Microplastics in the Weddell Sea (Antarctica): A Forensic Approach for Discrimination between Environmental and Vessel-Induced Microplastics

Leistenschneider, Clara; Burkhardt‐Holm, Patricia; Mani, Thomas; Primpke, Sebastian; Taubner, Heidi; Gerdts, Gunnar

doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c05207

Cited by 77 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In subsurface (5 m, near-shore and offshore) water samples from the Ross Sea, Cincinelli et al [42] found much more MPs (mean concentration 0.17 ± 0.34 particles m −3 ) than those reported from the Weddell Sea (0.04 ± 0.1 particles m −3 [82]). Although comparisons are difficult, because smaller MPs, including fibers, were considered in the Ross Sea waters (Table 1), the polymer composition in the latter sea was different, probably due to the greater impact of sewage from coastal stations and from research and logistic vessels [42].…”

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…By comparing the results of two expeditions in the Weddell Sea, those authors highlighted a great temporal variability and found that no MPs occurred in water samples collected from coastal polynyas and east of the Antarctic Peninsula. The much greater occurrence of paint fragments in the Southern Ocean than in other seas was attributed by Leistenschneider et al [82] to the low contamination by other plastic polymers and the increased mechanical abrasion of ship paints in the cold water of the Southern Ocean. In surface waters off the Antarctic Peninsula, Lacerda et al [83] found paint fragments at all sampling stations and their number was 30 times that of plastics.…”

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…In the ocean, plastic debris is carried and accumulates in the center of gyres. By filtering over 8 million liters of surface and subsurface waters from the Weddell Sea gyre, Leistenschneider et al [82] found that 45.5% of all recovered fragments originated from paints of the research vessel; mean concentrations of plastic fragments (>300 µm) were 0.01 ± 0.01 m −3 and 0.04 ± 0.1 m −3 , for surface and subsurface waters, respectively (Table 1). By comparing the results of two expeditions in the Weddell Sea, those authors highlighted a great temporal variability and found that no MPs occurred in water samples collected from coastal polynyas and east of the Antarctic Peninsula.…”

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Macro- and Microplastics in the Antarctic Environment: Ongoing Assessment and Perspectives

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of scientists and tourists visiting Antarctica is on the rise and, despite the management framework for environmental protection, some coastal areas, particularly in the Antarctic Peninsula region, are affected by plastic contamination. The few data available on the occurrence of microplastics (<5 mm) are difficult to compare, due to the different methodologies used in monitoring studies. However, indications are emerging to guide future research and to implement environmental protocols. In the surface and subsurface waters of the Southern Ocean, plastic debris >300 µm appears to be scarce and far less abundant than paint chips released from research vessels. Yet, near some coastal scientific stations, the fragmentation and degradation of larger plastic items, as well as microbeads and microfibers released into wastewater from personal care products and laundry, could potentially affect marine organisms. Some studies indicate that, through long-range atmospheric transport, plastic fibers produced on other continents can be deposited in Antarctica. Drifting plastic debris can also cross the Polar Front, with the potential to carry alien fouling organisms into the Southern Ocean. Sea ice dynamics appear to favor the uptake of microplastics by ice algae and Antarctic krill, the key species in the Antarctic marine food web. Euphausia superba apparently has the ability to fragment and expel ingested plastic particles at the nanoscale. However, most Antarctic organisms are endemic species, with unique ecophysiological adaptations to extreme environmental conditions and are likely highly sensitive to cumulative stresses caused by climate change, microplastics and other anthropogenic disturbances. Although there is limited evidence to date that micro- and nanoplastics have direct biological effects, our review aims at raising awareness of the problem and, in order to assess the real potential impact of microplastics in Antarctica, underlines the urgency to fill the methodological gaps for their detection in all environmental matrices, and to equip scientific stations and ships with adequate wastewater treatment plants to reduce the release of microfibers.

