Microplastics in different tissues of fish and prawn from the Musa Estuary, Persian Gulf

Abstract

Commercially-important species of fish and a crustacean from four sites in the Musa estuary and a site in the Persian Gulf have been analysed for the presence and location of microplastics (MPs). A total of 828 MPs were detected in the guts (gastrointestinal tracts), skin, muscle, gills and liver of demersal and pelagic fish (Platycephalus indicus, Saurida tumbil, Sillago sihama, Cynoglossus abbreviatus) from all five sites and in the exoskeleton and muscle of the tiger prawn, Penaeus semisulcatus, from three sites. On an individual basis, MPs were most abundant in P. indicus (mean = 21.8) and least frequently encountered in P. semisulcatus (mean = 7.8), but when normalized on a mass basis, MPs ranged from 0.16 g for C. abbreviatus to 1.5 g for P. semisulcatus. Microscopic analyses (polarized light, fluorescence, SEM/EDS) revealed that MPs were mainly fibrous fragments (with a few angular fragments) of various colour and size (<100 μm to > 1000 μm) and with strong C and O signatures. Additional particles detected that were distinctly different in colour, morphology, brittleness and elemental composition (part-metallic, and containing Cu) were suspected of being fragments of antifouling paint. The means of entry of MPs into tissues not involved in digestion are unclear but could be related to translocation or adherence. Regardless of the mode of accumulation, the presence of MPs in heavily fished species of fish and crustacean raises concerns about the potential transfer of synthetic materials into humans.

Chronic microfiber exposure in adult Japanese medaka (Oryzias latipes)

“…Microfibers are pervasive in digestive tracts of various wild caught fish [21,24,87,88]. In the laboratory, Grigorakis et al [23] determined retention times for MFs to be fairly low.…”

A micro(nano)plastic boomerang tale: A never ending story?

“…Species like mussels, that are consumed as a whole, enabling the ingestion of micro(nano)plastic particles present in their gastrointestinal tract, were considered of major concern whereas a lower relevance was given to fish as microplastic particles have been reported within the gastrointestinal tract, usually not eaten by humans. This notion of potential risk must however be reconsidered as the presence of microplastics in the skin and muscle of several pelagic and demersal fish species of commercial interest, as well as muscle of a prawn species [36], has been detected. Furthermore, some fish are also consumed as a whole, in their juvenile stages, increasing the likelihood of human microplastic consumption.…”

“…However, this subject is understudied [2,12] and available data is scarce. The reported toxic effects of micro(nano)plastics in aquatic species such as immunomodulation and apoptosis [38], generation of reactive oxygen species and peroxidative damage [23], impaired neurotransmission [22], translocation of micro(nano)plastics from the digestive track to the circulatory system and internal organs [36], brain and liver and continuous inflammatory activation suggest that these particles may also be toxic to humans (Table SI 1). However, no studies are available in terms of effects of micro(nano)plastics of environmental origin on humans.…”

Distribution and potential health impacts of microplastics and microrubbers in air and street dusts from Asaluyeh County, Iran

“…Ingested MPs can also act as vectors for the bioaccumulation of chemical additives or monomers from the plastic matrix or contaminants adsorbed to the polymer surface (Batel et al, 2016). The direct or indirect (dietary) ingestion of MPs by commercially important species, coupled with possible translocation of micrometer-sized plastics has also recently raised concerns about the potential exposure of MPs to humans who regularly consume sea food (Rochman et al, 2015;Abbasi et al, 2018).…”