Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i>
Microplastic fibres (MPFs) are a major source of microplastic pollution, most are released during domestic washing of synthetic clothing. Organic microfibres (OMF) are also released into the environment by the same means, with cotton and wool being the most common in the UK. There is little empirica...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2021-08-01
|
| Series: | Environments |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/8/8/74 |
| _version_ | 1797523896837079040 |
|---|---|
| author | Lewis Yardy Amanda Callaghan |
| author_facet | Lewis Yardy Amanda Callaghan |
| author_sort | Lewis Yardy |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Microplastic fibres (MPFs) are a major source of microplastic pollution, most are released during domestic washing of synthetic clothing. Organic microfibres (OMF) are also released into the environment by the same means, with cotton and wool being the most common in the UK. There is little empirical evidence to demonstrate that plastic fibres are more harmful than organic fibres if ingested by freshwater animals such as <i>Gammarus pulex</i>. Using our method of feeding <i>Gammarus</i> MPFs embedded in algal wafers, we compared the ingestion, feeding behaviour and growth of <i>Gammarus</i> exposed to 70 µm sheep wool, 20 µm cotton, 30 µm acrylic wool, and 50 µm or 100 µm human hair, and 30 µm cat hair at a concentration of 3% fibre by mass. <i>Gammarus</i> would not ingest wafers containing human hair, or sheep wool fibres. Given the choice between control wafers and those contaminated with MPF, cat hair or cotton, <i>Gammarus</i> spent less time feeding on MPF but there was no difference in the time spent feeding on OMFs compared to the control. Given a choice between contaminated wafers, <i>Gammarus</i> preferred the OMF to the MPF. There were no significant differences in growth or mortality among any of the treatments. These results conclude that MPFs are less likely to be ingested by <i>Gammarus</i> if alternative food is available and are not more harmful than OMFs. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T08:49:38Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4df1bc8d82254d4ebd188305381cd834 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2076-3298 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T08:49:38Z |
| publishDate | 2021-08-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Environments |
| spelling | doaj.art-4df1bc8d82254d4ebd188305381cd8342023-11-22T07:36:21ZengMDPI AGEnvironments2076-32982021-08-01887410.3390/environments8080074Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i>Lewis Yardy0Amanda Callaghan1School of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6EX, UKSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Reading, Reading RG6 6EX, UKMicroplastic fibres (MPFs) are a major source of microplastic pollution, most are released during domestic washing of synthetic clothing. Organic microfibres (OMF) are also released into the environment by the same means, with cotton and wool being the most common in the UK. There is little empirical evidence to demonstrate that plastic fibres are more harmful than organic fibres if ingested by freshwater animals such as <i>Gammarus pulex</i>. Using our method of feeding <i>Gammarus</i> MPFs embedded in algal wafers, we compared the ingestion, feeding behaviour and growth of <i>Gammarus</i> exposed to 70 µm sheep wool, 20 µm cotton, 30 µm acrylic wool, and 50 µm or 100 µm human hair, and 30 µm cat hair at a concentration of 3% fibre by mass. <i>Gammarus</i> would not ingest wafers containing human hair, or sheep wool fibres. Given the choice between control wafers and those contaminated with MPF, cat hair or cotton, <i>Gammarus</i> spent less time feeding on MPF but there was no difference in the time spent feeding on OMFs compared to the control. Given a choice between contaminated wafers, <i>Gammarus</i> preferred the OMF to the MPF. There were no significant differences in growth or mortality among any of the treatments. These results conclude that MPFs are less likely to be ingested by <i>Gammarus</i> if alternative food is available and are not more harmful than OMFs.https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/8/8/74microplasticfibresanimal hairwoolcotton<i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| spellingShingle | Lewis Yardy Amanda Callaghan Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> Environments microplastic fibres animal hair wool cotton <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title | Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title_full | Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title_fullStr | Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title_full_unstemmed | Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title_short | Microplastic and Organic Fibres in Feeding, Growth and Mortality of <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| title_sort | microplastic and organic fibres in feeding growth and mortality of i gammarus pulex i |
| topic | microplastic fibres animal hair wool cotton <i>Gammarus pulex</i> |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/8/8/74 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lewisyardy microplasticandorganicfibresinfeedinggrowthandmortalityofigammaruspulexi AT amandacallaghan microplasticandorganicfibresinfeedinggrowthandmortalityofigammaruspulexi |