Institute of Marine Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO4 9LY, UK.
School of Biological Sciences, King Henry Bld. University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth PO1 2DY, UK.
Sci Total Environ. 2021 Nov 25;797:149217. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149217. Epub 2021 Jul 21.
Microplastic pollution has become a major source of concern, with a large body of literature surrounding the impacts of microplastic ingestion by biota. However, many of these studies utilise virgin microbeads, which are not reflective of environmental microplastics that are rapidly colonised with microbial communities (plastisphere) in marine ecosystems. It is a concern therefore that current evidence of the impacts of microplastics on biota are unrepresentative of the environmental microplastic pollution. In this study, uptake and bioaccumulation of both virgin and Escherichia coli coated microplastics, by European native oysters (Ostrea edulis) were compared, and the physiological responses of oysters to the exposure were investigated. The uptake of E. coli coated microplastics was found to be significantly higher than the uptake of virgin microplastics, with average concentrations of 42.3 ± 23.5 no. g and 11.4 ± 0.6 no. g microbeads found in oysters exposed to coated and virgin microplastics, respectively. This suggests that environmental microplastic uptake into the marine trophic web by benthic filter feeders may be greater than previously thought. The oxygen consumption and respiration rate of oysters exposed to E. coli coated microplastics increased significantly over time, whilst virgin microplastics did not produce any measurable significant physiological responses. However, less than 0.5% of the total amount of administered microbeads were retained by all oysters, suggesting a limited residence time within the organisms. Although microplastics did not bioaccumulate in oyster tissues in the short-term, microorganisms assimilated by the ingestion of coated microplastics may be transferred to higher trophic levels. This poses a risk, not only for wildlife, but also for food safety and human health. The capacity to carry pathogens and expose a wide range of organisms to them means microplastics may have an important role as vectors for disease.
微塑料污染已成为一个主要关注点,大量文献研究了生物摄入微塑料的影响。然而,这些研究中的许多都使用了原始的微珠,这些微珠不能反映环境中的微塑料,而环境中的微塑料在海洋生态系统中会迅速被微生物群落(塑料圈)定植。因此,令人担忧的是,目前关于微塑料对生物影响的证据并不能代表环境中的微塑料污染。在这项研究中,比较了欧洲本地牡蛎(Ostrea edulis)对原始和大肠杆菌包被微塑料的吸收和生物积累情况,并研究了牡蛎对暴露的生理反应。结果发现,大肠杆菌包被微塑料的吸收明显高于原始微塑料,暴露于包被和原始微塑料的牡蛎体内的微珠浓度分别为 42.3 ± 23.5 no. g 和 11.4 ± 0.6 no. g。这表明,底栖滤食者将环境微塑料摄入海洋营养网的程度可能比以前认为的要大。暴露于大肠杆菌包被微塑料的牡蛎的耗氧量和呼吸率随时间显著增加,而原始微塑料则没有产生任何可测量的显著生理反应。然而,所有牡蛎体内仅保留了所投入微珠总量的不到 0.5%,这表明它们在体内的停留时间有限。尽管微塑料在短期内没有在牡蛎组织中生物积累,但通过摄入包被微塑料而被同化的微生物可能会转移到更高的营养级。这不仅对野生动物构成风险,而且对食品安全和人类健康构成风险。微塑料携带病原体并将其暴露给广泛的生物体的能力意味着它们可能在疾病传播中发挥重要作用。