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 401–500 of 1,851
Microplastics in Lake Mead National Recreation Area, USA: Occurrence and biological uptake
Baldwin, A. K., Spanjer, A. R., Rosen, M. R., & Thom, T. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0228896 · Cited by 154
“Identified plastics were categorized based on their morphology as fragments, fibers, foams, beads/pellets, and films [9].”
BackgroundChen, Y., Ling, Y., Li, X., Hu, J., Cao, C., & He, D. (2020) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.123092 · Cited by 155
Distribution and sedimentation of microplastics in Taihu Lake
Zhang, Q., Liu, T., Liu, L., Fan, Y., Rao, W., Zheng, J., & Qian, X. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148745 · Cited by 158
Fontana, G. D., Mossotti, R., & Montarsolo, A. (2020) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.113960 · Cited by 162
Zhou, R., Lu, G., Yan, Z., Jiang, R., Bao, X., & Lu, P. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139222 · Cited by 159
Bai, C.-L., Liu, L., Hu, Y.-B., Zeng, E. Y., & Guo, Y. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150263 · Cited by 164
Neustonic microplastic pollution in the Persian Gulf
Kor, K., & Mehdinia, A. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110665 · Cited by 163
Microplastics in waters and soils: Occurrence, analytical methods and ecotoxicological effects
Wu, M., Yang, C., Du, C., & Liu, H. (2020) · Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety · doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.110910 · Cited by 161
“It was also reported that small-sized MPs were found more abundant in many investigations (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
Khoironi, A., Anggoro, S., & Sudarno, S. (2019) · Journal of Ecological Engineering · doi:10.12911/22998993/108637 · Cited by 161
Akindele, E. O., Ehlers, S. M., & Koop, J. H. E. (2019) · Limnologica · doi:10.1016/j.limno.2019.125708 · Cited by 166
Fan, J., Zou, L., Duan, T., Liang, Q., Qi, Z., & Sun, J. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129968 · Cited by 152
de Sales‐Ribeiro, C., Brito‐Casillas, Y., Fernández, A., & Caballero, M. J. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-69062-3 · Cited by 157
Ali, I., Cheng, Q., Ding, T., Qian, Y., Zhang, Y., Sun, H., Peng, C., Naz, I., Li, J., & Liu, J. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127863 · Cited by 155
Shahi, N. K., Maeng, M., Kim, D., et al. (2020) · Process Safety and Environmental Protection · doi:10.1016/j.psep.2020.05.020 · Cited by 152
Microplastics and the functional traits of fishes: A global meta‐analysis
Salerno, M., Berlino, M., Mangano, M. C., & Sarà, G. (2021) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.15570 · Cited by 166
“Microplastics have been documented in all aquatic systems from both marine and freshwater habitats (Barnes et al., 2009), on beaches (Browne et al., 2011), sediments (Claessens et al., 2011) and ubiqui- tously along the water columns (Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundWang, Z., Qin, Y., Li, W., Yang, W., Meng, Q. Y., & Yang, J. (2019) · Environmental Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1007/s10311-019-00888-8 · Cited by 158
Improving microplastics source apportionment: a role for microplastic morphology and taxonomy?
Helm, P. A. (2017) · Analytical Methods · doi:10.1039/c7ay90016c · Cited by 151
Cai, H., Du, F., Li, L., Li, B., Li, J., & Shi, H. (2019) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.124 · Cited by 158
Plastic debris and policy: Using current scientific understanding to invoke positive change
Rochman, C. M., Cook, A., & Koelmans, A. A. (2016) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.3408 · Cited by 152
Photocatalytic and biological technologies for elimination of microplastics in water: Current status
Ebrahimbabaie, P., Yousefi, K., & Pichtel, J. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150603 · Cited by 148
Uptake, accumulation and elimination of polystyrene microspheres in tadpoles of Xenopus tropicalis
Hu, L., Su, L., Xue, Y., Mu, J., Zhu, J., Xu, J., & Shi, H. (2016) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.09.002 · Cited by 150
“In recent years, microplastics have also been found in freshwater ecosystems including rivers and lakes (Moore et al., 2011; Eriksen et al., 2013; Lechner et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2015).”
