Plastic and Microplastic in the Environment. Группа авторов
Читать онлайн книгу.
315–322.
83 Suman, T.Y., Li, W.G., Alif, S. et al. (2020). Characterization of petroleum‐based plastics and their absorbed trace metals from the sediments of the Marina Beach in Chennai, India. Environmental Sciences Europe 32 (1): 1–10.
84 Sundt, P., Schulze, P.‐E., and Syversen, F. (2014). Sources of microplastic pollution to the marine environment. Mepex for the Norwegian Environment Agency (Miljødirektoratet): 86.
85 Tan, X., Yu, X., Cai, L. et al. (2019). Microplastics and associated PAHs in surface water from the Feilaixia reservoir in the Beijiang River, China. Chemosphere 221: 834–840.
86 Tanaka, K. and Takada, H. (2016). Microplastic fragments and microbeads in digestive tracts of planktivorous fish from urban coastal waters. Scientific Reports 6 (1): 1–8.
87 Tanaka, K., Takada, H., Yamashita, R. et al. (2013). Accumulation of plastic‐derived chemicals in tissues of seabirds ingesting marine plastics. Marine Pollution Bulletin 69 (1–2): 219–222.
88 Tanaka, K., Takada, H., Yamashita, R. et al. (2015). Facilitated leaching of additive‐derived PBDEs from plastic by seabirds' stomach oil and accumulation in tissues. Environmental Science and Technology 49: 11799–11807. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b01376.
89 Thompson, R. (2017). Environment: a journey on plastic seas. Nature 547 (7663): 278.
90 Thompson, R.C., Swan, S.H., Moore, C.J. and Vom Saal, F.S. (2009). Our plastic age. royalsocietypublishing.org (accessed 26 October 2021).
91 Toxics Link (2014). Plastics and the Environment, Assessing the Impact of the Complete Ban on Plastic Carry Bag. New Delhi, India: Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) http://toxicslink.org/docs/Full‐Report‐Plastic‐and‐the‐Environment.pdf.
92 Tramoy, R., Gasperi, J., Dris, R. et al. (2019). Assessment of the plastic inputs from the seine basin to the sea using statistical and field approaches. Frontiers in Marine Science 6: 151.
93 UNHSP (United Nations Human Settlements Programme) (2016). World Cities Report. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Human Settlements Programme.
94 Van Cauwenberghe, L. and Janssen, C.R. (2014). Microplastics in bivalves cultured for human consumption. Environmental Pollution 193: 65–70.
95 Veerasingam, S., Mugilarasan, M., Venkatachalapathy, R., and Vethamony, P. (2016). Influence of 2015 flood on the distribution and occurrence of microplastic pellets along the Chennai coast, India. Marine Pollution Bulletin 109 (1): 196–204.
96 Verster, C., Minnaar, K., and Bouwman, H. (2017). Marine and freshwater microplastic research in South Africa. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management 13 (3): 533–535.
97 Wagner, M., Scherer, C., Alvarez‐Muñoz, D. et al. (2014). Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: what we know and what we need to know. Environmental Sciences Europe 26 (1): 1–9.
98 Werner, S., Budziak, A., van Franeker, J.A. et al. (2016). Harm caused by Marine Litter. MSFD GES TG Marine Litter – Thematic Report EUR 28317. Luxembourg.
99 Wilson, H.L., Johnson, M.F., Wood, P.J. et al. (2020). Anthropogenic litter is a novel habitat for aquatic macroinvertebrates in urban rivers. Freshwater Biology 66: 524–534.
100 Windsor, F.M., Durance, I., Horton, A.A. et al. (2019). A catchment‐scale perspective of plastic pollution. Global Change Biology 25 (4): 1207–1221.
101 Wright, S.L. and Kelly, F.J. (2017). Threat to human health from environmental plastics. BMJ 358: j4334. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4334.
