Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 488

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Quantity and type of plastic debris flowing from two urban rivers to coastal waters and beaches of Southern California

Open access
Moore, C.J., Lattin, G.L., Zellers, A.F.·2011·Revista de Gestão Costeira Integrada

Abstract

"Plastic debris is a common persistent pollutant in marine and coastal environments worldwide. Questions naturally arise among those dealing with the debris as to its source. Here we quantify the contribution of a large urban area, the Los Angeles basin, to the problem via the two main rivers draining its watershed. Samples of river water were taken with a variety of nets during both rainy and dry conditions from mass emission sites above the reach of tidal influence in the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers. The samples were from different strata in the flowing rivers using nets with less than 1mm mesh. Laboratory analysis of the samples divided the plastic debris into two size classes: >=1mm, <4.75mm, and >=4.75mm. A reason for the two size classes, in addition to providing a distinction between macro and micro debris, was that under California law, debris less than 5mm is not considered trash subject to regulation. The debris was first sorted into natural, plastic, and non-plastic manmade items. The plastic debris was then classified by type; either fragments, foams (mainly polystyrene), pre-production resin pellets, line, or films. Results extrapolated for 24 hours of flow from one moderate and one heavy rain day and one dry day when added together produced the following for 72 hours: Total number of plastic objects and fragments, 2,333,871,120.0 (2.3 billion), total weight of plastic objects and fragments 30, 438.52 kg (30 metric tons). In terms of the number of pieces, the majority, 71% were foams, with miscellaneous fragments at 14%, pre-production resin pellets at 10% and whole items at 1%. In terms of weight, however, whole items were the heaviest, at 37% of the total, followed by fragments at 29%, pellets at 13% and foamed polystyrene at 11%."

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 · 10.5894/rgci194

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.

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

Cited by

See all 488

Metadata

Authors
Moore, C. J., Lattin, G. L., & Zellers, A. F.
Venue
Revista de Gestão Costeira Integrada
Published
2011-03
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
65-73
ISSN
1646-8872 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2316398445
Cited by
488
References
0
FWCI
4.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

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: Quantity and type of plastic debris flowing from two urban rivers to coastal waters and beaches of Southern California. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5894/rgci194
The paper
Moore, C. J., Lattin, G. L., & Zellers, A. F. (2011). Quantity and type of plastic debris flowing from two urban rivers to coastal waters and beaches of Southern California. Revista de Gestão Costeira Integrada. https://doi.org/10.5894/rgci194

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.