BackgroundZitouni, N., Bousserrhıne, N., Belbekhouche, S., Missawi, O., Alphonse, V., Boughattas, I., & Bannı, M. (2020) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114576 · Cited by 149
Up and away: ontogenic transference as a pathway for aerial dispersal of microplastics
Al-Jaibachi, R., Cuthbert, R. N., & Callaghan, A. (2018) · Biology Letters · doi:10.1098/rsbl.2018.0479 · Cited by 143
Microplastic contamination in gudgeons (Gobio gobio) from Flemish rivers (Belgium)
Slootmaekers, B., Carteny, C. C., Belpaire, C., Saverwyns, S., Fremout, W., Blust, R., & Bervoets, L. (2018) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2018.09.136 · Cited by 151
Microplastics Derived from Food Packaging Waste—Their Origin and Health Risks
Kadac-Czapska, K., Knez, E., Gierszewska, M., Olewnik‐Kruszkowska, E., & Grembecka, M. (2023) · Materials · doi:10.3390/ma16020674 · Cited by 166
Rochman, C. M., Parnis, J. M., Browne, M. A., Serrato, S., Reiner, E. J., Robson, M., Young, T. M., Diamond, M. L., & Teh, S. J. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0187664 · Cited by 155
Gilbreath, A., McKee, L., Shimabuku, I., Lin, D., Werbowski, L. M., Zhu, X., Grbic, J., & Rochman, C. (2019) · Journal of Sustainable Water in the Built Environment · doi:10.1061/jswbay.0000883 · Cited by 146
Kurniawan, T. A., Haider, A., Ahmad, H. M., Mohyuddin, A., Aslam, H. M. U., Nadeem, S., Javed, M., Othman, M. H. D., Goh, H. H., & Chew, K. W. (2023) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138367 · Cited by 149
RetractedOn the representativeness of pump water samples versus manta sampling in microplastic analysis
Tamminga, M., Stöwer, S.-C., & Fischer, E. K. (2019) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2019.112970 · Cited by 147
Talukdar, A., Kundu, P., Bhattacharya, S., & Dutta, N. (2024) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.170254 · Cited by 159
Eriksen, M., Liboiron, M., Kiessling, T., Charron, L., Alling, A., Lebreton, L., Richards, H., Roth, B., Ory, N. C., Hidalgo‐Ruz, V., et al. (2017) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2017.09.058 · Cited by 151
“, 2014), including an increasing abundance of microplastics in all marine and freshwater ecosystems (Eriksen et al., 2013; Hoellein et al., 2014; Corcoran, 2015; Dris et al., 2015; EerkesMedrano et al., 2015).”
BackgroundSelf-citationSun, Q., Li, J., Wang, C., Chen, A., You, Y., Yang, S., Liu, H., Jiang, G., Wu, Y., & Li, Y. (2021) · Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering · doi:10.1007/s11783-021-1429-z · Cited by 148
“High concentrations of MPs were detected in Asia, North America, Europe, and Australia (Zbyszewski et al., 2014; Li et al., 2020a), especially in Asia and America.”
BackgroundInfluentialMicroplastics Occurrence in Surface Waters and Sediments in Five River Mouths of Manila Bay
Osorio, E. D., Tanchuling, M. A., & Diola, M. B. L. D. (2021) · Frontiers in Environmental Science · doi:10.3389/fenvs.2021.719274 · Cited by 158
Baudrimont, M., Arini, A., Guégan, C., Venel, Z., Gigault, J., Pedrono, B., Prunier, J., Maurice, L., Ter Halle, A., & Feurtet-Mazel, A. (2020) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04668-3 · Cited by 134
“4 and 34 ng·L in the Great Lakes of the USA (Eriksen et al. 2013), there are currently no sufficiently developed analytical methods to quantify NPs in the environment or organisms (Gallo et al.”
BackgroundInfluentialFeng, L., Li, J.-W., Xu, E. G., Sun, X.-D., Zhu, F., Ding, Z., Tian, H., Dong, S., Xia, P., & Yuan, X.-Z. (2019) · Environmental Science Nano · doi:10.1039/c9en00807a · Cited by 142
Distribution of microplastics in Surabaya River, Indonesia
Lestari, P., Trihadiningrum, Y., Wijaya, B. A., Yunus, K. A., & Firdaus, M. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138560 · Cited by 148
Direct observation and identification of nanoplastics in ocean water
Moon, S., Martin, L. M. A., Kim, S., Zhang, Q., Zhang, R., Xu, W., & Luo, T. (2024) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.adh1675 · Cited by 156
“…ranges of “microplastics” and “nanoplastics,” some have defined microplastics as ranging from 1 to 5000 μ m and nanoplastics with a size less than 1 μ m. Microplastics are abundant in the environment and have been observed in the open ocean ( 5–7 ), the Great Lakes ( 8 ), and rivers ( 5–7 , 9 ).”
