish remain unclear despite their importance to a better understanding of the routes of microplastics through marine food webs. Here, we compare microplastics and planktonic organisms in surface waters and as food items of 20 Amberstripe scads (Decapterus muroadsi) captured along the coast of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) to assess the hypothesis that fish ingest microplastics resembling their natural prey. Sixteen (80%) of the scad had ingested one to five microplastics, mainly blue polyethylene fragments that were similar in colour and size to blue copepod species consumed by the same fish. These results suggest that planktivorous fish, as a consequence of their feeding behaviour as visual predators, are directly exposed to floating microplastics. This threat may be exacerbated in the clear oceanic waters of the subtropical gyres, where anthropogenic litter accumulates in great quantity. Our study highlights the menace of microplastic contamination on the integrity of fragile remote ecosystems and the urgent need for efficient plastic waste management. (C) 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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