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 1,401–1,500 of 1,851
Water Pollution Hazards of Single-Use Face Mask in Indian Riverine and Marine System
Aditya, M. N., S, A. S., Sharma, M., Sivagami, K., Karthika, S., & Chakraborty, S. (2022) · Springer transactions in civil and environmental engineering · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-1847-6_8 · Cited by 7
Avila, F. L., Stürmer, S., Monteleone, A., Neely, D., Kuhajda, B. R., George, A., Knoll, M., Schary, W., & Fath, A. (2022) · Journal of Cellular Biotechnology · doi:10.3233/jcb-220076 · Cited by 8
Current studies on the degradation of microplastics in the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem
Devi, K., Singh, A. D., Dhiman, S., Kour, J., Bhardwaj, T., Sharma, N., Madaan, I., Khanna, K., Ohri, P., Singh, A. P., et al. (2023) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-023-29640-0 · Cited by 6
“The larger the size of MPs will be adsorbed with difficulty in comparison to the small-sized ones (Eriksen et al. 2013; Corcoran et al. 2015).”
BackgroundOccurrence and fate of microplastics in urban water management systems
Ou, H., Liu, R., Liao, Z., & Zeng, E. Y. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-15332-7.00006-5 · Cited by 10
Jiang, Y., Yang, Y., Zhan, C., & Cheng, B. (2024) · Environmental Science Processes & Impacts · doi:10.1039/d3em00500c · Cited by 8
Emerging Risk of Microplastics on Health, Agriculture and Environment
Shreetam, P., Nivethitha, A., & Kurapati, R. (2024) · Annals of Biomedical Science and Engineering · doi:10.29328/journal.abse.1001028 · Cited by 5
A bellwether for microplastic in wetland catchments in the Great Lakes region
Gilbert, D. S., Hayhurst, B. A., Grubisich, S., Schneider, N., Martin, O., DeNyse, C., Chomiak, K. M., Tyler, A. C., & Eddingsaas, N. C. (2024) · Journal of Great Lakes Research · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2024.102411 · Cited by 6
Identification of microplastics using spectroscopic methods
Samandra, S., Alwan, W. S., Hind, A., Ellis, A. V., & Clarke, B. O. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-15779-0.00020-1 · Cited by 5
Microplastics contamination in marine system
Kumar, A., Agrawal, M., Singh, A. K., Singh, H., & Kumar, P. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-29804-2.00008-1 · Cited by 5
Premières investigations sur la contamination en microplastiques d’une zone urbaine
Dris, R., Gaspéri, J., Rocher, V., Saad, M., & Tassin, B. (2015) · Techniques Sciences Méthodes · doi:10.1051/tsm/201512025 · Cited by 5
Muhsin, M., Ahmad, S. W., Yanti, N. A., Mukhsar, M., & Safitri, A. N. (2021) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1899/1/012012 · Cited by 5
“7 million tons was identified in the ocean with various types of plastic sizes namely nano-, micro-, meso-, and microplastic [10,11].”
BackgroundOmbongi, J., Muthumbi, A. W. N., Robertson-Andersson, D. V., Onyari, J. M., & Kimani, E. N. (2021) · African Journal of Biological Sciences · doi:10.21608/ajbs.2022.105234.1025 · Cited by 10
“…of the fish were separated into different samples, weighed, chopped into smaller pieces and digested using 10 % KOH (1g: 5 ml) (Foekema et al, 2013; Eriksen et al., 2013; Rochman et al., 2015; Dehaut et al., 2016; Kuhn et al., 2017; Thiele et al., 2019) at 60°C for 14 hours (modified protocol).”
MethodContaminants in the Urban Environment: Microplastics
Yang, Y., Rodríguez‐Jorquera, I. A., McGuire, M., & Toor, G. S. (2016) · EDIS · doi:10.32473/edis-ss649-2015 · Cited by 5
The Impacts of Microplastics on Zooplankton
Cole, M. (2014) · Figshare · Cited by 6
Jiang, Y., Yang, F., Zhao, Y., Wang, X., Chen, M., & Wang, J. (2020) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127653 · Cited by 5
RetractedMicroplastics Identified in Commercial Over-the-counter Lubricant EyedropsPreprint
Jaeger, J. E., Burke, M., Wu, D., et al. (2024) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2024.05.26.24307941 · Cited by 5
Zhou, Y., Zhang, G., Zhang, D., Li, W., Zhu, N., Bo, J., Meng, X., Chen, Y., Yu, Q., & Liu, H. (2024) · Water · doi:10.3390/w16152155 · Cited by 5
Asadollahi, A., Akimoto, M. L., & Fakhraei, H. (2025) · Fibers and Polymers · doi:10.1007/s12221-025-01083-z · Cited by 5
“These include the marine environment [10–12], freshwater systems [13–15], terrestrial glaciers [4], agricultural fields [16, 17], and even the atmosphere [18, 19].”
