The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Stranded Intertidal Marine Debris: Is There a Picture of Global Change?
Open accessAbstract
Floating and stranded marine debris is widespread. Increasing sea levels and altered rainfall, solar radiation, wind speed, waves, and oceanic currents associated with climatic change are likely to transfer more debris from coastal cities into marine and coastal habitats. Marine debris causes economic and ecological impacts, but understanding the scope of these requires quantitative information on spatial patterns and trends in the amounts and types of debris at a global scale. There are very few large-scale programs to measure debris, but many peer-reviewed and published scientific studies of marine debris describe local patterns. Unfortunately, methods of defining debris, sampling, and interpreting patterns in space or time vary considerably among studies, yet if data could be synthesized across studies, a global picture of the problem may be avaliable. We analyzed 104 published scientific papers on marine debris in order to determine how to evaluate this. Although many studies were well designed to answer specific questions, definitions of what constitutes marine debris, the methods used to measure, and the scale of the scope of the studies means that no general picture can emerge from this wealth of data. These problems are detailed to guide future studies and guidelines provided to enable the collection of more comparable data to better manage this growing problem.
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
Pseudoreplication and the Design of Ecological Field Experiments
Hurlbert, S. H. (1984) · Ecological Monographs · doi:10.2307/1942661 · Cited by 8,377
Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R. C., & Thiel, M. (2012) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es2031505 · Cited by 5,440
Self-citationThe Recent Increase in Atlantic Hurricane Activity: Causes and Implications
Goldenberg, S. B., Landsea, C. W., Mestas-Nuñez, A. M., & Gray, W. M. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1060040 · Cited by 1,769
Spatial patterns of plastic debris along estuarine shorelines
Browne, M. A., Galloway, T. S., & Thompson, R. C. (2010) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es903784e · Cited by 1,246 · cited 10×
“Most measured visible debris, such as household 57 goods,(20,21) or fishing gear,(22) but recently, there is more emphasis on microplastics.(13,19,23,24) 58”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialSelf-citationMicroplastic – an emerging contaminant of potential concern?
Browne, M. A., Galloway, T., & Thompson, R. (2007) · Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management · doi:10.1002/ieam.5630030412 · Cited by 856
Self-citation
Cited by
Plastics in the Marine Environment
Law, K. L. (2017) · Annual Review of Marine Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-marine-010816-060409 · Cited by 1,059
The ecological impacts of marine debris: unraveling the demonstrated evidence from what is perceived
Rochman, C. M., Browne, M. A., Underwood, A. J., van Franeker, J. A., Thompson, R. C., & Amaral‐Zettler, L. A. (2016) · Ecology · doi:10.1890/14-2070.1 · Cited by 614
Self-citationEnzymatic Purification of Microplastics in Environmental Samples
Löder, M. G. J., Imhof, H. K., Ladehoff, M., Löschel, L. A., Lorenz, C., Mintenig, S., Piehl, S., Primpke, S., Schrank, I., Laforsch, C., et al. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.7b03055 · Cited by 544
Chia, W. Y., Ying Tang, D. Y., Khoo, K. S., Kay Lup, A. N., & Chew, K. W. (2020) · Environmental Science and Ecotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.ese.2020.100065 · Cited by 477
Plastic Debris in the Marine Environment: History and Future Challenges
Napper, I. E., & Thompson, R. C. (2020) · Global Challenges · doi:10.1002/gch2.201900081 · Cited by 420
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Browne, M. A., Chapman, M. G., Thompson, R. C., Amaral Zettler, L. A., Jambeck, J., & Mallos, N. J.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2015-06-02
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 7082-7094
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2281777676
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 9.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
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.