show abstract

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Sources and Occurrence Of Mps In The Southern Oceanmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Macro- and Microplastics in the Antarctic Environment: Ongoing Assessment and Perspectives

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Potential sources of contamination must be recorded, and where possible collected to act as a reference. Potential sources of procedural plastic contaminants in the Arctic include staff clothing, ships, skidoos, helicopters or other vehicles, as well as equipment, and any plastics or paints used in the vicinity (Leistenschneider et al, 2021). During sample collection, efforts to prevent contamination should be enforced and all steps taken should be clearly reported.…”

Section: Consideration Of Contaminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The power of multi-matrix monitoring in the Pan-Arctic region: plastics in water and sediment

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Litter and microplastic assessments are being carried out worldwide. Arctic ecosystems are no exception and plastic pollution is high on the Arctic Council’s agenda. Water and sediment have been identified as two of the priority compartments for monitoring plastics under the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP). Recommendations for monitoring both compartments are presented in this publication. Alone, such samples can provide information on presence, fate, and potential impacts to ecosystems. Together, the quantification of microplastics in sediment and water from the same region produce a three-dimensional picture of plastics, not only a snapshot of floating or buoyant plastics in the surface water or water column but also a picture of the plastics reaching the shoreline or benthic sediments, in lakes, rivers, and the ocean. Assessment methodologies must be adapted to the ecosystems of interest to generate reliable data. In its current form, published data on plastic pollution in the Arctic is sporadic and collected using a wide spectrum of methods which limits the extent to which data can be compared. A harmonised and coordinated effort is needed to gather data on plastic pollution for the Pan-Arctic. Such information will aid in identifying priority regions and focusing mitigation efforts.

show abstract

“…Additionally, regular sampling campaigns like the ones occurring in Fram Strait (FRAM Pollution Observatory as part of HAUSGARTEN Observatory) could monitor the outflow of Arctic sea ice and study the processes at the interface between the ocean and the atmosphere by ship-based sampling. However, it is imperative to include extensive QA/QC protocols during ship-based sampling due to the high potential for shipbased contamination (Leistenschneider et al 2021). Selected fjords near Svalbard or reoccurring Central Arctic research vessel expeditions could include additional sea ice core sampling and air sampling programs for microplastics.…”

Section: Recommendations For Future Monitoring and Research Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monitoring microplastics in the atmosphere and cryosphere in the circumpolar North: A case for multi-compartment monitoring

Hamilton

Jantunen²,

Bergmann

et al. 2022

Arctic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The atmosphere and cryosphere have recently garnered considerable attention due to their role in transporting microplastics to and within the Arctic, and between freshwater, marine, and terrestrial environments. While investigating either in isolation provides valuable insight on the fate of microplastics in the Arctic, monitoring both provides a more holistic view. Nonetheless, despite the recent scientific interest, fundamental knowledge on microplastic abundance, and consistent monitoring efforts, are lacking for these compartments. Here, we build upon the work of the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme’s Monitoring Guidelines for Litter and Microplastic to provide a roadmap for multi-compartment monitoring of the atmosphere and cryosphere to support our understanding of the sources, pathways, and sinks of plastic pollution across the Arctic. Overall, we recommend the use of existing standard techniques for ice and atmospheric sampling and to build upon existing monitoring efforts in the Arctic to obtain a more comprehensive pan-Arctic view of microplastic pollution in these two compartments.

show abstract

Microplastics in the Weddell Sea (Antarctica): A Forensic Approach for Discrimination between Environmental and Vessel-Induced Microplastics

Cited by 77 publications

References 76 publications

Macro- and Microplastics in the Antarctic Environment: Ongoing Assessment and Perspectives

Macro- and Microplastics in the Antarctic Environment: Ongoing Assessment and Perspectives

The power of multi-matrix monitoring in the Pan-Arctic region: plastics in water and sediment

Monitoring microplastics in the atmosphere and cryosphere in the circumpolar North: A case for multi-compartment monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About