CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 38

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Concentrations of Airborne Microplastics during the Dry Season at Five Locations in Bangkok Metropolitan Region, Thailand

Sarathana, Danuwas, Winijkul, Ekbordin·2022·Atmosphere
DOI 10.3390/atmos14010028
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Information on airborne microplastics (AMPs) in Thailand is still not available. This study monitored and identified AMPs in Bangkok Metropolitan Region (BMR), Thailand. A high-volume air sampler was used to collect AMPs at five different locations in BMR. These five locations are university, roadside, urban park, dumpsite, and industrial estate. The results showed that AMPs concentration was averaged at 333.42 ± 142.99 per cubic meter (n/m3). The concentration of AMPs at the dumpsite was much higher than the concentration in the other areas. The relationship between AMPs and total suspended particles (TSP) was highly dependent on the locations and sources of microplastics nearby. Higher AMP with higher TSP were found at the university, dumpsite, and industrial estate. On the other hand, lower AMP with higher TSP were found at the roadside and urban park. Regarding the shape of the AMPs, the majority (97.22%) of the AMPs were in fragment form while only 2.78% were in fiber form. Polyethylene (PE) in the fragments and cellophane in the fibers were the major polymer types which were present in all locations.

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 · 10.3390/atmos14010028

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 ( a ) Map of the BMR and location of sampling sites, ( b ) sampling device at each location: ( A ) university; ( B ) roadside; ( C ) urban park; ( D ) dumpsite; ( E ) industrial estate. Figure 1. ( a ) Map of the BMR and location of sampling sites, ( b ) sampling device at each location: ( A ) university; ( B ) roadside; ( C ) urban park; ( D ) dumpsite; ( E ) industrial estate.
Figure 1 ( a ) Map of the BMR and location of sampling sites, ( b ) sampling device at each location: ( A ) university; ( B ) roadside; ( C ) urban park; ( D ) dumpsite; ( E ) industrial estate. Figure 1. ( a ) Map of the BMR and location of sampling sites, ( b ) sampling device at each location: ( A ) university; ( B ) roadside; ( C ) urban park; ( D ) dumpsite; ( E ) industrial estate.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 2 Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations in the BMR. Figure 2. Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations in the BMR.
Figure 2 Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations in the BMR. Figure 2. Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations in the BMR.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Shapes of Nile red staining plastic particles under fluorescence stereomicroscope. ( a ) Fragment; ( b ) fiber. Figure 3. Shapes of Nile red staining plastic particles under fluorescence stereomicroscope. ( a ) Fragment; ( b ) fiber.
Figure 3 Shapes of Nile red staining plastic particles under fluorescence stereomicroscope. ( a ) Fragment; ( b ) fiber. Figure 3. Shapes of Nile red staining plastic particles under fluorescence stereomicroscope. ( a ) Fragment; ( b ) fiber.CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 4
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 Size distribution for AMPs in five locations in the BMR. Figure 5. Size distribution for AMPs in five locations in the BMR.
Figure 5 Size distribution for AMPs in five locations in the BMR. Figure 5. Size distribution for AMPs in five locations in the BMR.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations during weekdays and weekends. Figure 6. Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations during weekdays and weekends.
Figure 6 Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations during weekdays and weekends. Figure 6. Concentration (mean ± S.D.) of AMPs at five locations during weekdays and weekends.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 7 Relationship of AMPs concentration and TSP concentration across the five sampling sites in the BMR. Figure 7. Relationship of AMPs concentration and TSP concentration across the five sampling sites in the BMR.
Figure 7 Relationship of AMPs concentration and TSP concentration across the five sampling sites in the BMR. Figure 7. Relationship of AMPs concentration and TSP concentration across the five sampling sites in the BMR.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 8 Percent of fragments and fibers in different size ranges of AMPs found in the BMR. Figure 8. Percent of fragments and fibers in different size ranges of AMPs found in the BMR.
Figure 8 Percent of fragments and fibers in different size ranges of AMPs found in the BMR. Figure 8. Percent of fragments and fibers in different size ranges of AMPs found in the BMR.CC-BY · From the PDF