102 Yonkos, L.T., Friedel, E.A., Perez‐Reyes, A.C. et al. (2014). Microplastics in four estuarine rivers in the Chesapeake Bay, USA. Environmental Science & Technology 48 (24): 14195–14202.
103 Zhao, S., Zhu, L., Wang, T., and Li, D. (2014). Suspended microplastics in the surface water of the Yangtze estuary system, China: first observations on occurrence, distribution. Marine Pollution Bulletin 86 (1–2): 562–568.
104 Ziajahromi, S., Neale, P.A., and Leusch, F.D. (2016). Wastewater treatment plant effluent as a source of microplastics: review of the fate, chemical interactions and potential risks to aquatic organisms. Water Science and Technology 74 (10): 2253–2269.
105 Ziajahromi, S., Kumar, A., Neale, P.A., and Leusch, F.D. (2017). Impact of microplastic beads and fibers on waterflea (Ceriodaphniadubia) survival, growth, and reproduction: implications of single and mixture exposures. Environmental Science & Technology 51 (22): 13397–13406.
3 Microplastic Contamination in the Marine Food Web: Its Impact on Human Health
Richa Singh
Institute of Environment and Sustainable Development, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India
3.1 Introduction
Plastic or synthetic polymers are artificially made from petroleum products, and due to their versatile nature of being lightweight, strong, durable, transparent, and waterproof they are now part of everything we human beings use. Thus, they are widely distributed to the entire segment of human life, from waking up in the morning until going to bed at night; modern humans are surrounded by plastic. Plastics have proliferated into food packaging industries; stationary, electric, and electronic goods; vehicles, private and public transport; medical appliances; fishing nets and more. In today's era, one cannot imagine a day without plastic. Toothpastes, shaving creams, and soaps all have synthetic polymers in the form of microbeads (Sun et al. 2020). Plastics are highly resistant to microbial degradation as they are of artificial (human‐made) petroleum‐based products; therefore, their remediation by natural processes is difficult enough and takes a long time that can vary in the range of hundreds of years (Wierckx et al. 2018). Due to chemical (acid rain) and physical (temperature, pressure, moisture) processes, they degrade and break down into smaller fragments and, in smaller forms which do not degrade completely and pose negative impacts on the environment, these smaller forms have high potential to enter into the water or air matrices in invisible forms. MPs have a size ranging from 100 nm to 5 mm (Zhang et al. 2020). The microbeads and nanoparticles that are intentionally added into facewash, shaving creams, soaps, etc. are termed “primary” MPs; however, those which are added to the environment after the fragmentation of larger size plastic particles by impact of natural phenomenon, as well as anthropogenic activities in the environment, are considered “secondary” MPs (Lei et al. 2017). Due to poor waste management practices and lack of knowledge about proper disposal of such wastes among the consumers of such plastic‐based products, plastic debris is dumped directly into the ocean every year in huge quantities. Varying sizes of plastic particles, including larger and smaller beads of MPs, ultimately reach the water column of the ocean, and their presence is significantly reported in sediments (Harris 2020). They are found on the deep floor of the sea, in underground water tables, and in soils. Global plastic production has significantly boomed from 300 to 360 million metric tons in the last five years (Deccan Herald, 2020). As they are highly resistant to microbial degradation, they persist for a longer time in the ecosystem. MPs are a matter of great concern because of their high potential to make any organism unfit, as they have huge impacts on their metabolism.
According to Boucher & Friot (2017), approximately 1.53 million tons/year of primary MPs enter the ocean via different pathways. These pathways include flushed water from our washroom's containing the MPs in microbead form from face scrubs, toothpaste, detergents, facewash, shampoo, cosmetic cream, etc., which goes into rivers through the drainage systems, and later become part of the ocean, as sewage treatment plants are not made for such efficiency in developing countries like India. MPs are extensively distributed throughout our ocean ecosystem; from zooplankton, bivalves, crustacean,