Microplastics: An overview on separation, identification and characterization of microplastics

Tirkey, Anita; Upadhyay, Lata Sheo Bachan

doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112604

Cited by 229 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A harmonization of the MP detection methods is therefore urgently needed to critically analyze the results of different studies. Although a chemical characterization (e.g., through Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) or Raman spectroscopy techniques) would be preferable, the identification of MPs is often performed visually by optical microscopy [21]. Due to its time and financial requirements, chemical characterization is generally adopted to assist and confirm the visual identification of MPs [22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Microplastics Distribution in a Biological Wastewater Treatment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Full-scale wastewater treatment facilities are not able to prevent microplastics (MPs) from discharging into natural waters and they are also associated with the land application of the sludge. This study evaluates the distribution of microfibers (MFs) in a lab-scale sequencing batch reactor (SBR) fed by synthetic wastewater (SW) for 93 days. The MFs were analyzed through optical microscopy in the mixed liquor (ML) and the effluent, and sulfuric acid digestion was applied to discriminate between natural and synthetic MFs (i.e., MPs). The results of the optical microscopy analyses were further validated through FTIR spectroscopy. A model describing the evolution over time of the MF concentration in the ML was created, accounting for the MFs entering the system through the SW and atmospheric deposition. The ratio between the MF concentration in the ML and the effluent was 1409 ± 781, demonstrating that MFs settle with the sludge. Consistently, in the ML, 64.9% of the recovered MFs were smaller than 1000 µm (average size 968 µm), while in the effluent, 76.1% of MFs were smaller than 1000 µm (average size 772 µm). Overall, 72% of MFs recovered from the ML were natural fibers and sulfuric acid digestion was successful in eliminating the natural MFs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of Microplastics Distribution in a Biological Wastewater Treatment

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the increasing development of FTIR and Raman spectroscopy technology [ 63 , 64 , 65 ], the scope of application for the detection of microplastics is expanding beyond these techniques. However, the supplementation of FLIM technology also has advantages that cannot be underestimated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Rapid Method for Detecting Microplastics Based on Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging Technology (FLIM)

Fang

Wang

et al. 2022

Toxics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing use and release of plastic products, microplastics have rapidly accumulated in ecological environments. When microplastics enter the food chain, they cause serious harm to organisms and humans. Microplastics pollution has become a growing concern worldwide; however, there is still no standardized method for rapidly and accurately detecting microplastics. In this work, we used fluorescence lifetime imaging technology to detect four kinds of Nile red-stained and unstained microplastics, and the unique phasor fingerprints of different microplastics were obtained by phasor analysis. Tracing the corresponding pixels of the “fingerprint” in the fluorescence lifetime image allowed for the quick and intuitive identification of different microplastics and their location distributions in a mixed sample. In our work, compared with staining the four microplastics with a fluorescent dye, using the phasor “fingerprint library” formed by the autofluorescence lifetimes of the microplastics was more easily distinguished than microplastics in the mixed samples. The feasibility of this method was further tested by adding three single substances—SiO2, chitin and decabromodiphenyl ethane (DBDPE), and surface sediments to simulate interferent in the environment, and the results providing potential applications for the identification and analysis of microplastics in complex environments.

show abstract

“…Among various treatment methods in water treatment plants [54,55], clarification, sedimentation, density separation, coagulation and, or flocculation, activated sludge, sieving and filtration are considered conventional treatment processes in water treatment plants, and several studies have been focused on the removal efficiency of these treatment process for microplastic separation [56]. The basis of various physical, chemical, and biological methods conventionally applied in water treatment plants has been reviewed by Tirkey and Upadhyay and Zhang et al [57,58].…”

Section: Conventional Methods Of Microplastic Separationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microplastics in Aquatic Environments: Recent Advances in Separation Techniques

Hadian-Ghazvini

Torkashvand

2022

Period. Polytech. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Separation and removal of microplastic pollution from aquatic environments as a global environmental issue is classified as one of the major concerns in both water and wastewater treatment plants. Microplastics as polymeric particles less than 5 mm in at least one dimension are found with different shapes, chemical compositions, and sizes in soil, water, and sediments. Conventional treatment methods for organic separation have shown high removal efficiency for microplastics, while the separation of small microplastic particles, mainly less than 100 µm, in wastewater treatment plants is particularly challenging. This review aims to review the principle and application of different physical and chemical methods for the separation and removal of microplastic particles from aquatic environments, especially in water treatments process, with emphasis on some alternative and emerging separation methods. Advantages and disadvantages of conventional separation techniques such as clarification, sedimentation, floatation, activated sludge, sieving, filtration, and density separation are discussed. The advanced separation methods can be integrated with conventional techniques or utilize as a separate step for separating small microplastic particles. These advanced microplastic separation methods include membrane bioreactor, magnetic separation, micromachines, and degradation-based methods such as electrocatalysis, photocatalysis, biodegradation, and thermal degradation.

show abstract

Microplastics: An overview on separation, identification and characterization of microplastics

Cited by 229 publications

References 105 publications

Assessment of Microplastics Distribution in a Biological Wastewater Treatment

Assessment of Microplastics Distribution in a Biological Wastewater Treatment

A Rapid Method for Detecting Microplastics Based on Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging Technology (FLIM)

Microplastics in Aquatic Environments: Recent Advances in Separation Techniques

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About