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

Research works printed but not linked: 29

  1. Andrady, 2009, Applications and societal benefits of plastics, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 364, 1977, 10.1098/rstb.2008.0304 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Lithner, 2011, Environmental and health hazard ranking and assessment of plastic polymers based on chemical composition, Sci. Total Environ., 409, 3309, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.04.038 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Frias, 2019, Microplastics: Finding a consensus on the definition, Mar. Pollut. Bull., 138, 145, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.11.022 · DOI
  4. Akanyange, 2021, Does microplastic really represent a threat? A review of the atmospheric contamination sources and potential impacts, Sci. Total Environ., 777, 146020, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146020 · DOI
  5. Guo, 2019, The chemical behaviors of microplastics in marine environment: A review, Mar. Pollut. Bull., 142, 1, 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.019 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Golwala, 2021, Solid waste: An overlooked source of microplastics to the environment, Sci. Total Environ., 769, 144581, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144581 · DOI
  7. Alimba, 2019, Microplastics in the marine environment: Current trends in environmental pollution and mechanisms of toxicological profile, Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 68, 61, 10.1016/j.etap.2019.03.001 · DOI
  8. Auta, 2017, Distribution and importance of microplastics in the marine environment: A review of the sources, fate, effects, and potential solutions, Environ. Int., 102, 165, 10.1016/j.envint.2017.02.013 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Chae, 2018, Current research trends on plastic pollution and ecological impacts on the soil ecosystem: A review, Environ. Pollut., 240, 387, 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.05.008 · DOI
  10. Beaurepaire, 2021, Microplastics in the atmospheric compartment: A comprehensive review on methods, results on their occurrence and determining factors, Curr. Opin. Food Sci., 41, 159, 10.1016/j.cofs.2021.04.010 · DOI
  11. Levermore, 2020, Detection of microplastics in ambient particulate matter using Raman spectral imaging and chemometric analysis, Anal. Chem., 92, 8732, 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b05445 · DOI
  12. Costa, 2022, Airborne microplastics and SARS-CoV-2 in total suspended particles in the area surrounding the largest medical centre in Latin America, Environ. Pollut., 292, 118299, 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118299 · DOI
  13. Donaldson, 2002, Inflammation caused by particles and fibers, Inhal. Toxicol., 14, 5, 10.1080/089583701753338613 · DOI
  14. Eschenbacher, 1999, Nylon flock–associated interstitial lung disease, Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., 159, 2003, 10.1164/ajrccm.159.6.9808002 · DOI
  15. Pauly, 1998, Inhaled cellulosic and plastic fibers found in human lung tissue, Cancer Epidemiol. Prev. Biomark., 7, 419
  16. Tran, 2000, Inhalation of poorly soluble particles. II. Influence of particle surface area on inflammation and clearance, Inhal. Toxicol., 12, 1113, 10.1080/08958370050166796 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Huang, 2020, Mini-review on current studies of airborne microplastics: Analytical methods, occurrence, sources, fate and potential risk to human beings, TrAC Trends Anal. Chem., 125, 115821, 10.1016/j.trac.2020.115821 · DOI
  18. Jin, 2014, Evaluation of impacts of trees on PM2.5 dispersion in urban streets, Atmos. Environ., 99, 277, 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.10.002 · DOI
  19. Chen, 2017, Variation in tree species ability to capture and retain airborne fine particulate matter (PM2. 5), Sci. Rep., 7, 1
  20. Zhu, 2021, Airborne microplastic concentrations in five megacities of northern and southeast China, Environ. Sci. Technol., 55, 12871
  21. Liao, 2021, Airborne microplastics in indoor and outdoor environments of a coastal city in Eastern China, J. Hazard. Mater., 417, 126007, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126007 · DOI
  22. Kaya, 2018, Ubiquitous exposure to microfiber pollution in the air, Eur. Phys. J. Plus, 133, 488, 10.1140/epjp/i2018-12372-7 · DOI
  23. Ding, 2021, The abundance and characteristics of atmospheric microplastic deposition in the northwestern South China Sea in the fall, Atmos. Environ., 253, 118389, 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2021.118389 · DOI
  24. Liu, 2019, Consistent transport of terrestrial microplastics to the ocean through atmosphere, Environ. Sci. Technol., 53, 10612, 10.1021/acs.est.9b03427 · DOI
  25. Syafei, 2017, Microplastic pollution in the ambient air of Surabaya, Indonesia, Curr. World Environ., 14, 290, 10.12944/CWE.14.2.13 · DOI
  26. Klein, 2019, Microplastic abundance in atmospheric deposition within the Metropolitan area of Hamburg, Germany, Sci. Total Environ., 685, 96, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.405 · DOI
  27. Gaston, 2020, Microplastics differ between indoor and outdoor air masses: Insights from multiple microscopy methodologies, Appl. Spectrosc., 74, 1079, 10.1177/0003702820920652 · DOI
  28. Tamminga, 2017, Nile red staining as a subsidiary method for microplastic quantification: A comparison of three solvents and factors influencing application reliability, SDRP J. Earth Sci. Environ. Stud., 2, 165
  29. Ashrafi, 2018, Source apportionment of total suspended particles (TSP) by positive matrix factorization (PMF) and chemical mass balance (CMB) modeling in Ahvaz, Iran, Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 75, 278, 10.1007/s00244-017-0500-z · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 38

Metadata

Authors
Sarathana, D., & Winijkul, E.
Venue
Atmosphere
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-12-24
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
28
ISSN
2073-4433
DOI
10.3390/atmos14010028
Cited by
38
References
5
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

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