The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 10 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes
Open accessAbstract
Neuston samples were collected at 21 stations during an ~700 nautical mile (~1300 km) expedition in July 2012 in the Laurentian Great Lakes of the United States using a 333 μm mesh manta trawl and analyzed for plastic debris. Although the average abundance was approximately 43,000 microplastic particles/km², station 20, downstream from two major cities, contained over 466,000 particles/km², greater than all other stations combined. SEM analysis determined nearly 20% of particles less than 1 mm, which were initially identified as microplastic by visual observation, were aluminum silicate from coal ash. Many microplastic particles were multi-colored spheres, which were compared to, and are suspected to be, microbeads from consumer products containing microplastic particles of similar size, shape, texture and composition. The presence of microplastics and coal ash in these surface samples, which were most abundant where lake currents converge, are likely from nearby urban effluent and coal burning power plants.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Neuston sampling across Lakes Superior, Huron, and Erie in July 2012 found microplastic pollution at nearly all 21 stations, with an average abundance of 43,157 particles/km² and extreme concentrations in western Lake Erie. SEM/EDS showed that many particles visually identified as microplastic were actually coal ash, while multi-colored spheres were suspected to be consumer-product microbeads.
Key findings
- All 21 net tows except sample 13 contained plastic; adjusted average abundance was 43,157 particles/km², with counts ranging from 0 to over 450,000 particles/km².
- Sample 20 contained 1,101 plastic particles, reported as 466,305 particles/km² in Table 1 (463,423 particles/km² in the results text), greater than all other samples combined. Lake Erie samples accounted for ~90% of all pelagic plastic debris, and samples 20 and 21 alone contained 85% of all microplastic particles collected.
- SEM/EDS determined that nearly 20% of particles <1 mm initially identified as microplastic were aluminum silicate from coal ash; 8 of 21 samples contained coal/fly ash, with an average contribution of 20% within the 0.355–1 mm size class, and samples 20 and 21 contained 28% and 27% aluminum silicate, respectively.
- The 0.355–0.999 mm size class accounted for 81% of total particle count; pellets and fragments were far more abundant than other particle types. Multi-colored spheres were compared to polyethylene microbeads from two national facial cleanser brands and found to be similar in shape, size, color, and elemental composition.
Methods
- During a ~700 nautical mile expedition from 11–31 July 2012, 21 neuston samples were collected in Lakes Superior (5), Huron (8), and Erie (8) using a 333 µm mesh manta trawl towed for 60 min at 2.0 knots.
- Samples were preserved in 70% isopropyl alcohol, rinsed in salt water, sorted under a dissecting microscope, and separated into three size classes (0.355–0.999 mm, 1.00–4.749 mm, >4.75 mm) and five categories (fragment, foamed polystyrene, line, pellet, film); abundance per km² was calculated from tow length and trawl width.
- All particles <1 mm from each sample were examined by SEM/EDS for elemental composition; suspected microbeads were compared with two national facial cleanser products, and a fraction of sample 21 was soaked in 2 M HCl for 24 h to remove biofilm before SEM imaging.
Limitations
- The paper states that visual observation alone is insufficient to separate microplastic from other debris, as shown by the misidentification of coal ash particles.
- Evident from the text: SEM/EDS analysis was applied only to particles <1 mm, while particles >1 mm were identified visually and excluded from SEM/EDS.
- Evident from the text: the survey covered only three of the five Great Lakes during a single July 2012 expedition, with high spatial variability; the microbead source attribution is suspected based on similarity to consumer products rather than confirmed by tracing.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
13 Own result · 9 Own interpretation · 4 Sources not found · 4 No full text of the sources · 3 Own method · 1 Not checked yet · 1 No basis given
In the paper
“SEM/EDS analysis also allowed the determination that many particles initially identified as microplastic were actually aluminum silicates.”