Single and combined effects of microplastics and roxithromycin on Daphnia magna
Zhang, P., Yan, Z., Lu, G., & Ji, Y. (2019) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-019-05031-2 · Cited by 141
Hossain, M. B., Banik, P., Nur, A.-A. U., & Rahman, T. (2020) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111956 · Cited by 148
Peez, N., Janiska, M.-C., & Imhof, W. (2018) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-018-1510-z · Cited by 144
Huang, X., Zemlyanov, D. Y., Díaz‐Amaya, S., Salehi, M., Stanciu, L., & Whelton, A. J. (2019) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121585 · Cited by 139
Wastewater treatment alters microbial colonization of microplastics
Kelly, J. J., London, M. G., McCormick, A. R., Rojas, M., Scott, J. W., & Hoellein, T. J. (2021) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0244443 · Cited by 147
“Microplastics were isolated and quantified according to adaptation of a common method [5, 6, 53].”
MethodHe, D., Chen, X., Wang, Z., Zhu, Z., Qi, X., Zhou, L., Chen, W., Wan, C., Li, D., Zou, X., et al. (2021) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.110908 · Cited by 143
Microplastic contamination, an emerging threat to the freshwater environment: a systematic review
Bhardwaj, L. K., Rath, P., Yadav, P., & Gupta, U. (2024) · ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS RESEARCH · doi:10.1186/s40068-024-00338-7 · Cited by 168
Microplastic pollution in the surface sediments collected from Sishili Bay, North Yellow Sea, China
Zhang, B., Wu, D., Yang, X., Teng, J., Liu, Y., Zhang, C., Zhao, J., Yin, X., You, L., Liu, Y., et al. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.02.021 · Cited by 138
Vidal, C., & Pasquini, C. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117251 · Cited by 146
Zhang, F., Wang, Z., Wang, S. J., Fang, H., & Wang, D. (2019) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.04.115 · Cited by 135
Spatial Distribution of Microplastics in Surficial Benthic Sediment of Lake Michigan and Lake Erie
Lenaker, P. L., Corsi, S. R., & Mason, S. A. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c06087 · Cited by 143
Self-citationPlastic pollution in water ecosystems: A bibliometric analysis from 2000 to 2020
Kasavan, S., Yusoff, S., Fakri, M., & Siron, R. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127946 · Cited by 121
Gao, G., Zhao, X., Jin, P., Gao, K., & Beardall, J. (2020) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124685 · Cited by 135
Semcesen, P., & Wells, M. G. (2021) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112573 · Cited by 151
Effects of biofilm on metal adsorption behavior and microbial community of microplastics
Qiongjie, W., Zhang, Y., Yangyang, Z., Zhouqi, L., Wang, J., & Hui-juan, C. (2021) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.127340 · Cited by 136
Percentage of microbeads in pelagic microplastics within Japanese coastal waters
Isobe, A. (2016) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.06.030 · Cited by 138
Ambrose, K. K., Box, C., Boxall, J., Brooks, A., Eriksen, M., Fabres, J., Fylakis, G., & Walker, T. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.036 · Cited by 108
“Plastic pollution, originating from marine and land-based sources, migrate into sub-tropical gyres, where it accumulates into zones of macro and microplastic deposits (Lebreton et al., 2012; Eriksen et al., 2013).”
