Cargando…
Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research
Microplastic pollution has become one of the most pressing environmental issues. A fundamental criterion for risk assessment is the concentration of found microplastic that can be altered during microplastic isolating from the sample. Recovery rate (i.e. positive control) is an important feedback co...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8683728/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34976752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101603 |
_version_ | 1784617478532366336 |
---|---|
author | Dimante-Deimantovica, Inta Suhareva, Natalija Barone, Marta Putna-Nimane, Ieva Aigars, Juris |
author_facet | Dimante-Deimantovica, Inta Suhareva, Natalija Barone, Marta Putna-Nimane, Ieva Aigars, Juris |
author_sort | Dimante-Deimantovica, Inta |
collection | PubMed |
description | Microplastic pollution has become one of the most pressing environmental issues. A fundamental criterion for risk assessment is the concentration of found microplastic that can be altered during microplastic isolating from the sample. Recovery rate (i.e. positive control) is an important feedback component that identifies accuracy, quality and efficiency of sample processing, same as physical and chemical impact. Here, using 100 µm red polystyrene (PS) beads we have tested some methodological steps that can be responsible for the possible microplastic losses during sample treatment and based on that, we provided a recovery rate threshold values. Our results support that the choice of the extraction method (vacuum filtration versus wet sieving) results in lower recoverability when vacuum filtration is used and that used separatory funnels size versus material amount impacts the efficiency or recoverability in density separation. We have also analysed microplastic recovery rate when different samples treatment steps from widely used isolation protocols (sediment and water) were applied and our results suggest that there are a number of factors affecting recovery rates, of which physical effects (loss by consecutive treatment steps due to material transfer) are more important than possible chemical degradation. • Sample filtration method determines recovery rate from < 40 to > 80%. • The number of sample processing steps involving transfer has a direct impact on recovery rate. • As a measure of quality assurance, recovery rate thresholds are introduced. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8683728 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86837282021-12-30 Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research Dimante-Deimantovica, Inta Suhareva, Natalija Barone, Marta Putna-Nimane, Ieva Aigars, Juris MethodsX Method Article Microplastic pollution has become one of the most pressing environmental issues. A fundamental criterion for risk assessment is the concentration of found microplastic that can be altered during microplastic isolating from the sample. Recovery rate (i.e. positive control) is an important feedback component that identifies accuracy, quality and efficiency of sample processing, same as physical and chemical impact. Here, using 100 µm red polystyrene (PS) beads we have tested some methodological steps that can be responsible for the possible microplastic losses during sample treatment and based on that, we provided a recovery rate threshold values. Our results support that the choice of the extraction method (vacuum filtration versus wet sieving) results in lower recoverability when vacuum filtration is used and that used separatory funnels size versus material amount impacts the efficiency or recoverability in density separation. We have also analysed microplastic recovery rate when different samples treatment steps from widely used isolation protocols (sediment and water) were applied and our results suggest that there are a number of factors affecting recovery rates, of which physical effects (loss by consecutive treatment steps due to material transfer) are more important than possible chemical degradation. • Sample filtration method determines recovery rate from < 40 to > 80%. • The number of sample processing steps involving transfer has a direct impact on recovery rate. • As a measure of quality assurance, recovery rate thresholds are introduced. Elsevier 2021-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8683728/ /pubmed/34976752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101603 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Method Article Dimante-Deimantovica, Inta Suhareva, Natalija Barone, Marta Putna-Nimane, Ieva Aigars, Juris Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title | Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title_full | Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title_fullStr | Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title_full_unstemmed | Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title_short | Hide-and-seek: Threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
title_sort | hide-and-seek: threshold values and contribution towards better understanding of recovery rate in microplastic research |
topic | Method Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8683728/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34976752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2021.101603 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dimantedeimantovicainta hideandseekthresholdvaluesandcontributiontowardsbetterunderstandingofrecoveryrateinmicroplasticresearch AT suharevanatalija hideandseekthresholdvaluesandcontributiontowardsbetterunderstandingofrecoveryrateinmicroplasticresearch AT baronemarta hideandseekthresholdvaluesandcontributiontowardsbetterunderstandingofrecoveryrateinmicroplasticresearch AT putnanimaneieva hideandseekthresholdvaluesandcontributiontowardsbetterunderstandingofrecoveryrateinmicroplasticresearch AT aigarsjuris hideandseekthresholdvaluesandcontributiontowardsbetterunderstandingofrecoveryrateinmicroplasticresearch |