- Also stated in: § 3. Results · plain
“The aluminum silicate particles were determined to be coal ash and coal fly ash (Fig. 2) based upon a match between our SEM/EDS analysis and similar analyses performed by a commercial ash analysis firm”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites STS Analytical Testing Laboratory
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 3. Results · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with particle counts ranging from $450 up to over 450,000 per square kilometer”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“overall counts varying from 0 to over 450,000 plastic particles per square kilometer”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the 21 net tows, all samples except one, sample 13, contained plastic”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the average abundance was approximately 43,000 microplastic particles/km 2”
- Also stated in: § 3. Results · plain
“the average abundance was 43,157 plastic particles/km 2”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“yielding an average count density of 43,157 ± 115,519 particles/km 2”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > Abstract
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § 3. Results · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The size classes representing particles 0.355-0.999mm accounted for 81% of the total particle count.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In fact, Lake Erie samples account for $90% of all the pelagic plastic debris”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“with samples 20 and 21 alone containing 85% of all microplastic particles collected in all samples combined.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Microplastic pellets and fragments were far more abundant than other particle types.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The microbeads within these consumer products were compared to the multi-colored microplastic spheres in the samples, and found to be of similar shape, size, color and elemental composition (Fig. 4).”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · hedged
“Many microplastic particles were multi-colored spheres, which were compared to, and are suspected to be, microbeads from consumer products containing microplastic particles of similar size, shape, texture and composition.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · hedged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We report here the first open-water survey for plastic pollution within the Laurentian Great Lakes system.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 1. Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 10
- Probably not a substantial claim. 4
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“contained 1101 plastic particles, or 463,423 particles/km 2 , which was the highest count in one 60-min tow and greater than the count of all other samples combined.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“station 20, downstream from two major cities, contained over 466,000 particles/km 2 , greater than all other stations combined.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of our 21 samples, 8 were found to contain coal/fly ash, with an average contribution of 20% (within the 0.355-1 mm size classification).”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“SEM analysis determined nearly 20% of particles less than 1 mm, which were initially identified as microplastic by visual observation, were aluminum silicate from coal ash.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While the samples showed great spatial variability (Fig. 1), with particle counts ranging from $450 up to over 450,000 per square kilometer, the samples from Lake Erie were consistently the most concentrated as compared to the other two Great Lakes sampled.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plaincorrelationaln = 21- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our two samples with high particle counts, sample 20 & 21, contained 28% and 27% aluminum silicate, respectively”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These two samples were collected in the area of converging currents, are in close proximity to several coal burning power plants (Stamper et al., 2012) and are directly downstream from the cities of Detroit, MI, Cleveland, OH and Erie, PA, (Fig. 1).”
- Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · hedged
“Annual mean current modeling suggest that currents in Lake Erie are pushed southward along the shoreline (Beletsky et al., 1999).”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stamper et al., 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Beletsky et al., 1999 source
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · hedged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“tended to show slightly higher particle counts as compared to Lake Huron.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“SEM/EDS analyses confirmed that suspected paint fragments were not polymeric and had a nearly identical elemental fingerprint to samples taken from the vessel.It was concluded that these were paint chips from the vessel and they were excluded from plastic particle counts.”
- Also stated in: § 2. Materials and methods · plain
“Qualitative elemental composition of particles was confirmed using an Oxford INCA Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy system (EDS).”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 2. Materials and methods · plain
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Particles >1 mm were more easily identified as plastic, and therefore excluded from SEM/EDS analysis.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Particles larger than 1 mm can be reliably identified as plastic by visual observation without SEM/EDS confirmation.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Microbeads are microplastic by design and have similar consequences in the marine environment.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In the 8 states that border the Great Lakes, there are 144 coal-burning power plants (Stamper et al., 2012), which may release aluminum silicates in the form of coal ash or fly ash into waterways through wastewater discharge or aeolian transport.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stamper et al., 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“microplastic particles from sandblasting media have been suspected to pollute the marine environment since the early 1990s (Zitko and Hanlon, 1991).”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Zitko and Hanlon, 1991 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The presence of microplastics and coal ash in these surface samples, which were most abundant where lake currents converge, are likely from nearby urban effluent and coal burning power plants.”
- Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
“These two samples were collected in the area of converging currents, are in close proximity to several coal burning power plants (Stamper et al., 2012) and are directly downstream from the cities of Detroit, MI, Cleveland, OH and Erie, PA, (Fig. 1).”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Stamper et al., 2012
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plainconditionaln = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 4. Discussion · plain
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All of these materials would be negatively buoyant in freshwater, and therefore are not likely to appear within samples obtained in the Great Lakes.”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · hedged
“Though sandblasting media may release microplastic particles to the environment, their negative buoyancy in freshwater likely eliminates them as a drifting pollutant.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 4. Discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · hedged
The paper relies on this without support.
Few, if any, wastewater treatment facilities capture all floating, non-biodegradable particulate of 0.5 mm size or smaller.
“but few, if any, wastewater treatment facilities capture all floating, non-biodegradable particulate of 0.5 mm size or smaller.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Particles larger than 1 mm can be reliably identified as plastic by visual observation without SEM/EDS confirmation.
“Particles >1 mm were more easily identified as plastic, and therefore excluded from SEM/EDS analysis.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated major: it would touch a result — a value a result rests on, reported and recomputed p-values on opposite sides of the significance level, two passages that conflict with no sign which is right, or a cited work retracted before this paper was published.