From local to global: Leveraging localized environmental actions for scalable sustainability effects
Theis, S. (2025) · PLOS Sustainability and Transformation · doi:10.1371/journal.pstr.0000185 · Cited by 4
Števove, B., Príkazská, M., Sabová, A. A., & Kováč, V. (2025) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2025.144721 · Cited by 4
Microplastics in sediments: A systematic review structured through reproducible analytical pipelines
Jefroy, M., Lusher, A., van Bavel, B., & Ghaffari, P. (2026) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2026.144849 · Cited by 7
Plastic pollution in the aquatic ecosystem: An emerging threat and its mechanisms
Ali, M. M., Reale, P., Islam, M. S., Asaduzzaman, M., Alam, M., & Rahman, M. M. (2023) · Advances in chemical pollution, environmental management and protection · doi:10.1016/bs.apmp.2023.06.010 · Cited by 9
In Vitro and in Vivo Assays of Selected Plant Extracts Against Fruit Rot Fungi
Shaari, F. N., & Zainudin, N. A. I. M. (2023) · Sains Malaysiana · doi:10.17576/jsm-2023-5209-06 · Cited by 4
Impacts of wind forcing on microplastics kinematic in a sensitive water area
Wang, H., Wu, Y., Deng, Y., Wu, X., Li, X., Xu, H., Zeng, Y., & Yan, Y. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.177983 · Cited by 5
Gökdağ, K., Pekmez, T., Akca, G., Korkmaz, M., Pacheco, J. P., Kankılıç, G. B., Dede, C., Özkan, K., Beklioğlu, M., Jeppesen, E., et al. (2025) · Hydrobiologia · doi:10.1007/s10750-025-05844-y · Cited by 5
“…number of studies document the presence of MPs in marine environments, but also the presence of MPs in lakes and rivers has been extensively documented in recent years (e.g., Baldwin et al., 2016; Devereux et al., 2023; Eriksen et al., 2013; Free et al., 2014; Mao et al., 2020; Pan et al., 2020).”
Anandhan, K., Muralisankar, T., Yogeshwaran, A., Thangal, S. H., & Janani, K. S. (2025) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-025-08117-5 · Cited by 4
“Primary MPs are engineered particles intentionally used in the personal care products and cosmetics industries, whereas secondary MPs originate from consumer plastic waste when disposed into the environment without proper management (Eriksen et al., 2013; Sundt et al., 2014).”
Khan, M. T. (2025) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-025-08596-6 · Cited by 5
“Hydrochloric acid was used to remove the impurities from MPs (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
Microplastics: An Emerging Threat to the Aquatic Ecosystem
Srivastava, A., & Srivastava, A. K. (2020) · Environmental chemistry for a sustainable world · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38192-9_5 · Cited by 4
Occurrence of microplastics and nanoplastics in marine environment
Manojkumar, Y., Gopal, B., Sumanth, C., Pilli, S., Tyagi, R. D., & Pandey, A. (2022) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-99908-3.00010-5 · Cited by 6
Wang, Y., Zhang, B., Zhang, R., Wei, Y., Wang, Y., & Zhu, R. (2023) · Atmosphere · doi:10.3390/atmos14050838 · Cited by 8
Plastic Pollution and its Impact on Environment
Prasad, E. H., Sekhar, L. T. G. C., Narayana, M. R. R., Rajput, P., & Rajput, A. (2023) · Ecology Environment and Conservation · doi:10.53550/eec.2023.v29i03s.014 · Cited by 6
EFFECTS OF MICROPLASTIC CONCENTRATIONS ON THE SURVIVABILITY AND REPRODUCTION OF MOINA MACROCOPA
Gao, Y., FAN, K.-Y., WEI, J.-X., ZENG, Y.-Y., Liu, Q., & WANG, C. (2023) · Applied Ecology and Environmental Research · doi:10.15666/aeer/2105_41554163 · Cited by 4
Electrochemical treatment of plastic industry wastewaters powered by photovoltaic solar energy
Marmanis, D., Thysiadou, A. A., Marmani, I., et al. (2024) · E3S Web of Conferences · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202455101007 · Cited by 4
Impacts of polystyrene nanoplastics on microgel formation from effluent organic matter
Vazquez, C. I., Chang, H.-M., Gong, G., Shiu, R.-F., & Chin, W. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176209 · Cited by 4
Khaliq, Z., Ashraf, M. B., Abbasi, N. A., Ahmad, S. R., Shahid, S. U., & Qadir, A. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-35540-8 · Cited by 5
“However, the contamination tends to be greater near to the places with larger human population, urban centers and around the solid waste, sludge and wastewater treatment sites (Eriksen et al. 2013; Moore et al. 2011).”
