Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
San Francisco Estuary Institute, Richmond, California, USA.
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2021 Jan;17(1):282-291. doi: 10.1002/ieam.4325. Epub 2020 Oct 9.
To inform mitigation strategies and understand how microplastics affect wildlife, research is focused on understanding the sources, pathways, and occurrence of microplastics in the environment and in wildlife. Microplastics research entails counting and characterizing microplastics in nature, which is a labor-intensive process, particularly given the range of particle sizes and morphologies present within this diverse class of contaminants. Thus, it is crucial to determine appropriate sampling methods that best capture the types and quantities of microplastics relevant to inform the questions and objectives at hand. It is also critical to follow protocols with strict quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) measures so that results reflect accurate estimates of microplastic contamination. Here, we assess different sampling procedures and QA/QC strategies to inform best practices for future environmental monitoring and assessments of exposure. We compare microplastic abundance and characteristics in surface-water samples collected using different methods (i.e., manta and bulk water) at the same sites, as well as duplicate samples for each method taken at the same site and approximate time. Samples were collected from 9 sampling sites within San Francisco Bay, California, USA, using 3 different sampling methods: 1) manta trawl (manta), 2) 1-L grab (grab), and 3) 10-L bulk water filtered in situ (pump). Bulk water sampling methods (both grab and pump) captured more microplastics within the smaller size range (<335 µm), most of which were fibers. Manta samples captured a greater diversity of morphologies but underestimated smaller-sized particles. Inspection of pump samples revealed high numbers of particles from procedural contamination, stressing the need for robust QA/QC, including sampling and analyzing laboratory blanks, field blanks, and duplicates. Choosing the appropriate sampling method, combined with rigorous, standardized QA/QC practices, is essential for the future of microplastics research in marine and freshwater ecosystems. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2021;17:282-291. © 2020 SETAC.
为了制定缓解策略并了解微塑料如何影响野生动物，研究的重点是了解环境中和野生动物体内微塑料的来源、途径和存在情况。微塑料研究需要对自然界中的微塑料进行计数和特征描述，这是一个劳动密集型过程，特别是考虑到此类多样化污染物中存在的各种粒径和形态。因此，确定最合适的采样方法以最佳捕获与手头问题和目标相关的微塑料类型和数量至关重要。遵循具有严格质量保证和质量控制（QA/QC）措施的协议也非常重要，以便结果反映出对微塑料污染的准确估计。在这里，我们评估了不同的采样程序和 QA/QC 策略，以为未来的环境监测和暴露评估提供最佳实践。我们比较了在加利福尼亚州旧金山湾的 9 个采样点使用不同方法（即，manta 拖网和 bulk 水）采集的地表水样本中的微塑料丰度和特征，以及在同一地点和近似时间采集的每种方法的重复样本。使用 3 种不同的采样方法：1）manta 拖网（manta），2）1-L 抓斗（grab）和 3）原位过滤的 10-L bulk 水（pump），在加利福尼亚州旧金山湾的 9 个采样点收集了样本。 bulk 水采样方法（grab 和 pump）在较小的尺寸范围内（<335 μm）捕获了更多的微塑料，其中大部分是纤维。 manta 样品捕获了更多形态的多样性，但低估了较小尺寸的颗粒。对泵样品的检查显示，来自程序污染的颗粒数量很多，这强调了需要进行严格的 QA/QC，包括采样和分析实验室空白、野外空白和重复样品。选择合适的采样方法，结合严格的标准化 QA/QC 实践，对于海洋和淡水生态系统中的微塑料研究的未来至关重要。2021 年《综合环境评估与管理》17：282-291。©2020 SETAC。
