Exploring the impacts of plastics in soil – The effects of polyester textile fibers on soil invertebrates

Selonen, Salla; Dolar, Andraž; Kokalj, Anita Jemec; Skalar, Tina; Dolcet, Lidia Parramon; Hurley, Rachel; Gestel, Cornelis A.M. van

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134451

Cited by 208 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The removed microplastics end up into sewage sludge during wastewater cleaning processes. The sewage sludge can then be applied onto a soil where microplastics may adversely affect soil animals (Selonen et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying

Kärkkäinen

Sillanpää

2020

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microplastic fibres released in synthetic cloth washing have been shown to be a source of microplastics into the environment. The annual emission of polyester fibres from household washing machines has earlier been estimated to be 150,000 kg in a country with a population of 5.5 × 106 (Finland). The objectives of this study were (1) to quantify the emissions of synthetic textile fibres discharged from five sequential machine washes (fibre number and length) and tumble dryings (fibre mass) and (2) to determine the collection efficiency of two commercial fibre traps. The synthetic fabrics were five types of polyester textiles, one polyamide and one polyacryl. The number of fibres released from the test fabrics in the first wash varied in the range from 1.0 × 105 to 6.3 × 106 kg−1. The fibre lengths showed that the fleece fabrics released, on average, longer fibres than the technical sports t-shirts. The mass of fibres ranged from 10 to 1700 mg/kg w/w in the first drying. Fibre emissions showed a decreasing trend both in sequential washes and dryings. The ratio of the fibre emissions in machine wash to tumble drying varied between the fabrics: the ratio was larger than one to polyester and polyamide technical t-shirts whereas it was much lower to the other tested textiles. GuppyFriend washing bag and Cora Ball trapped 39% and 10% of the polyester fibres discharged in washings, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying

Kärkkäinen

Sillanpää

2020

Environ Sci Pollut Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Polyester fibers, such as typical poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) fiber, poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) fiber, and poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT) fiber, have been extensively utilized in textile field due to their excellent properties 1–6 . However, it is worth pointing out that such fibers are non‐renewable as their main precursor, terephthalic acid (TPA), is derived from petroleum 7–9 . In fact, due to the widespread concerns on environmental protection as well as the depletion of non‐renewable resources, the development of sustainable biobased alternatives to generate polyester fibers has received considerable attention in the last decades because of their potential applications as eco‐friendly fibers contributing to reduction of environmental pollution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparation of biobased poly(propylene 2,5‐furandicarboxylate) fibers: Mechanical, thermal and hydrolytic degradation properties

Chen

Zou

et al. 2020

J of Applied Polymer Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this work, a fully biobased poly(propylene 2,5‐furandicarboxylate) (PPF) was synthesized from 2,5‐furan dicarboxylic acid (FDCA) and 1,3‐propanediol (1,3‐PDO) via traditional two‐step melting polycondensation. Then, the resultant PPF was characterized with 1H NMR, FTIR, GPC, intrinsic viscosity, TGA, and DSC measurements, respectively. Next, the prepared PPF was melt‐spun into fibers. The morphology and thermal stability of the as‐spun PPF fibers were firstly investigated by SEM and TGA. Furthermore, the mechanical properties of the PPF fibers were evaluated. The results showed that the tensile of the PPF fibers increased with increasing of the draw ratios following gradual decrease of the breaking elongation from 307.1% to 48.9%. In addition, the crystallization ability and the hydrolytic degradation behavior of the as‐spun PPF fibers were investigated in detail as well. The results presented that comparing to traditional fossil‐based poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT) fibers, the PPF fibers exhibited lower crystallinity, however, it displayed a better hydrolytic degradation performance. Based on these results, it confirmed that the PPF fiber based on biomass polymer is a kind of promising environmentally friendly synthetic fiber for potential application in various fields.

show abstract

“…Damaged gill epithelium was also observed in Japanese medaka following long-term exposure to microfibers (Hu et al, 2020). The effects of fiber exposure to soil invertebrates was also investigated, with lower cast production observed for exposed earthworms (Prendergast-Miller et al, 2019), while limited effects were observed on enchytraeids, springtails, isopods and oribatid mites (Selonen et al, 2020). Studies focusing on fiber retention and gut residence time showed that retention time for synthetic microfiber varies from a few hours to a couple of days for small invertebrates, like daphnids, gammarids, sea anemones, and shrimps (Blarer and Burkhardt-Holm, 2016;Jemec et al, 2016;Gray and Weinstein, 2017;Romanó de Orte et al, 2019), and from a few hours to up to 3 weeks for crabs and fish species (Watts et al, 2015;Grigorakis et al, 2017;Ory et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthetic Microfiber and Microbead Exposure and Retention Time in Model Aquatic Species Under Different Exposure Scenarios

Bour

Hossain

Taylor

et al. 2020

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synthetic microfibers have been reported in most aquatic environments and represent a large proportion of environmental microplastics. However, they remain largely underrepresented in microplastic ecotoxicity studies. The present study aims to investigate particle interaction with, and retention time in, aquatic organisms comparing microfibers, and microbeads. We used brine shrimp (Artemia sp.) and fish (Gasterosteus aculeatus) as invertebrate and vertebrate models, respectively. Organisms were exposed to a mixture of microbeads (polyethylene, 27-32 µm) and microfibers (dope dyed polyester; 500 µm-long) for 2 h, at high concentrations (100,000 part./L) in order to maximize organism-particles interaction. Artemia were exposed in the presence or absence of food. Fish were exposed either via the trophic route or directly via water, and water exposures were performed either in freshwater or seawater. In the absence of food, Artemia ingested high numbers of microbeads, retained in their digestive tract for up to 96 h. Microfiber ingestion was very limited, and its egestion was fast. In the presence of food, no microfiber was ingested, microbead ingestion was limited, and egestion was fast (48 h). Limited particle ingestion was observed in fish exposed via water, and particle retention time in gut did not exceed 48 h, both for direct and trophic exposure. However, water exposures resulted in a higher number of particles present in gills, and average retention time was higher in gills, compared to gut. This suggests that gills are organs susceptible to microplastic exposure and should be taken into account in fish exposure and effect studies. Our results show that particle ingestion and retention by organisms differ between microbeads and microfibers, suggesting particle selection based on size, shape, and/or color and species-specific selective feeding. We also showed that the presence of food results in limited particle ingestion and retention in Artemia and that microbeads are more likely to be transferred to organisms from upper trophic levels than microfibers. Finally, fish exposure to particles was not significantly different between freshwater and seawater conditions.

show abstract

Exploring the impacts of plastics in soil – The effects of polyester textile fibers on soil invertebrates

Cited by 208 publications

References 58 publications

Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying

Quantification of different microplastic fibres discharged from textiles in machine wash and tumble drying

Preparation of biobased poly(propylene 2,5‐furandicarboxylate) fibers: Mechanical, thermal and hydrolytic degradation properties

Synthetic Microfiber and Microbead Exposure and Retention Time in Model Aquatic Species Under Different Exposure Scenarios

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About