BackgroundSelf-citationUzun, P., Farazande, S., & Güven, B. (2021) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132517 · Cited by 134
Microplastics in the surface water of small-scale estuaries in Shanghai
Zhang, J., Zhang, C., Deng, Y., Wang, R., Ma, E., Wang, J., Bai, J., Wu, J. L., & Zhou, Y. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110569 · Cited by 136
Peller, J., Nevers, M., Byappanahalli, M., Nelson, C., Ganeshbabu, B., Evans, M., Kostelnik, E., Keller, M., Johnston, J., & Shidler, S. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116695 · Cited by 107
Microplastic Pollution in Inland Waters Focusing on Asia
Wu, C., Zhang, K., & Xiong, X. (2017) · The handbook of environmental chemistry · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-61615-5_5 · Cited by 150
Blettler, M. C. M., Garello, N., Ginon, L., Abrial, E., Espínola, L. A., & Wantzen, K. M. (2019) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113348 · Cited by 138
Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in China’s largest freshwater lake system
Jian, M., Zhang, Y., Yang, W., Zhou, L., Liu, S., & Xu, E. G. (2020) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128186 · Cited by 134
Quantification of selected microplastics in Australian urban road dust
O’Brien, S., Okoffo, E. D., Rauert, C., O'Brien, J. W., Ribeiro, F., Burrows, S. D., Toapanta, T. Y. A., Wang, X., & Thomas, K. V. (2021) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125811 · Cited by 134
Surana, M., Pattanayak, D. S., Yadav, V., Singh, V. K., & Pal, D. (2024) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2024.118268 · Cited by 138
Skalska, K., Ockelford, A., Ebdon, J., & Cundy, A. B. (2020) · Journal of Water Process Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101600 · Cited by 132
Ye, Y., Yu, K., & Yanru, Z. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151851 · Cited by 134
Effects of polystyrene microbeads on cytotoxicity and transcriptomic profiles in human Caco‐2 cells
Wu, S., Wu, M., Tian, D., Qiu, L., & Li, T. (2019) · Environmental Toxicology · doi:10.1002/tox.22885 · Cited by 134
“film directly.(14,15) MPs have brought dangers to soil animals and might threaten human health via the food chain or other ways.”
BackgroundOccurrence and Spatial Distribution of Microplastics in the Surface Waters of Lake Naivasha, Kenya
Migwi, F. K., Ogunah, J. A., & Kiratu, J. M. (2020) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.4677 · Cited by 137
“Increased urbanization around the lake (Ndungu et al. 2015) has led to increased use of certain products such as cosmetics and textiles whose waste is directed into streams and tributaries that channel into the freshwater bodies (Eriksen et al. 2013).”
InfluentialLondon's river of plastic: High levels of microplastics in the Thames water column
Rowley, K. H., Cucknell, A.-C., Smith, B. D., Clark, P. F., & Morritt, D. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140018 · Cited by 131
Inventory and transport of plastic debris in the Laurentian Great Lakes
Hoffman, M. J., & Hittinger, E. (2016) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.11.061 · Cited by 129
“The samples from [13] are reported in three sizes—0.”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialEvaluation of microplastics in beach sediments along the coast of Dubai, UAE
Aslam, H., Ali, T., Mortula, M. M., & Attaelmanan, A. G. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110739 · Cited by 140
Riverine microplastic pollution matters: A case study in the Zhangjiang River of Southeastern China
Pan, Z., Sun, Y., Liu, Q., Lin, C., Sun, X., He, Q., Zhou, K., & Lin, H. (2020) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111516 · Cited by 132
Relationship between Discharge and River Plastic Concentrations in a Rural and an Urban Catchment
Wagner, S., Klöckner, P., Stier, B., Römer, M., Seiwert, B., Reemtsma, T., & Schmidt, C. (2019) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b03048 · Cited by 124
The role of plastic concerning the sustainable development goals: The literature point of view
de Sousa, F. D. B. (2021) · Cleaner and Responsible Consumption · doi:10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100020 · Cited by 135
Abuwatfa, W. H., Al-Muqbel, D., Al–Othman, A., Halalsheh, N., & Tawalbeh, M. (2021) · Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.cscee.2021.100151 · Cited by 130
(2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · Cited by 125
Schmidt, L. K., Bochow, M., Imhof, H. K., & Oswald, S. E. (2018) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2018.03.097 · Cited by 124
Pedersen, A. F., Gopalakrishnan, K. K., Boegehold, A. G., Peraino, N. J., Westrick, J. A., & Kashian, D. R. (2020) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.113964 · Cited by 130
Kumar, R., Sharma, P., & Bandyopadhyay, S. (2021) · Journal of Water Process Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.101966 · Cited by 129
Distribution, biological effects and biofilms of microplastics in freshwater systems - A review.
