Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 979

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Source and potential risk assessment of suspended atmospheric microplastics in Shanghai

Liu, Kai, Wang, Xiaohui, Fang, Tao, Xu, Pei, Zhu, Lixin, Li, Daoji·2019·Science of The Total Environment

Abstract

A growing body of research has recently revealed that airborne microplastics could be an important source of microplastic pollution in marine environments. However, the origins and spatial distributions of suspended atmospheric microplastics (SAMPs) are poorly understood. Further, SAMPs abundances have only been observed using passive sampling devices that could lead to underestimates of abundances. To address these knowledge-gaps, the current study investigated the potential source and spatial distribution of SAMPs in Shanghai during May 2018 using an active suspended particulate sampler. SAMPs abundances from filtered air ranged from 0 to 4.18 n/m3 (items per cubic meter of air). Microfibers comprised 67% of all SAMPs, followed by fragments and granules comprising 30% and 3% of SAMPs, respectively. μ-FT-IR analysis revealed that the SAMPs consisted of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyethylene (PE), polyester (PES), polyacrylonitrile (PAN), poly(N-methyl acrylamide) (PAA), rayon (RY), ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), epoxy resin (EP), and alkyd resin (ALK). Synthetic compounds comprised 54% of the observed particles, of which PET, PE, PES, PAN, PAA, and RY comprised 91% of the microplastics. Our preliminary evaluation indicated that textile clothes are likely major source of the airborne microplastics. Modeling estimated that approximately 120.7 kg of SAMPs are annually transported through Shanghai air. Moreover, an estimation of the ecological risk from SAMPs indicated that a minor ecological consequence was present, necessitating further evaluation of SAMPs pollution. In addition, modeling estimated that approximately 21 particles of microplastics are inhaled daily by people in Shanghai from outdoor environments. Given the prevalence of airborne microfibers, it is critically urgent to reevaluate procedures for sampling, transporting, and processing microplastic field samples. Future investigations should seek to develop more rigorous and conclusive methods to evaluate these types 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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.110

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 979

Metadata

Authors
Liu, K., Wang, X., Fang, T., Xu, P., Zhu, L., & Li, D.
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-07
Volume
675
Pages
462-471
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2937567928
Cited by
979
References
10
FWCI
23.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Source and potential risk assessment of suspended atmospheric microplastics in Shanghai. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.110
The paper
Liu, K., Wang, X., Fang, T., Xu, P., Zhu, L., & Li, D. (2019). Source and potential risk assessment of suspended atmospheric microplastics in Shanghai. Science of The Total Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.110

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.