Common laboratory reagents: Are they a double-edged sword in microplastics research?

Understanding and communicating instances of microplastic contamination is critical for enabling plastic-free transitions. While microplastics research uses a variety of commercial chemicals and laboratory liquids, the impact of microplastics on these materials remains unknown. To fill this knowledg...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Science of the total environment 2023-06, Vol.875, p.162610-162610, Article 162610
Hauptverfasser: Kutralam-Muniasamy, Gurusamy, Shruti, V.C., Pérez-Guevara, Fermín, Roy, Priyadarsi D., Elizalde-Martínez, I.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Understanding and communicating instances of microplastic contamination is critical for enabling plastic-free transitions. While microplastics research uses a variety of commercial chemicals and laboratory liquids, the impact of microplastics on these materials remains unknown. To fill this knowledge gap, the current study investigated microplastics abundance and their characteristics in laboratory waters (distilled, deionized, and Milli-Q), salts (NaCl and CaCl2), chemical solutions (H2O2, KOH and NaOH), and ethanol from various research laboratories and commercial brands. The mean abundance of microplastics in water, salt, chemical solutions, and ethanol samples was 30.21 ± 30.40 (L−1), 24.00 ± 19.00 (10 g−1), 187.00 ± 45.00 (L−1), and 27.63 ± 9.53 (L−1), respectively. Data comparisons revealed significant discrepancies between the samples in terms of microplastic abundance. Fibers (81 %) were the most common microplastics, followed by fragments (16 %) and films (3 %); 95 % of them were
ISSN:0048-9697
1879-1026
DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.162610