Crutchett, T., Linge, K. L., Novak, P. A., Partridge, J. C., Paterson, H., & Hovey, R. K. (2025) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125184 · Cited by 4
Collection and Separation of Microplastics
da Costa, J. P., Duarte, A. C., & da Costa, M. F. (2020) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-10618-8_35-1 · Cited by 4
Saiwaree, S., & Kanokkantapong, V. (2021) · Environmental science and engineering · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-75278-1_10 · Cited by 4
Microplastic Pollution in Freshwater Systems: A Potential Environmental Threat
Singh, V., & Chakraborty, S. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-83553-8_15 · Cited by 4
Rahman, M., Haque, Z., Huda, N., Huq, M. A., Rauf, M., Fahim, M. M. H., & Arif, M. S. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-89984-4_17 · Cited by 4
Introduction to the Analytical Methodologies for the Analysis of Microplastics
da Costa, J. P., & Duarte, A. C. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-39041-9_1 · Cited by 4
Fadhila, F., Zulkarnaini, Z., Husin, A., et al. (2024) · Elkawnie · doi:10.22373/ekw.v10i1.22195 · Cited by 4
“Approximately 93% of microbeads used in cosmetics are composed of polyethylene (PE) (Eriksen et al., 2013; Gouin et al., 2015). personal care products microbeads, such as those found in toothpaste, facial scrubs, and liquid soap, constitute a significant source of microplastics originating from…”
BackgroundMartin, M. T., & Webb, K. (2019) · International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development · doi:10.1504/ijisd.2020.10025840 · Cited by 4
Ombongi, J., Muthumbi, N., Robertson-Andersson, D. V., Onyari, M., & Kimani, N. (2021) · African Journal of Biological Sciences · doi:10.21608/ajbs.2021.212176 · Cited by 9
Survey of Personal Care Products in the United States
Bernot, M. J., & Justice, J. R. (2014) · The handbook of environmental chemistry · doi:10.1007/698_2014_288 · Cited by 4
Ogden, W., & Everard, M. (2020) · International Journal of River Basin Management · doi:10.1080/15715124.2020.1830783 · Cited by 4
“The majority of microplastics found in the American Great Lakes were found to be secondary microplastics (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundMicroplastic ingestion by Characidae in rural streams (Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil)
Ferrari, L., & Hepp, L. U. (2021) · Biotemas · doi:10.5007/2175-7925.2021.e81780 · Cited by 4
Hentschel, L.-H. (2015) · Skemman · Cited by 4
Direct Observation of Nanoplastics in Ocean WaterPreprint
Luo, T., Moon, S., Martin, L. M. A., Kim, S., Zhang, Q., & Xu, W. L. (2023) · ChemRxiv · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2023-375jp · Cited by 3
Toxicity Assessment of Microconstituents in the Environment
Jagadeesh, N., Sundaram, B., & Dubey, B. (2023) · doi:10.1002/9781119825289.ch4 · Cited by 4
Microplastic to Accumulate Microbial Pathogens in the Terrestrial Environment
Kanojia, H., Purohit, H., Joshi, M. N., Kamdar, J. H., & Chakraborty, J. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-8357-5_20 · Cited by 3
Kanehara, I., Washihira, N., Nagasaka, T., Seki, H., Fujii, S., Kimura, T., Yamamoto, M., & Tanabe, T. (2025) · Materials & Design · doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2025.113804 · Cited by 2
Ulakesan, A., Sunil, S. L., Ramarajan, R., Mallikarjunaiah, S., & Gurushankara, H. P. (2025) · Mutagenesis · doi:10.1093/mutage/geaf020 · Cited by 3
Microplastics identified in commercial over-the-counter lubricant eyedrops
Jaeger, J., Burke, M., Wu, D., Curren, E., Leong, S. C. Y., Symons, R. K., Lim, B. X. H., Su, X., Mehta, J. S., Riau, A. K., et al. (2025) · Eye · doi:10.1038/s41433-025-04031-6 · Cited by 12
“Given the significant implications of these preliminary findings, all LDIR analyses were conducted in a National Association of Ultimately, this variability, while analytically challenging, is likely reflective of the true, real-world conditions these products endure from production to the consumer.”
