Queen's Marine Laboratory, Queen's University Belfast, 12-13 The Strand, Portaferry, Northern Ireland, UK.
School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, 19 Chlorine Gardens, Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK.
Integr Comp Biol. 2019 Dec 1;59(6):1485-1496. doi: 10.1093/icb/icz068.
Microplastics (synthetic polymers; <5 mm) are ubiquitous, in the environment and in the news. The associated effects of microplastics on flora and fauna are currently only established through laboratory-based exposure trials; however, such studies have come under scrutiny for employing excessive concentrations with little environmental relevance. This critical review is intended to summarize key issues and approaches for those who are considering the need for local microplastics research, both in terms of environmental pollution and the impacts on aquatic species. A meta-analysis of results from published experimental (n = 128) and environmental (n = 180) studies allowed us to compare the reported impacts from experiments that expose organisms to microplastics, and the concentrations of environmental microplastics found in the wild. The results of this meta-analysis highlight three issues that should be modified in future work (1) use of extreme dosages, (2) incompatible and incomparable units, and (3) the problem of establishing truly informative experimental controls. We found that 5% of exposure trials examined did not use any control treatment, and 82% use dramatically elevated dosages without reference to environmental concentrations. Early studies in this field may have been motivated to produce unequivocal impacts on organisms, rather than creating a robust, environmentally relevant framework. Some of the reported impacts suggest worrying possibilities, which can now inspire more granular experiments. The existing literature on the extent of plastic pollution also has limited utility for accurately synthesizing broader trends, as has been raised in previous reviews; environmental extraction studies use many different units, among which only 76% (139/180) could be plausibly converted for comparison. Future research should adopt the units of microparticles/kg (of sediment) or mp/L (of fluid) to improve comparability. Now that the global presence of microplastic pollution is well established, with more than a decade of research, new studies should focus on comparative aspects rather than the presence of microplastics. Robustly designed, controlled, hypothesis-driven experiments based on environmentally relevant concentrations are needed now to understand our future in the new plastic world.
微塑料(合成聚合物;<5 毫米)无处不在,存在于环境中和新闻中。微塑料对动植物的相关影响目前仅通过基于实验室的暴露试验来确定;然而,这些研究因采用与环境相关性不大的过高浓度而受到质疑。本综述旨在总结那些正在考虑进行局部微塑料研究的人员所面临的关键问题和方法,无论是在环境污染方面,还是在对水生物种的影响方面。对已发表的实验(n=128)和环境(n=180)研究结果的荟萃分析使我们能够比较将生物体暴露于微塑料的实验报告的影响,以及在野外发现的环境微塑料的浓度。这项荟萃分析的结果突出了三个在未来工作中需要修改的问题(1)使用极端剂量,(2)不兼容和不可比的单位,以及(3)建立真正有信息价值的实验对照的问题。我们发现,5%的暴露试验没有使用任何对照处理,82%的试验使用了明显升高的剂量,而没有参考环境浓度。该领域的早期研究可能是为了对生物体产生明确的影响,而不是建立一个稳健的、与环境相关的框架。一些报告的影响表明存在令人担忧的可能性,这现在可以启发更细致的实验。先前的综述已经提出,关于塑料污染程度的现有文献对于准确综合更广泛的趋势也没有多少用处;环境提取研究使用了许多不同的单位,其中只有 76%(139/180)可以合理转换以进行比较。未来的研究应采用微粒/kg(沉积物)或 mp/L(流体)的单位,以提高可比性。现在,微塑料污染的全球存在已经得到充分证实,已有十多年的研究,新的研究应该侧重于比较方面,而不是微塑料的存在。现在需要基于与环境相关的浓度进行稳健设计、对照、假设驱动的实验,以了解我们在新的塑料世界中的未来。