In the paper
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
“Great Lakes sample 20, collected at 42°23.62N, 79°57.21W,contained 1101 plastic particles, or 463,423 particles/km 2”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 5. Conclusion
“| 20 | 42.3938 | À79.9536 | 1101 | 3.87 | 466305 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
“with particle counts ranging from $450 up to over 450,000 per square kilometer”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 5. Conclusion
“| 13 | 43.4134 | À82.3994 | 0 | 3.93 | 0 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 3. Results
“the samples from Lake Erie were consistently the most concentrated as compared to the other two Great Lakes sampled.”
§ Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes > 5. Conclusion
“| 15 | 41.7523 | À82.9450 | 9 | 3.15 | 4686 |”
Citations
Cites
Lost at sea: where is all the plastic?
Thompson, R. C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R. P., Davis, A., Rowland, S. J., John, A. W. G., McGonigle, D., & Russell, A. E. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1094559 · Cited by 7,765
Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments
Barnes, D. K. A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R. C., & Barlaz, M. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0205 · Cited by 6,126
Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review
Cole, M., Lindeque, P., Halsband, C., & Galloway, T. S. (2011) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.09.025 · Cited by 6,023
Accumulation of Microplastic on Shorelines Woldwide: Sources and Sinks
Browne, M. A., Crump, P., Niven, S. J., Teuten, E. L., Tonkin, A., Galloway, T. S., & Thompson, R. C. (2011) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es201811s · Cited by 4,838
The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review.
Derraik, J. G. B. (2002) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/s0025-326x(02)00220-5 · Cited by 4,042
Transport and release of chemicals from plastics to the environment and to wildlife
Teuten, E. L., Saquing, J. M., Knappe, D. R. U., Barlaz, M. A., Jonsson, S., Björn, A., Rowland, S. J., Thompson, R. C., Galloway, T. S., Yamashita, R., et al. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0284 · Cited by 2,938
Plastic Resin Pellets as a Transport Medium for Toxic Chemicals in the Marine Environment
Mato, Y., Isobe, T., Takada, H., Kanehiro, H., OHTAKE, C., & Kaminuma, T. (2000) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es0010498 · Cited by 1,898
Gregory, M. R. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0265 · Cited by 1,852
Plastics on the Sargasso Sea Surface
Carpenter, E. J., & Smith, K. L. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.175.4027.1240 · Cited by 1,663
Monitoring the abundance of plastic debris in the marine environment
Ryan, P. G., Moore, C. J., van Franeker, J. A., & Moloney, C. L. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0207 · Cited by 1,565
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 1,101–1,200 of 1,851
Zhuang, L., Zhang, Y., Xue, Y., Ren, Y., He, J., & Sun, H. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.172880 · Cited by 18
A Review of Microplastics in Freshwater Environments: Locations, Methods, and Pollution Loads
Peller, J. R., Nelson, C. R., Babu, B. G., Iceman, C. R., & Kostelnik, E. (2020) · ACS symposium series · doi:10.1021/bk-2020-1352.ch004 · Cited by 19
Li, W., Duo, J., Wufuer, R., Wang, S., & Pan, X. (2022) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-021-18284-7 · Cited by 20
“Previous studies have suggested that MP concentrations in aquatic environments were mainly driven by population density or economic development (Lahens et al. 2018; Peng et al. 2018; Eriksen et al. 2013; Yonkos et al. 2014; Liu et al. 2019).”
BackgroundExposure and effects of microplastics on wildlife : A review of existing data
Kärrman, A., Schönlau, C., & Engwall, M. (2016) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · Cited by 19
Novel environmentally sustainable xylitol-based plasticizer: synthesis and application
Hou, B., Ren, L., Fu, D., Jiang, Y., Zhang, M. Y., & Zhang, H. (2021) · Journal of Polymer Research · doi:10.1007/s10965-021-02694-9 · Cited by 18
“In recent years, the overuse of non-degradable polymer materials has resulted in increasingly serious problems such as environmental pollution and "microplastics" [1, 2].”
BackgroundATICI, A. A., Sepil, A., Şen, F., & Karagöz, M. H. (2022) · Chemistry and Ecology · doi:10.1080/02757540.2021.2022126 · Cited by 18
Idris, F., Febrianto, T., Hidayati, J. R., et al. (2022) · IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/967/1/012009 · Cited by 18
“In addition, mechanical forces such as waves and wind can break down the degraded plastic into ever smaller particles (mechanical degradation) [3].”
BackgroundMülayim, A., Bat, L., Öztekin, A., Kecel‐Gunduz, S., Yücedağ, E., & Bıçak, B. (2022) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-022-05908-y · Cited by 21
“The number of studies in freshwater systems is relatively less than in marine ecosystems (Eriksen et al., 2013; Mani et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2017; Grbić et al., 2020; Manikanda Bharath et al., 2021).”