Wang, Y., Zhou, B., Chen, H.-L., Yuan, R.-F., & Wang, F. (2022) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134370 · Cited by 125
Zhang, Z., Deng, C., Li, D., Liu, L., Li, H., Wu, J., & Ye, C. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117580 · Cited by 125
Ebrahimi, P., Abbasi, S., Pashaei, R., Bogusz, A., & Oleszczuk, P. (2021) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133146 · Cited by 129
Talukdar, A., Bhattacharya, S., Bandyopadhyay, A., & Dey, A. (2023) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162495 · Cited by 131
Li, L., Liu, D., Song, K., & Zhou, Y. (2019) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110724 · Cited by 125
Zhang, J., Meng, H., Kong, X., Cheng, X., Ma, T., He, H., Du, W., Yang, S., Li, S., & Zhang, L. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116767 · Cited by 122
Pelagic plastic pollution within the surface waters of Lake Michigan, USA
Mason, S. A., Kammin, L., Eriksen, M., Aleid, G., Wilson, S., Box, C., Williamson, N., & Riley, A. (2016) · Journal of Great Lakes Research · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2016.05.009 · Cited by 124
Self-citationPazos, R. S., Bauer, D. E., & Gómez, N. (2018) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2018.08.064 · Cited by 130
Toumi, H., Abidli, S., & Béjaoui, M. (2019) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04695-0 · Cited by 123
“Among studies of MPs in freshwater systems, investigations reveal the amount of MPs in surface waters of the following: (i) the Laurentian Great Lakes (e.g. Eriksen et al. 2013), (ii) Asiatic lakes (e.g. Free et al. 2014) (iii) and European lakes (e.g. Faure et al. 2015).”
BackgroundInfluentialEgessa, R., Nankabirwa, A., Basooma, R., & Nabwire, R. H. (2019) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113442 · Cited by 124
Microplastics, a Global Issue: Human Exposure through Environmental and Dietary Sources
Borriello, L., Scivicco, M., Cacciola, N. A., Esposito, F., Severino, L., & Cirillo, T. (2023) · Foods · doi:10.3390/foods12183396 · Cited by 134
“The proportion of primary MPs in the environment is lower than that of secondary MPs, except in some large lakes in the United States, which are located close to large industries [35].”
BackgroundApplication of Scanning Electron Microscopy–Energy Dispersive X-Ray Spectroscopy (SEM-EDS)
Girao, A. V., Caputo, G., & Ferro, M. C. (2017) · Comprehensive analytical chemistry · doi:10.1016/bs.coac.2016.10.002 · Cited by 145
Sorption of three synthetic musks by microplastics
Zhang, X., Zheng, M., Wang, L., Lou, Y., Shi, L., & Jiang, S. (2017) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.09.025 · Cited by 121
Cohen, J. H., Internicola, A. M., Mason, R. A., & Kukulka, T. (2019) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b04814 · Cited by 121
Microplastic and Fibre Contamination in a Remote Mountain Lake in Switzerland
Velasco, A. N., Rard, L., Blois, W., Lebrun, D., Lebrun, F., Pothe, F., & Stoll, S. (2020) · Water · doi:10.3390/w12092410 · Cited by 122
“found on average 75 ± 30 and 168 ± 85 fibres/kg in lake shore sediments in Lakes Bolsena and Chiusi, respectively [60].”
BackgroundZhang, M., Yang, J., Cai, Z., Feng, Y., Wang, Y., Zhang, D., & Pan, X. (2019) · Environmental Science Nano · doi:10.1039/c8en01086b · Cited by 120
Limited long-distance transport of plastic pollution by the Orange-Vaal River system, South Africa
Weideman, E. A., Perold, V., & Ryan, P. G. (2020) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138653 · Cited by 124
Microplastics in plant-microbes-soil system: A review on recent studies
Ren, X., Yin, S., Wang, L., & Tang, J. (2021) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151523 · Cited by 115
Dai, L., Wang, Z., Guo, T., Hu, L., Chen, Y., Chen, C., Yu, G., Ma, L. Q., & Chen, J. (2022) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.133576 · Cited by 127
Nahian, S. A., Rakib, M. R. J., Kumar, R., Haider, S. M. B., Sharma, P., & Idris, A. M. (2022) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158892 · Cited by 120
Simple Generation of Suspensible Secondary Microplastic Reference Particles via Ultrasound Treatment
von der Esch, E., Lanzinger, M., Kohles, A. J., Schwaferts, C., Weißer, J., Hofmann, T. F., Glas, K., Elsner, M., & Ivleva, N. P. (2020) · Frontiers in Chemistry · doi:10.3389/fchem.2020.00169 · Cited by 122
Morphological and Physical Characterization of Microplastics
Rodríguez-Seijo, A., & Pereira, R. (2016) · Comprehensive analytical chemistry · doi:10.1016/bs.coac.2016.10.007 · Cited by 120
Di, M., Liu, X., Wang, W., & Wang, J. (2018) · Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1016/j.etap.2018.12.009 · Cited by 114
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