Trapping of microplastic particles in Germany’s largest drinking water reservoir: a simulation study
Wendt‐Potthoff, K., Mi, C., Ahmadi, P., Fleckenstein, J. H., & Rinke, K. (2025) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/s12302-025-01192-9 · Cited by 4
“Microplastic particles (MP) have been detected in various habitats in aquatic environments all over the world [15, 17, 44] and MP pollution has reached a global scale impact [65, 66].”
Exploring microplastic pollution from origin to environmental impact and remediation approaches
Choudhary, A., Thakur, D., Kumar, R., Kaushal, D., Chauhan, V., Shandilya, P., & Kumar, M. (2025) · Discover Environment · doi:10.1007/s44274-025-00402-8 · Cited by 3
“3 [56].”
Mukherjee, F., Shi, A., Latasa, L. A., You, F., & Abbott, N. L. (2025) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.ady1167 · Cited by 4
“When used to characterize MPs in water samples, however, the approach suffers from rates of false positive identification that range from 20 to 70 % ( 10 ), with organic matter and inorganic species such as aluminosilicates being incorrectly identified as MPs.”
Silva, J. P., Sampaio, P., & de Pablo, H. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app16010439 · Cited by 3
Batista, G. S., Ferreira, V. A. S., Godoy, L. G. R., et al. (2026) · ACS Omega · doi:10.1021/acsomega.5c11569 · Cited by 3
Buoninsegni, J., Anfuso, G., Tessari, U., Giro, V., Marrocchino, E., & Vaccaro, C. (2026) · Microplastics · doi:10.3390/microplastics5010015 · Cited by 4
Boleydei, H., Walker, T. R., Bougie, F., & Vaneeckhaute, C. (2026) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-025-09071-y · Cited by 3
“These results are quite similar to previously reported concentrations in Lake Superior (Cox et al., 2021; Eriksen et al., 2013; Hendrickson et al., 2018; Minor et al., 2020), Lake Erie (Cable et al., 2017; Eriksen et al., 2013; Mason et al., 2020), and Lake Ontario (Mason et al., 2020), as…”
Mithu, M. M., Fatema, K., Zaman, F., Anonna, W., Kanok, N. J. R., Zannat, T., Siddiquee, M. A. M., Dahal, Y., Dutta, R., Sumon, K. A., et al. (2026) · Journal of Sedimentary Environments · doi:10.1007/s43217-026-00282-9 · Cited by 3
“…mangrove forests (Nor & Obbard, 2014; Naji et al., 2019), sandy beaches (Wessel et al., 2016; Koongolla et al., 2018; Dean et al., 2018), lakes (Eriksen et al., 2013; Jiang et al., 2018; Jiménez-Contreras et al., 2024), and riverine environments (Kataoka et al., 2019; He et al., 2020;…”
Neurophysiological and Behavioral Effects of Micro- and Nanoplastics in Aquatic Organisms
Belanger, R. M., & Storks, L. (2026) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani16060941 · Cited by 4
Tools and Techniques to Analyse Microplastic Pollution in Aquatic and Terrestrial Ecosystems
Priyadarshi, G. V., Prajapati, S., & Trivedi, M. H. (2023) · BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBLISHERS eBooks · doi:10.2174/9789815165104123010004 · Cited by 3
Examining the Ecological Footprint of Microplastics: A Holistic Exploration from Genesis to Demise
Yadav, P., Dahiya, S., Yadav, S., Dahiya, D., Rani, M., & Chaudhary, S. (2024) · Oriental Journal Of Chemistry · doi:10.13005/ojc/400321 · Cited by 3
Raman Spectroscopy Based Approaches for Microplastics Investigations
Sunil, M., Unnimaya, S., Mithun, N., Chidangil, S., Kumar, K. S., & Lukose, J. (2024) · Emerging contaminants and associated treatment technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64253-1_27 · Cited by 4
Aydın, S., Ulvi, A., & Aydın, M. E. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-35029-4 · Cited by 4
“For the first time, Eriksen et al. (2013) reported plastic pollution in the Laurentian Great Lakes ecosystem as 43,157 ± 115,519 particles/km 2 .”
