CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 223Microplastics and Plastic PollutionEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyTurtle Biology and Conservation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Estimating the size distribution of plastics ingested by animals

Open access
Jâms, Ifan B., Windsor, Fredric M., Poudevigne-Durance, Thomas, Ormerod, Steve J., Durance, Isabelle·2020·Nature Communications
DOI 10.1038/s41467-020-15406-6PMC PMC7101383
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The ingestion of plastics appears to be widespread throughout the animal kingdom with risks to individuals, ecosystems and human health. Despite growing information on the location, abundance and size distribution of plastics in the environment, it cannot be assumed that any given animal will ingest all sizes of plastic encountered. Here, we use published data to develop an allometric relationship between plastic consumption and animal size to estimate the size distribution of plastics feasibly ingested by animals. Based on more than 2000 gut content analyses from animals ranging over three orders of magnitude in size (lengths 9 mm to 10 m), body length alone accounts for 42% of the variance in the length of plastic an animal may ingest and indicates a size ratio of roughly 20:1 between animal body length and the largest plastic the animal may ingest. We expect this work to improve global assessments of plastic pollution risk by introducing a quantifiable link between animals and the plastics they can ingest.

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 · 10.1038/s41467-020-15406-6

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Allometric relationship between animal size and ingestible plastic size. a Allometric size relationship (log10-log10 linear regression; R2 = 0.42, F1,63 = 46.06, p = 4.7e−09), including 99% (light grey) and 95% (dark grey) CIs, between animal body length (mm) and the longest piece of ingested plastic (mm) found during gut surveys (longest axis of largest piece of plastic found). Animal images are for illustration only and are not to scale. Each data point (n = 65) corresponds to the largest piece of plastic found within an animal taxon. b Distribution of field studies that provided data for the allometric relationship. Size of data points in a and b correspond to the number of individual animal specimens surveyed. Similar taxa from separate studies are plotted separately.
Fig. 1 Allometric relationship between animal size and ingestible plastic size. a Allometric size relationship (log10-log10 linear regression; R2 = 0.42, F1,63 = 46.06, p = 4.7e−09), including 99% (light grey) and 95% (dark grey) CIs, between animal body length (mm) and the longest piece of ingested plastic (mm) found during gut surveys (longest axis of largest piece of plastic found). Animal images are for illustration only and are not to scale. Each data point (n = 65) corresponds to the largest piece of plastic found within an animal taxon. b Distribution of field studies that provided data for the allometric relationship. Size of data points in a and b correspond to the number of individual animal specimens surveyed. Similar taxa from separate studies are plotted separately.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Animal depth ranges in the water column exceed plastic pollution models. Water column depth range of species included in meta-analysis compared to depth range of established global plastic models. Cózar et al.11, Eriksen et al.8 and van Sebille et al.10 are well cited distribution models of buoyant plastics floating at the surface of the Earth’s oceans (674, 946 and 255 citations, respectively (Google Scholar 2019)). We assigned a crude water depth value of 25 m to each of these models, to account for the oceanic surface mixed layer, according to Kukulka et al.31.
Fig. 2 Animal depth ranges in the water column exceed plastic pollution models. Water column depth range of species included in meta-analysis compared to depth range of established global plastic models. Cózar et al.11, Eriksen et al.8 and van Sebille et al.10 are well cited distribution models of buoyant plastics floating at the surface of the Earth’s oceans (674, 946 and 255 citations, respectively (Google Scholar 2019)). We assigned a crude water depth value of 25 m to each of these models, to account for the oceanic surface mixed layer, according to Kukulka et al.31.CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Detection limits scale with animal size. Studies of larger animals tended not to specify the use of magnifying equipment. Weak relationship (log10-log10 linear regression; R2 = 0.10, F1,61 = 7.58, p = 0.008), including 99% (light grey) and 95% (dark grey) CIs, between animals and the smallest piece of ingested plastic found during gut surveys (plastics measured along their longest axes; n = 63).
Fig. 3 Detection limits scale with animal size. Studies of larger animals tended not to specify the use of magnifying equipment. Weak relationship (log10-log10 linear regression; R2 = 0.10, F1,61 = 7.58, p = 0.008), including 99% (light grey) and 95% (dark grey) CIs, between animals and the smallest piece of ingested plastic found during gut surveys (plastics measured along their longest axes; n = 63).CC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Global risk of plastic entering zooplankton communities. a Using the animal-plastic size relationship to estimate the density of ingestible plastics (0.33–1.00 mm in length) divided by zooplankton density. b Current ‘state of the art’: as for a, with ingestible plastic densities substituted with total plastic densities. Legend coarsely estimates the level of plastic ingestion risk for zooplankton.
Fig. 4 Global risk of plastic entering zooplankton communities. a Using the animal-plastic size relationship to estimate the density of ingestible plastics (0.33–1.00 mm in length) divided by zooplankton density. b Current ‘state of the art’: as for a, with ingestible plastic densities substituted with total plastic densities. Legend coarsely estimates the level of plastic ingestion risk for zooplankton.CC BY · PubMed Central

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

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?

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 27 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 223

Related

Metadata

Authors
Jâms, I. B., Windsor, F. M., Poudevigne-Durance, T., Ormerod, S. J., & Durance, I.
Affiliations
Cardiff University (GB)
Corresponding author
Durance, Isabelle
ORCID
Venue
Nature Communications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-03-27
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
1594-1594
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1038/s41467-020-15406-6
PMC
PMC7101383
OpenAlex
W3013106828
Cited by
223
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 13
FWCI
8.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
Funders
Natural Environment Research Council (1642617, NE/L002434/, L002434)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Turtle Biology and Conservation
Keywords
plastic ingestion, allometric relationships, animal body size, gut content analysis, marine fauna, microplastics
MeSH terms
Animals, Eating, Environmental Monitoring, Environmental Pollution, Fishes, Particle Size, Plastics, Zooplankton, Ecosystem, Body Size

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