Cited by 128Microplastics and Plastic PollutionEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyMarine and coastal ecosystems

Smells good enough to eat: dimethyl sulfide (DMS) enhances copepod ingestion of microplastics

Open access
Procter, Jade, Hopkins, Frances E., Fileman, Elaine S., Lindeque, Penelope K.·2019·Marine Pollution Bulletin

Abstract

Marine copepods have been shown to readily ingest microplastics - a crucial first step in the transfer of plastics into the marine food chain. Copepods have also been shown to elicit a foraging behavioural response to the presence of olfactory stimuli, such as dimethyl sulfide (DMS) - a volatile compound produced by their algal prey. Here, we show that the temperate Calanoid copepod Calanus helgolandicus displays enhanced grazing rates of between 0.7 and 3-fold (72%-292%) on microplastics that have been infused in a DMS solution, compared to DMS-free controls. Environmental exposure of microplastics may result in the development of an olfactory signature that includes algal-derived compounds such as DMS. Our study provides evidence that copepods, which are known to use chemosensory mechanisms to identify and locate dense sources of palatable prey, may be at an increased risk of plastic ingestion if it mimics the scent of their prey.

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

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

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.11.014

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

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

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

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Irrespective of the exposure concentration, the percent MP ingestion quantified here, and in previous studies, is extremely low (i.e., <1%).

    “Yet, irrespective of the exposure concentration, the percent MP ingestion quantified here, and in previous studies (Cole et al., 2015; Procter et al., 2019), is extremely low (i.e., &lt; 1 %).”

    From Trophic transfer of polyester microfibres across a multi-level marine food web. (2025) · cites this paper as Procter et al., 2019

    Methods (§§2.2–2.3; page unavailable) report about 80 fibres/mL in 615-mL bottles, with five copepods grazing for six hours. Results (§3.1; page unavailable) report even the lowest mean ingestion rate as 31,380 fibres per copepod per day. Converted to six hours, that is about 7,845 fibres per copepod—roughly 16% of the approximately 49,200 fibres initially in a bottle, not less than 1%. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Copepods use chemosensory mechanisms to identify algal prey; for example, the presence of the algal gaseous metabolite dimethyl sulphide (DMS) results in increased MP ingestion.

    “Copepods use chemosensory mechanisms to identify algal prey; for example, the presence of the algal gaseous metabolite dimethyl sulphide (DMS; the reduced form of DMSO and a known foraging attractant (Asher et al., 2017)) results in increased MP ingestion (Procter et al., 2019).”

    From Trophic transfer of polyester microfibres across a multi-level marine food web. (2025) · cites this paper as Procter et al., 2019

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Setälä, O., Lehtiniemi, M., Coppock, R., Cole, M., 2018. Microplastics in Marine Food Webs. Microplastic Contamination in Aquatic Environments. Elsevier, pp. 339-363.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Procter, J., Hopkins, F. E., Fileman, E. S., & Lindeque, P. K.
Affiliations
Plymouth Marine Laboratory (GB)
Corresponding author
Hopkins, Frances E.
Venue
Marine Pollution Bulletin
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
138
Pages
1-6
ISSN
0025-326X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2901097294
Cited by
128
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12
FWCI
3.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Marine Pollution Bulletin (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Marine Biological Association (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Natural Environment Research Council (NE/L003988/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Oceanography › Marine and coastal ecosystems
Keywords
dimethyl sulfide, microplastics, Calanus helgolandicus, foraging behavior, olfactory cues, chemosensory cues, grazing rates, marine plastic pollution, trophic transfer
MeSH terms
Dietary Exposure, Animals, Plastics, Sulfides, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Copepoda, Ecotoxicology

About these checks

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

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

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

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

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