What You Net Depends on if You Grab: A Meta-analysis of Sampling Method’s Impact on Measured Aquatic Microplastic Concentration

Microplastic pollution is measured with a variety of sampling methods. Field experiments indicate that commonly used sampling methods, including net, pump, and grab samples, do not always result in equivalent measured concentration. We investigate the comparability of these methods through a meta-an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Environmental science & technology 2021-10, Vol.55 (19), p.12930-12942, Article acs.est.1c03019
Main Authors: Watkins, Lisa, Sullivan, Patrick J, Walter, M. Todd
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Contaminants in Aquatic and Terrestrial Environments
Contamination
Field tests
Filtration
Meta-analysis
Microplastics
Plastic debris
Plastic pollution
Sampling
Sampling methods
Surface water
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Microplastic pollution is measured with a variety of sampling methods. Field experiments indicate that commonly used sampling methods, including net, pump, and grab samples, do not always result in equivalent measured concentration. We investigate the comparability of these methods through a meta-analysis of 121 surface water microplastic studies. We find systematic relationships between measured concentration and sampled volume, method of collection, mesh size used for filtration, and waterbody sampled. Most significantly, a strong log–linear relationship exists between sample volume and measured concentration, with small-volume grab samples measuring up to 104 particles/L higher concentrations than larger volume net samples, even when sampled concurrently. Potential biasing factors explored included filtration size (±102 particles/L), net volume overestimation (±101 particles/L), fiber loss through net mesh (unknown magnitude), intersample variability (±101 particles/L), and contamination, the potential factor with an effect large enough (±103 particles/L) to explain the observed differences. On the basis of these results, we caution against comparing concentrations across multiple studies or combining multiple study results to identify regional patterns. Additionally, we emphasize the importance of contamination reduction and quantification strategies, namely that blank samples from all stages of field sampling be collected and reported as a matter of course for all studies.
ISSN:0013-936X
1520-5851
DOI:10.1021/acs.est.1c03019