179
© The Author(s) 2018
S. Jungblut et al. (eds.), YOUMARES 8 – Oceans Across Boundaries: Learning from each other,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93284-2_13
Microplastics in Aquatic Systems –
Monitoring Methods and Biological
Consequences
Thea Hamm, Claudia Lorenz, and Sarah Piehl
Abstract
Microplastic research started at the turn of the millennium
and is of growing interest, as microplastics have the
potential to affect a whole range of organisms, from the
base of the food web to top predators, including humans.
To date, most studies are initial assessments of microplastic abundances for a certain area, thereby generally distinguishing three different sampling matrices: water,
sediment and biota samples. Those descriptive studies are
important to get a first impression of the extent of the
problem, but for a proper risk assessment of ecosystems
and their inhabitants, analytical studies of microplastic
fluxes, sources, sinks, and transportation pathways are of
utmost importance. Moreover, to gain insight into the
effects microplastics might have on biota, it is crucial to
identify realistic environmental concentrations of microplastics. Thus, profound knowledge about the effects of
microplastics on biota is still scarce. Effects can vary
regarding habitat, functional group of the organism, and
polymer type for example, making it difficult to find quick
answers to the many open questions. In addition, microplastic research is accompanied by many methodological
challenges that need to be overcome first to assess the
impact of microplastics on aquatic systems. Thereby, a
development of standardized operational protocols
(SOPs) is a pre-requisite for comparability among studies. Since SOPs are still lacking and new methods are
developed or optimized very frequently, the aim of this
chapter is to point out the most crucial challenges in
microplastic research and to gather the most recent promising methods used to quantify environmental concentrations of microplastics and effect studies.
Introduction
Literature on microplastic (MP) abundance in aquatic environments and observed effects on biota has exponentially
increased over the last 7 years (Connors et al. 2017). Within
the current literature, MP sampling is imbalanced and studies are most often conducted on sandy beaches and the sea
surface, followed by bottom sediment samples and water
column samples (Duis and Coors 2016; Bergmann et al.
2017). Individual studies examining MP abundance, i.e.,
deep sea sediments (Van Cauwenberghe et al. 2013b;
Woodall et al. 2014), sea ice (Obbard et al. 2014) or marine
snow (Zhao et al. 2017) exist. Thereby, attempts to compare
data taken from similar sampling matrices have been made in
almost every study (Filella 2015), whereas for most studies
this is often hampered by the various sampling methods
applied (Hidalgo-Ruz et al. 2012; Filella 2015; Löder and
Gerdts 2015; Costa and Duarte 2017). Hidalgo-Ruz et al.
(2012) was the first article that showed the huge variety of
different methods used for MP data collection and suggested
the need for standardized operational protocols (SOPs). In
the “Guidelines for Monitoring of marine litter” published
by Hanke et al. (2013) the authors suggested methods based
on the most often used techniques but also stressed that further standardization is needed. The NOAA made initial
attempts of standardization in laboratory methods (Masura
et al. 2015). Moreover, Löder and Gerdts (2015), as well as
more recently Costa and Duarte (2017), took up the issue and
critically assessed the different methods used for MP analysis. However, different environments can only be compared
T. Hamm
GEOMAR Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research, Kiel, Germany
e-mail: thamm@geomar.de
C. Lorenz (*)
Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), Helmholtz Centre for Polar and
Marine Research, Biologische Anstalt Helgoland,
Helgoland, Germany
e-mail: claudia.lorenz@awi.de
S. Piehl
Department of Animal Ecology I and BayCEER, University of
Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
e-mail: sarah.piehl@uni-bayreuth.de
© The Author(s) 2018
S. Jungblut et al. (eds.), YOUMARES 8 – Oceans Across Boundaries: Learning from each other,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93284-2_13
Microplastics in Aquatic Systems –
Monitoring Methods and Biological
Consequences
Thea Hamm, Claudia Lorenz, and Sarah Piehl
Abstract
Microplastic research started at the turn of the millennium
and is of growing interest, as microplastics have the
potential to affect a whole range of organisms, from the
base of the food web to top predators, including humans.
To date, most studies are initial assessments of microplastic abundances for a certain area, thereby generally distinguishing three different sampling matrices: water,
sediment and biota samples. Those descriptive studies are
important to get a first impression of the extent of the
problem, but for a proper risk assessment of ecosystems
and their inhabitants, analytical studies of microplastic
fluxes, sources, sinks, and transportation pathways are of
utmost importance. Moreover, to gain insight into the
effects microplastics might have on biota, it is crucial to
identify realistic environmental concentrations of microplastics. Thus, profound knowledge about the effects of
microplastics on biota is still scarce. Effects can vary
regarding habitat, functional group of the organism, and
polymer type for example, making it difficult to find quick
answers to the many open questions. In addition, microplastic research is accompanied by many methodological
challenges that need to be overcome first to assess the
impact of microplastics on aquatic systems. Thereby, a
development of standardized operational protocols
(SOPs) is a pre-requisite for comparability among studies. Since SOPs are still lacking and new methods are
developed or optimized very frequently, the aim of this
chapter is to point out the most crucial challenges in
microplastic research and to gather the most recent promising methods used to quantify environmental concentrations of microplastics and effect studies.
Introduction
Literature on microplastic (MP) abundance in aquatic environments and observed effects on biota has exponentially
increased over the last 7 years (Connors et al. 2017). Within
the current literature, MP sampling is imbalanced and studies are most often conducted on sandy beaches and the sea
surface, followed by bottom sediment samples and water
column samples (Duis and Coors 2016; Bergmann et al.
2017). Individual studies examining MP abundance, i.e.,
deep sea sediments (Van Cauwenberghe et al. 2013b;
Woodall et al. 2014), sea ice (Obbard et al. 2014) or marine
snow (Zhao et al. 2017) exist. Thereby, attempts to compare
data taken from similar sampling matrices have been made in
almost every study (Filella 2015), whereas for most studies
this is often hampered by the various sampling methods
applied (Hidalgo-Ruz et al. 2012; Filella 2015; Löder and
Gerdts 2015; Costa and Duarte 2017). Hidalgo-Ruz et al.
(2012) was the first article that showed the huge variety of
different methods used for MP data collection and suggested
the need for standardized operational protocols (SOPs). In
the “Guidelines for Monitoring of marine litter” published
by Hanke et al. (2013) the authors suggested methods based
on the most often used techniques but also stressed that further standardization is needed. The NOAA made initial
attempts of standardization in laboratory methods (Masura
et al. 2015). Moreover, Löder and Gerdts (2015), as well as
more recently Costa and Duarte (2017), took up the issue and
critically assessed the different methods used for MP analysis. However, different environments can only be compared
T. Hamm
GEOMAR Helmholtz Center for Ocean Research, Kiel, Germany
e-mail: thamm@geomar.de
C. Lorenz (*)
Alfred Wegener Institute (AWI), Helmholtz Centre for Polar and
Marine Research, Biologische Anstalt Helgoland,
Helgoland, Germany
e-mail: claudia.lorenz@awi.de
S. Piehl
Department of Animal Ecology I and BayCEER, University of
Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
e-mail: sarah.piehl@uni-bayreuth.de