Observation and physical characterization of nanoparticles
Qiu, Y., Dong, Z., & Su, L. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-15779-0.00013-4 · Cited by 3
Detecting and measuring Microplastic pollution in Al Hoceima City's harbor, northern Morocco
Achoukhi, I., Hammoudani, Y. E., Haboubi, K., Bourjila, A., Touzani, A., Reklaoui, K., & Dimane, F. (2024) · Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cscee.2024.101093 · Cited by 5
On microplastics abundance in waters of Guizhou, China
Xiong, S., Bai, G., Shen, X., et al. (2025) · Journal of Oceanology and Limnology · doi:10.1007/s00343-025-4207-0 · Cited by 3
“Current studies primarily focus on the marine environment, including Canada, western Europe, China, and the waters around Antarctica (Desforges et al., 2014; Zhao et al., 2014; Steer et al., 2017; Reed et al., 2018).”
Semcesen, P., Wells, M. G., Sherlock, C., Gutierrez, R. F., & Rochman, C. M. (2025) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.118034 · Cited by 7
Sustainability nexus perspectives on water security and climate resilience
Karthe, D., Babel, M. S., Pu, J. Y., & Jarzebski, M. P. (2025) · Sustainability Nexus Forum · doi:10.1007/s00550-025-00577-x · Cited by 4
Saikia, K. K., & Handique, S. (2025) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2025.127474 · Cited by 3
Microplastic in Aquatic Environments
Revel, M., Châtel, A., & Mouneyrac, C. (2019) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-1-78548-314-1.50005-5 · Cited by 3
Assessment of the Ecotoxicity of Nanoplastics
Kováts, N., Eck‐Varanka, B., Békéssy, Z., Diósi, D., Hubai, K., & Korponai, J. L. (2019) · Hungarian Journal of Industry and Chemistry · doi:10.33927/hjic-2019-22 · Cited by 3
Microplastics in Environment and Effects on Biota
Bozdaş, K., Üstün, G. E., & Aygün, A. (2020) · Turkish Journal of Water Science and Management · doi:10.31807/tjwsm.660146 · Cited by 3
“Approximately 93% of the microbeads contained in cosmetics are PE and also they can be composed of PP, PET, PMMA and nylon (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
Töre, G. Y., & YILMAZ, Ş. İ. (2022) · Journal of Balkan Science and Technology · doi:10.55848/jbst.2022.6 · Cited by 3
Mikroplastiklerin Deniz Ortamı ve Sucul Canlılara Etkisi
Kenan, İ., & TEKSOY, A. (2022) · Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi · doi:10.35193/bseufbd.1074246 · Cited by 6
Moraczewska-Majkut, K., Nocoń, W. K., & Łobos-Moysa, E. (2021) · Desalination and Water Treatment · doi:10.5004/dwt.2021.27860 · Cited by 3
Yang, D., Xue, Q., Lu, F., et al. (2022) · Applied Optics · doi:10.1364/ao.474528 · Cited by 3
Generation and impact of microplastics and nanoplastics from bioplastic sources
Kanwal, H., Nadeem, H., Azeem, F., Rasul, I., Muzammil, S., Zubaır, M., Imran, M., Afzal, M., & Siddique, M. H. (2023) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-89858-4.00003-8 · Cited by 4
Kelimpahan Mikroplastik di Perairan Pulau Temajo Mempawah Kalimantan Barat
Fadhilah, W., Sofiana, M. S. J., Safitri, I., & Kushadiwijayanto, A. A. (2023) · Jurnal Laut Khatulistiwa · doi:10.26418/lkuntan.v6i3.64222 · Cited by 3
Lozada-Gómez, E. J., & Pérez‐Reyes, O. (2023) · Environmental Research Ecology · doi:10.1088/2752-664x/ad0cfe · Cited by 3
“Similar findings have been reported in numerous studies (e.g. [ 56–59]), in which the amount of MP found in freshwater aquatic environments is influenced by the degree of the surrounding environment.”
