Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microplastic accumulation in the gastrointestinal tracts in birds of prey in central Florida, USA

Open access
Carlin, Julia, Craig, Casey, Little, Samantha, Donnelly, Melinda, Fox, David, Zhai, Lei, Walters, Linda·2020·Environmental Pollution

Abstract

A study was conducted to quantify the abundance of plastic pollution in the gastrointestinal tracts in birds of prey. Data was collected from all birds retrieved from the Audubon Center for Birds of Prey in central Florida, USA from January to May 2018. Individuals were either dead prior to reaching the Center or died within 24 h of arrival with no food consumed during captivity. Sixty-three individuals representing eight species were dissected to extract the gastrointestinal (GI) tract from the esophagus to the large intestine. Microplastics were found in the GI tracts in all examined species and in all individual birds. The overall mean number (±S.E.) of microplastics for species of bird of prey in central Florida was 11.9 (±2.8), and the overall mean number of microplastics per gram of GI tract tissue was 0.3 (±0.1). A total of 1197 pieces of plastic were recorded. Microfibers accounted for 86% of total plastics followed by microfragments (13%), macroplastics (0.7%) and microbeads (0.3%). Most fibers were either clear or royal blue in color. Micro-Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (μ-FTIR) found that processed cellulose was the most common polymer identified in birds (37%), followed by polyethylene terephthalate (16%) and a polymer blend (4:1) of polyamide-6 and poly(ethylene-co-polypropylene) (11%). Two bird species, Buteo lineatus (red-shouldered hawk, n = 28) and Pandion haliaetus (osprey, n = 16), were sufficiently abundant to enable statistical analyses. Microplastics were significantly more abundant per gram in the gastrointestinal tract tissue of B. lineatus, that consumes small mammals, snakes, and amphibians, than in fish-feeding P. haliaetus (ANOVA: p = 0.013). If raptors in terrestrial food webs have higher densities of microplastics than aquatic top predators, then it potentially could be due to a combination of direct intake of plastics and indirect consumption via trophic transfer.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114633

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 70 references

Cited by

See all 292

Metadata

Authors
Carlin, J., Craig, C., Little, S., Donnelly, M., Fox, D., Zhai, L., & Walters, L.
Venue
Environmental Pollution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-09
Volume
264
Pages
114633
ISSN
0269-7491 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3019759869
Cited by
292
References
70
FWCI
7.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microplastic accumulation in the gastrointestinal tracts in birds of prey in central Florida, USA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114633
The paper
Carlin, J., Craig, C., Little, S., Donnelly, M., Fox, D., Zhai, L., & Walters, L. (2020). Microplastic accumulation in the gastrointestinal tracts in birds of prey in central Florida, USA. Environmental Pollution. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114633

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.