The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Freshwater and airborne textile fibre populations are dominated by ‘natural’, not microplastic, fibres
Open accessAbstract
The potential role of natural textile fibres as environmental pollutants has been speculated upon by some environmental scientists, however, there is a general consensus that their biodegradability reduces their environmental threat. Whilst the risks that they pose remain poorly understood, their environmental prevalence has been noted in several recent microplastic pollution manuscripts. Here we highlight the extent to which natural textile fibres dominate fibre populations of upstream reaches of the River Trent, UK, as well as the atmospheric deposition within its catchment, over a twelve month microplastic sampling campaign. Across 223 samples, natural textile fibres represented 93.8% of the textile fibre population quantified. Moreover, though microplastic particles including synthetic fibres are known to be pervasive environmental pollutants, extruded textile fibres were absent from 82.8% of samples. Natural textile fibres were absent from just 9.7% of samples.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Lusher, A. L., McHugh, M., & Thompson, R. C. (2013) · Marine Pollution Bulletin · doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.11.028 · Cited by 2,075
Van Cauwenberghe, L., Claessens, M., Vandegehuchte, M. B., & Janssen, C. R. (2015) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2015.01.008 · Cited by 1,084
(2012) · doi:10.5772/32373 · Cited by 640
Remy, F., Collard, F., Gilbert, B., Compère, P., Eppe, G., & Lepoint, G. (2015) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b02005 · Cited by 378
Cited by
Microfibers in oceanic surface waters: a global characterization
Suaria, G., Achtypi, A., Perold, V., Lee, J. R., Pierucci, A., Bornman, T. G., Aliani, S., & Ryan, P. G. (2020) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.aay8493 · Cited by 528
De Falco, F., Cocca, M., Avella, M., & Thompson, R. C. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.9b06892 · Cited by 452
Athey, S. N., & Erdle, L. M. (2022) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.5173 · Cited by 289
Bioretention cells remove microplastics from urban stormwater
Smyth, K., Drake, J., Li, Y., Rochman, C., Van Seters, T., & Passeport, E. (2021) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2020.116785 · Cited by 226
Gouin, T. (2020) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.4718 · Cited by 208
Metadata
- Authors
- Stanton, T., Johnson, M., Nathanail, P., MacNaughtan, W., & Gomes, R. L.
- Venue
- Science of The Total Environment
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-05
- Volume
- 666
- Pages
- 377-389
- ISSN
- 0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2916731373
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 11.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Freshwater and airborne textile fibre populations are dominated by ‘natural’, not microplastic, fibres. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.278
- The paper
- Stanton, T., Johnson, M., Nathanail, P., MacNaughtan, W., & Gomes, R. L. (2019). Freshwater and airborne textile fibre populations are dominated by ‘natural’, not microplastic, fibres. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.278
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