ResultChantima, K., Suk-ueng, K., INTEP, P. I. P., & Vittayapadung, S. (2023) · Sains Malaysiana · doi:10.17576/jsm-2023-5209-01 · Cited by 3
Microplastic abundance in Surabaya mangrove areas during the wet season
Nafisyah, A. L., Iswandi, H. S., Karisma, A. D., et al. (2023) · IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science · doi:10.1088/1755-1315/1273/1/012059 · Cited by 3
Micro-Nano-Plastics in Sewage Sludge: Sources, Occurrence, and Potential Environmental Risks
Angmo, D., Singh, J., Bhat, S. A., et al. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-51967-3_14 · Cited by 3
Adsorption of Heavy Metal with Aged Microplastic in Groundwater Under Varying Organic Matter Content
Singh, J., & Yadav, B. K. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-49092-7_1 · Cited by 5
Petersen, M., & Partridge, C. (2024) · Journal of Great Lakes Research · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2024.102374 · Cited by 3
Meso- and microplastics in marine environments: An overview
Selvam, S., Muthukumar, P., Prasanna, M. V., Roy, P. D., Chidambaram, S. K. M., Afzal, J. M., Rajkumar, L. V., Priya, K. L., & Ullah, A. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-90980-8.00012-1 · Cited by 3
LIZARD: Pervasive Sensing for Autonomous Plastic Litter Monitoring
Dar, F., Olapade, M., Ottun, A.-R. O., Yin, Z., Liyanage, M., Zuniga, A., Passanantti, M., Tarkoma, S., Nurmi, P., & Flores, H. (2024) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Internet-of-Things Design and Implementation (IoTDI) · doi:10.1109/iotdi61053.2024.00008 · Cited by 3
“Macro-plastics (more than 200 mm in size) are easy to detect by the human eye [43].”
BackgroundKhan, M. A., & Johnson, K. S. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.176637 · Cited by 4
Microplastic Chemostasis and Homogeneity During a Historic Flood on the Mississippi River
Hasenmueller, E. A., & Ritter, A. N. (2024) · Environmental Engineering Science · doi:10.1089/ees.2024.0133 · Cited by 3
“…side of the channel as well as studies that have identi fi ed urbanization, population density, and waterway traf fi c as strong drivers of microplastic pollution in freshwater systems (Baraza et al., 2022; Browne et al., 2011; de Carvalho et al., 2021; Eriksen et al., 2013; Treilles et al., 2022).”
Microplastics in the Environment
Kaur, H., Sharma, S., Chandel, M., Kaur, G., Sharma, S. K., Madaan, I., Sirhindi, G., & Bhardwaj, R. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-4978-5_1 · Cited by 3
Ecotoxicological Impact of Plastic Waste on Marine Flora
Bhusare, B. P., Zambare, V., Jaweed, T. H., & Shahnawaz, M. (2022) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-16-5403-9_14 · Cited by 4
Hossain, M. R., & Mustafa, A. (2014) · Journal of Applied Aquaculture · doi:10.1080/10454438.2014.901079 · Cited by 3
Plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish and bivalves sold for human consumption
Rochman, C. M., Tahir, A., Williams, S. L., Baxa, D. V., Lam, R., Miller, J. T., Teh, F., Werorilangi, S., & Teh, S. J. (2015) · Cited by 3
History and Development of the Anthropocene as a Stratigraphic Concept
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C. N., Williams, M., & Summerhayes, C. P. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108621359.001 · Cited by 4
Climate Change and the Anthropocene
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C. N., Williams, M., & Summerhayes, C. P. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108621359.006 · Cited by 3
The Technosphere and Its Physical Stratigraphic Record
Zalasiewicz, J., Waters, C. N., Williams, M., & Summerhayes, C. P. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108621359.004 · Cited by 3
Fish–People–Place:Interweaving Knowledges to Elucidate Pacific Salmon Fate
Reid, A. J. (2020) · Carleton University's Institutional Repository (MacOdrum Library, Carleton University) · doi:10.22215/etd/2020-14221 · Cited by 4
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