BackgroundThormeyer, M., & Tseng, M. (2023) · Journal of Medical Entomology · doi:10.1093/jme/tjad014 · Cited by 18
Research status and prospects of microplastic pollution in lakes
Li, T., Zhang, W., Yu, H., Hai, C., Wang, Y., Shan, Y., & Tsedevdorj, S.-O. (2023) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-023-11043-w · Cited by 19
“Net sampling is widely used in lakes in North America and Africa and is used in the Great Lakes and Lake Victoria (Egessa et al., 2020; Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialWater or sediment? Assessing seasonal microplastic accumulation from wastewater treatment works
Dalu, T., Ngomane, N., Dondofema, F., & Cuthbert, R. N. (2023) · H2Open Journal · doi:10.2166/h2oj.2023.017 · Cited by 20
Microplastic pollution of drinking water in a metropolis
Büyükünal, S. K., Koluman, A., & Muratoğlu, K. (2023) · Journal of Water and Health · doi:10.2166/wh.2023.265 · Cited by 18
Field and laboratory microplastics uptake by a freshwater shrimp
Cuthbert, R. N., Nkosi, M. S., & Dalu, T. (2024) · Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1002/ece3.11198 · Cited by 18
“Within the middle reaches is the Mpumalanga Province capital Nelspruit, which is home to most industrial activities, wastewater treatment plants, and storm drainage facilities, all of which are potential sources of microplastics (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundLi, J., Liu, F., Yang, C., Zheng, S., Xiao, L., Li, J., Tu, C., & Luo, Y. (2019) · Journal of Basic Microbiology · doi:10.1002/jobm.201900415 · Cited by 19
“As an emerging pollutant, microplastics are ubiquitous in estuaries, coastal zones, and offshore seas, including lakes, subtidal sediments, straits, and bays [6,7].”
BackgroundWater Pollution Control Technologies
Reddy, D. H. K. (2017) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-409548-9.10163-0 · Cited by 21
Sabra, M. S., Sayed, A. E. H., Idriss, S. K. A., & Soliman, H. A. M. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-64282-3 · Cited by 17
Iwalaye, O. A., Moodley, G. K., & Robertson-Andersson, D. V. (2021) · Ocean Science Journal · doi:10.1007/s12601-021-00013-3 · Cited by 21
Design of a confocal micro-Raman spectroscopy system and research on microplastics detection
Lu, J., Xue, Q., Bai, H., et al. (2021) · Applied Optics · doi:10.1364/ao.433256 · Cited by 17
Fate and Behavior of Microplastics in Freshwater Systems
Atugoda, T., Piyumali, H., Liyanage, S., Mahatantila, K., & Vithanage, M. S. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39041-9_42 · Cited by 30
Sonko, A., Brehmer, P., de Magny, G. C., et al. (2022) · Regional Studies in Marine Science · doi:10.1016/j.rsma.2022.102755 · Cited by 16
Microplastics in subsurface water and zooplankton from eight lakes in British Columbia
Klasios, N., & Tseng, M. (2023) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2022-0293 · Cited by 17
Mazumder, D., Quader, M. F. B., Saha, S., Islam, M. A., Sarker, R. H., & Chowdhury, A. M. (2023) · Food Science & Nutrition · doi:10.1002/fsn3.3486 · Cited by 17
Systematic review on fate and behavior of microplastics towards the environment
Chellasamy, G., Ramasundaram, S., Veerapandian, M., Chandran, M., Dhanasekaran, B., Oh, T. H., Govindaraju, S., & Yun, K. (2023) · TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.trac.2023.117390 · Cited by 22
Giri, S., Dimkpa, C. O., Ratnasekera, D., & Mukherjee, A. (2024) · Environmental and Experimental Botany · doi:10.1016/j.envexpbot.2024.105666 · Cited by 17
Gani, A. R. F., Pathak, S., Hussain, A., Shukla, A. K., & Chand, S. (2024) · Environmental Geochemistry and Health · doi:10.1007/s10653-024-01992-7 · Cited by 20
Microplastic in Marine Environment and Its Impact
Wibowo, Y. G., Maryani, A. T., Rosanti, D., & Rosarina, D. (2019) · Sainmatika Jurnal Ilmiah Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam · doi:10.31851/sainmatika.v16i1.2884 · Cited by 17
Governance and Measures for the Prevention of Marine Debris
Stoll, T., Stoett, P. J., Vince, J., & Hardesty, B. D. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10618-8_26-1 · Cited by 25
“Once used, microbeads tend to be washed down household drains, and there is ample evidence that they escape through wastewater filters and that even advanced filtration technologies cannot prevent this from happening (Eriksen et al. 2013; Isobe 2016; Cheung and Fok 2017).”
