Interlaboratory comparison of microplastic extraction methods from marine biota tissues: A harmonization exercise of the Plastic Busters MPAs project

Catherine Tsangaris; Cristina Panti; Montserrat Compa; Cristina Pedà; Nikoletta Digka; Matteo Baini; Michela D'Alessandro; Carme Alomar; Danae Patsiou; Dario Giani; Teresa Romeo; Salud Deudero; Maria Cristina Fossi

doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111992

Interlaboratory comparison of microplastic extraction methods from marine biota tissues: A harmonization exercise of the Plastic Busters MPAs project

Mar Pollut Bull. 2021 Mar:164:111992. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111992. Epub 2021 Jan 22.

Authors

Affiliations

¹ Institute of Oceanography, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR), 46.7 km, Athinon-Souniou Ave., P.O. Box 712, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece. Electronic address: ctsangar@hcmr.gr.
² Department of Physical, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Siena, Via Mattioli, 4, Siena 53100, Italy.
³ Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Centro Oceanográfico de Baleares, Muelle de Poniente s/n, 07015 Palma de Mallorca, Balearic Islands, Spain.
⁴ Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), BIOCIT, via dei Mille 46, 98057 Milazzo, ME, Italy.
⁵ Institute of Oceanography, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research (HCMR), 46.7 km, Athinon-Souniou Ave., P.O. Box 712, 19013 Anavyssos, Greece.
⁶ Institute for Environmental Protection and Research (ISPRA), BIOCIT, via dei Mille 46, 98057 Milazzo, ME, Italy; Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn (SZN), Department of Integrative Marine Ecology, Sicily, Via dei Mille 46, 98057 Milazzo, ME, Italy.

PMID: 33493856
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111992

Abstract

In the framework of the Plastic Busters MPAs project, a harmonization exercise on two methods of microplastic extraction from biological samples i.e. 15% H₂O₂ digestion and 10% KOH digestion was carried out. The two methods were tested in four laboratories on fish gastrointestinal tracts and mussel tissues spiked with polyethylene, polypropylene and polyethylene terephthalate. The recovery percentage of microplastics for each method, species and polymer tested were overall similar among laboratories, and interlaboratory coefficient of variation was less than 11% for the majority of samples. Microplastic recovery rates for the two methods were similar for each sample tested, but overall mean interlaboratory recovery rate using KOH (96.67%) was higher than H₂O₂ (88.75%)_. Results validate the use of both methods for extracting microplastics from biota tissues. However, when comparing the two methods in terms of microplastic recovery rate, time consumed, technical difficulties and cost, digestion with 10% KOH is considered optimal.

Keywords: Ingestion; Isolation; Microplastic; Mullus barbatus; Mytilus galloprovincialis; Protocol harmonization.

MeSH terms

Animals
Biota
Environmental Monitoring
Hydrogen Peroxide
Microplastics
Plastics*
Water Pollutants, Chemical* / analysis

Substances

Microplastics
Plastics
Water Pollutants, Chemical
Hydrogen Peroxide