BackgroundSimamora, C. S. L., Warsidah, W., & Nurdiansyah, S. I. (2020) · Jurnal Laut Khatulistiwa · doi:10.26418/lkuntan.v2i3.34828 · Cited by 17
Microplastics in fish gut, first records from the Tom River in West Siberia, Russia
Frank, Y. A., Vorobiev, E. D., Babkina, I. B., Antsiferov, D. V., & Vorobiev, D. S. (2020) · Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta Biologiya · doi:10.17223/19988591/52/7 · Cited by 18
Sources of Micro and Nano Plastic Hydrocarbon Pollutants in Marine Bodies and Their Treatment
Swain, S., Sudha, M. P., Dey, S., et al. (2025) · Environmental science and engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-81615-4_3 · Cited by 16
Liu, Y., Wang, K., Shi, X., Chen, L., & Li, H. (2025) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2025.138135 · Cited by 19
Plastics in soil environments: All things considered
Huo, Y., Dijkstra, F. A., Possell, M., & Singh, B. (2022) · Advances in agronomy · doi:10.1016/bs.agron.2022.05.002 · Cited by 17
Plastic contamination of sandy beaches along the southern Baltic – a one season field survey results
Mazurkiewicz, M., Martinez, P. S., Konwent, W., Deja, K., Kotwicki, L., & Węsławski, J. M. (2022) · Oceanologia · doi:10.1016/j.oceano.2022.07.004 · Cited by 14
Chen, C., Deng, J., Zhang, Q., & Cai, J. (2022) · International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1007/s13762-022-04559-0 · Cited by 15
“Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes was reported first (Eriksen et al., 2013), and the presence of microplastics was reported in freshwater beaches, lakes or rivers in Africa, Europe, Asia, North and South America (Eerkes-Medrano et al.”
BackgroundDhea, L. A., Kurniawan, A., Ulfa, S. M., & Karimah, K. (2023) · Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA · doi:10.29303/jppipa.v9i2.2777 · Cited by 16
Unaccounted Microplastics in the Outlet of Wastewater Treatment Plants—Challenges and Opportunities
Gangula, A., Chhetri, T., Atty, M., Shanks, B. C., Kannan, R., Upendran, A., & Afrasiabi, Z. (2023) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr11030810 · Cited by 16
Widespread microplastic pollution in Indiana, USA , rivers
Conard, W. M., O’Reilly, K. E., Hartlage, C. S., & Lamberti, G. A. (2023) · River Research and Applications · doi:10.1002/rra.4204 · Cited by 17
“Microplastics in pelagic (i.e., open water) zones of the Great Lakes are typically larger particles such as fragments, beads, films, and foam, with relatively few fibers (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundYadav, D. K., & Kumar, R. (2023) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2023.1279589 · Cited by 16
Variability in the drivers of microplastic consumption by fish across four lake ecosystems
Conowall, P., Schreiner, K. M., Marchand, J., Minor, E. C., Schoenebeck, C. W., Maurer‐Jones, M. A., & Hrabik, T. R. (2024) · Frontiers in Earth Science · doi:10.3389/feart.2024.1339822 · Cited by 16
Bansal, S., Kumar, N., Tahir, M. D., Jindal, J., Sharma, A., Grover, S., Singh, P., & Kumari, K. (2024) · Materials Today Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.mtsust.2024.100833 · Cited by 17
Gerolin, C. R., Zornio, B. F., Pataro, L. F., Labuto, G., & Semensatto, D. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-33960-0 · Cited by 17
“6), a pattern often observed in lakes and reservoirs (Bertoldi et al. 2021; Di and Wang 2018; Eriksen et al. 2013; Su et al. 2016; Tamminga and Fischer 2020; Yin et al. 2022; Zhang et al. 2016).”
Yu, X., Liu, Y., Tan, C., Zhai, L., Wang, T., Fang, J., Zhang, B., Ma, W., & Lu, X. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174968 · Cited by 17
Morgan, S. E., & DeLouise, L. A. (2024) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.143338 · Cited by 17
Hankett, J. M., Collin, W. R., Yang, P., Chen, Z., & Duhaime, M. B. (2016) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b05598 · Cited by 16
Microplastics in the aquatic environment—Perspectives on the scope of the problem
Burgess, R. M., Ho, K. T., Mallos, N. J., et al. (2017) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.3867 · Cited by 16
Nadiratuzzahra, S., & Tristantini, D. (2020) · AIP conference proceedings · doi:10.1063/5.0005117 · Cited by 16
Microplastic pollutants in the coastal dunes of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario
Costello, J. D., & Ebert, J. R. (2020) · Journal of Great Lakes Research · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2020.08.001 · Cited by 18
An Environmentally Friendly Method for the Identification of Microplastics Using Density Analysis
Barnett, S., Evans, R., Martín-Montalvo, B. Q., Miliou, A., & Pietroluongo, G. (2021) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.5164 · Cited by 16
Nisari, A. R., & Sujatha, C. H. (2024) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-024-07356-2 · Cited by 16
“The small-sized multi-colored polymers are used in the costume industries and personal care products, these micro beads float in freshwater (Eriksen et al., 2013; Gerolin et al., 2020).”
Michler‐Kozma, D., Neu, T. R., & Gabel, F. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151663 · Cited by 17
Forrest, S. A., & Vermaire, J. C. (2023) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-023-11277-8 · Cited by 17
“(1234567890) known source of microplastics (Corradini et al., 2019; Zubris & Richards, 2005) with precipitation also entraining microplastics through runoff over WWTP sludge (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundPrajapati, A., Dehal, A., & Kumar, A. R. (2024) · Water, Air and Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-024-06964-2 · Cited by 15
Stanković, J., Milošević, D., Paunović, M., Jovanović, B., Popović, N., Tomović, J., Atanacković, A. D., Radulović, K., Lončarević, D. R., & Raković, M. (2024) · Water · doi:10.3390/w16070962 · Cited by 17
Singh, P., Varshney, G., & Kaur, R. (2024) · Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part C · doi:10.1080/26896583.2024.2370715 · Cited by 17
Microplastics in Aquaculture Systems and Their Transfer in the Food Chain
Lyu, W., Chen, Q., Cheng, L., & Zhou, W. (2020) · The handbook of environmental chemistry · doi:10.1007/698_2020_455 · Cited by 21
Interaction of Microplastics and Heavy Metals: Toxicity, Mechanisms, and Environmental Implications
Jiang, X., & Li, M. (2020) · The handbook of environmental chemistry · doi:10.1007/698_2020_460 · Cited by 20
Characteristics and distribution of microplastics in the surface water of the Songhua River in China
Tang, S., Gao, L., Gao, H., & Zou, D. (2021) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-021-15296-1 · Cited by 16
Li, X., Han, X., Vogt, R. D., et al. (2021) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131904 · Cited by 15
Data on the microplastics contamination in water and sediments along the Haraz River estuary, Iran
Naeeji, N., Rafeei, M., Azizi, H., Hashemi, M., & Eslami, A. (2020) · Data in Brief · doi:10.1016/j.dib.2020.106155 · Cited by 15
Bibliometric analysis for global marine microplastic pollution control from 2013 to 2022
Lou, X., Sui, Y., Fang, C., Tang, Y., Huang, D., & Guo, Y. (2023) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2023.1215317 · Cited by 14
Arcadio, C. G. L. A., Albarico, F. P. J. B., Hsieh, S., Chen, Y.-T., & Bacosa, H. P. (2025) · Journal of Contaminant Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jconhyd.2025.104603 · Cited by 15
Micro(nano)plastics in the total environment – A holistic review
Jaszczyszyn, K., Kiedrzyńska, E., Matuszewska, D., Xue, J., & Kiedrzyński, M. (2025) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179806 · Cited by 17
White, E. M., Horn, J., Wang, S., Crawford, B. P., Ritchie, B. W., Carraway, D., & Locklin, J. (2021) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c00974 · Cited by 15
Sarin, C., & Klomjek, P. (2022) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-022-10578-8 · Cited by 15
“In contrast, the abundance of MP in the Bueng Boraphet Wetland was slightly higher than that in the Laurentian Great Lakes, USA (Eriksen et al., 2013); Northern Lake Victoria, Africa (Egessa et al., 2020); and Qinghai Lake, China (Xiong et al., 2018).”
ResultPorras-Rojas, M. A., Charry-Vargas, C., Yustres, J. L. M., Silva, P. M., & Gómez-Méndez, L. D. (2023) · Microplastics · doi:10.3390/microplastics2030021 · Cited by 15
Priyanka, R., & Govindarajulu, B. (2023) · Regional Studies in Marine Science · doi:10.1016/j.rsma.2023.103151 · Cited by 14
Khedre, A. M., Ramadan, S. A., Ashry, A., & Alaraby, M. (2023) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-023-30855-4 · Cited by 15
A Multicompartment Assessment of Microplastic Contamination in Semi-remote Boreal Lakes
McIlwraith, H. K., Dias, M., Orihel, D. M., Rennie, M. D., Harrison, A. L., Hoffman, M. J., Provencher, J. F., & Rochman, C. M. (2024) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.5832 · Cited by 14
“The manta trawl technique is a popular sampling method in marine and freshwater studies (Cole et al., 2011; Eriksen et al., 2013; Hidalgo ‐ Ruz et al., 2012).”
MethodA Review of Microplastic Identification and Characterization Methods in Aquatic Environments
Jahanpeyma, P., & Baranya, S. (2024) · Periodica Polytechnica Civil Engineering · doi:10.3311/ppci.22886 · Cited by 16
Sources, Uses and Transport of Secondary Microplastics from Land to Marine Environment
Adetuyi, B. O., Mathew, J. T., Inobeme, A., Olaitan, F. Y., Adetunji, C. O., Shahnawaz, M., Oyewole, O. A., Eniola, K. I. T., & Yerima, M. B. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-8357-5_3 · Cited by 21
Joint aerobic biodegradation of synthetic and natural textile microfibers and laundry surfactants
Ríos, F., Tapia-Navarro, C., Gallegos, J. F. M., Lechuga, M., & Fernández‐Serrano, M. (2024) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.136619 · Cited by 14
Zhang, Z., Zhu, Y., Yang, Y., et al. (2025) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5c08029 · Cited by 14
USHIJIMA, T., Tanaka, S., SUZUKI, Y., YUKIOKA, S., Mengze, W. A. N. G., NABETANI, Y., Fujii, S., & Takada, H. (2018) · Journal of Japan Society on Water Environment · doi:10.2965/jswe.41.107 · Cited by 14
Some reflections on water for residential uses in developed countries
González‐Gómez, F., Rubio, M. Á. G., & Guardiola, J. (2020) · International Journal of Water Resources Development · doi:10.1080/07900627.2019.1707072 · Cited by 13
“…& Vethaak, 2017; Mani, Hauk, Walter, & Burkhardt-Holm, 2015; Sadri & Thompson, 2014), America (Anderson et al., 2017; Baldwin, Corsi, & Mason, 2016; Eriksen et al., 2013; Lima, Costa, & Barletta, 2014; McCormick, Hoellein, Mason, Schluep, & Kelly, 2014; Moore, Lattin, & Zellers, 2011) and Africa…”
Kim, M., Jeong, Y.-H., & Kwak, D.-H. (2020) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124660 · Cited by 14
Wu, C., Li, B., & Xiong, N. N. (2021) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3069990 · Cited by 16
“In this experiment, we chose the value of n in the range of [2 , 26].”
BackgroundMethodMicroplastics identification in landfill leachates by different spectroscopic techniques
Simongini, C., Pučetaitė, M., Serranti, S., van Praagh, M., Hammer, E. C., & Bonifazi, G. (2022) · Detritus · doi:10.31025/2611-4135/2022.15169 · Cited by 14
Plastic materials and water sources actively select and shape wastewater plastispheres over time
Xia, Y., Zhang, X., Zhang, M., Chen, L., Tang, X., Sun, Y., & Li, X. (2022) · Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11783-022-1580-1 · Cited by 13
“, 2014), and lakes (Eriksen et al., 2013), from not only effluents of wastewater treatment plants (Estahbanati and Fahrenfeld, 2016), but also surface runoff, rain, and storms.”
Microplastics in Aquatic Systems – Monitoring Methods and Biological Consequences
Hamm, T., Lorenz, C., & Piehl, S. (2018) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-93284-2_13 · Cited by 18
Quality assessment of research studies on microplastics in soils: A methodological perspective.
Shanmugam, S. D., Praveena, S., & Sarkar, B. (2022) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134026 · Cited by 11
Pharmaceutical residues and other emerging substances in the effluent of sewage treatment plants
Baresel, C., Cousins, A. P., Allard, A., Westling, K., Wahlberg, C., & Söhr, S. (2015) · Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) · Cited by 13
Miller, M. E., Santana, M. F. M., Carsique, M., Motti, C. A., Hamann, M., & Kroon, F. J. (2022) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119545 · Cited by 13
Kaur, M., Sharma, A., Sharma, K. M. T. K., John, P. J., & Bhatnagar, P. (2024) · Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.tox.2024.154043 · Cited by 13
A bibliometric analysis of microplastic pollution in aquatic environments from 2013 to 2023
Yang, S., Li, P., Jiao, Y., Li, Z., Ruan, Y., & Yang, Q. (2025) · Sustainable Environment Research · doi:10.1186/s42834-025-00257-x · Cited by 16
Rashid, S., Majeed, L. R., Hussain, N., Bhat, S. U., Shabib, A. G., Maraqa, M. A., Rather, M. Y., & Bhat, M. A. (2026) · Microchemical Journal · doi:10.1016/j.microc.2026.117210 · Cited by 20
Kibria, G., Nugegoda, D., & Haroon, A. K. Y. (2022) · Emerging contaminants and associated treatment technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89220-3_7 · Cited by 15
Microplastics in the Water Column of Western Lake Superior
Fox, J. M., Schwoerer, G. D., Schreiner, K. M., Minor, E. C., & Maurer‐Jones, M. A. (2022) · ACS ES&T Water · doi:10.1021/acsestwater.2c00169 · Cited by 13
MICROPLASTICS AND THE AMAZON: FROM THE RIVERS TO THE ESTUARY
de Souza, M. T., Sales-Shimomoto, V., da Silva, G., & Val, A. L. (2023) · Química Nova · doi:10.21577/0100-4042.20230066 · Cited by 18
Tran, M. L., Nguyen, H. T. V., Thai, V. P., & Nguyen, T. N. (2023) · Human and Ecological Risk Assessment An International Journal · doi:10.1080/10807039.2023.2228414 · Cited by 12
“5mm in size was not captured by wastewater treatment systems (Eriksen et al. 2013).”
BackgroundMiranda-Peña, L., Buitrago-Duque, L., Rangel-Buitrago, N. G., Adriana Gracia, C., Arana, V. A., & Trilleras, J. E. (2023) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/d3ra04016j · Cited by 22
Effects of microplastics and nanoplastics on host–parasite interactions in aquatic environments
Balsdon, M. K. C. B., & Koprivnikar, J. (2024) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s00442-023-05502-x · Cited by 13
“For instance, Eriksen et al. (2013) reported MBs from surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes at a concentration of 0.027/m 3 .”
InfluentialKovačić, I., Štefanko, K., Špada, V., Pustijanac, E., Buršić, M., & Burić, P. (2024) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app14052056 · Cited by 15
de Castro, D. G., da Silva, A. L. L., Lopes, M. D. N., Freire, A. S., & Leite, N. K. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-33029-y · Cited by 12
“For example, the discharge of effluents is an important source of irregular spheres and fragments due to the release of this microplastic from personal hygiene products (Eriksen et al. 2013; Fendall & Sewell 2009).”
Microplastic Characterization by Infrared Spectroscopy
Xu, J., Hassellöv, M., Yu, K., & Gowen, A. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10618-8_21-1 · Cited by 19
Occurrence and sources of microplastics in dust of the Ebinur lake Basin, northwest China
Zhang, Z., Mamat, Z., & Pengwei, W. (2022) · Environmental Geochemistry and Health · doi:10.1007/s10653-022-01279-9 · Cited by 13
Daily, J., Tyler, A. C., & Hoffman, M. J. (2022) · Journal of Great Lakes Research · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2022.07.001 · Cited by 16
Martinho, S. D., Fernandes, V. C., Figueiredo, S. A., & Delerue-Matos, C. M. (2022) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym14173645 · Cited by 14
Haque, F., & Fan, C. (2022) · Environmental sciences · doi:10.5772/intechopen.107896 · Cited by 16
Microplastic Detection and Analysis from Water and Sediment: A Review
Sajad, S., Allam, B. K., Mushtaq, Z., & Banerjee, S. (2023) · Macromolecular Symposia · doi:10.1002/masy.202100367 · Cited by 13
Kang, M., Gong, D., Weng, Y., Huang, Y., Chen, Y., Li, F., & Bai, X. (2023) · Environmental Science Nano · doi:10.1039/d2en00915c · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Eriksen, M., Mason, S., Wilson, S., Box, C., Zellers, A., Edwards, W., Farley, H., & Amato, S.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- SUNY Fredonia (US)
- Niagara University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Eriksen, Marcus
- Venue
- Marine Pollution Bulletin
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-12
- Volume
- 77
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 177-182
- ISSN
- 0025-326X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2150503350
- Cited by
- 1,937
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 117 · 2025: 160 · 2024: 212 · 2023: 219 · 2022: 227 · 2021: 228 · 2020: 226 · 2019: 172 · 2018: 123 · 2017: 105 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 50 · 2014: 22
- FWCI
- 36.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Marine Pollution Bulletin (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- ScholarSphere (Penn State Libraries) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- River Foundation
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Oil Spill Detection and Mitigation
- Keywords
- microplastic pollution, Great Lakes, neuston, surface water, microbeads, coal ash, aluminum silicate, urban effluents, coal-fired power plants, lake currents
- MeSH terms
- Environmental Monitoring, Plastics, United States, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Lakes
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
