Skip to content
1887

Abstract

Biotic and abiotic materials attachment to suspended particulate matter in aquatic systems can increase their toxicity and health impacts and has led to an increased need for consistent sampling across various compartments. Sedimentation traps and continuous flow centrifuges are the traditional tools for sampling suspended particulate matter, while manta trawls have been widely used for surface water sampling of suspended or floating microplastics. Limitations, however, exist in the cost of sampling and infrastructure needed to deploy such devices. Here we report on the construction and usage of a novel suspended particulate matter sampling device, the microParticle Obtaining Trap (mPOT). Quality control testing of the mPOT showed suspended particle recovery rates of >90% for particles 100 µm and larger, while field sampling of groundwater, lake and river water shows consistent, size-fractionated recovery of particulate matter. The mPOT is well suited to sample systems not easily accessible by boat or for particles not commonly recovered by common suspended particulate matter sampling and for collection of particles smaller than 300 µm in size.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • University of Wisconsin-Madison, Division of Extension
    • Principal Award Recipient: EricaMajumder
  • Great Lakes Research Consortium
    • Principal Award Recipient: EricaMajumder
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001538
2025-03-06
2025-12-08

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/micro/171/3/mic001538.html?itemId=/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001538&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Eisma Doeke Suspended Matter in the Aquatic Environment 1993 p 315
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Hou L, Kumar D, Yoo CG, Gitsov I, Majumder ELW. Conversion and removal strategies for microplastics in wastewater treatment plants and landfills. Chem Eng J 2021; 406:126715 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Ricardo IA, Alberto EA, Silva Júnior AH, Macuvele DLP, Padoin N et al. A critical review on microplastics, interaction with organic and inorganic pollutants, impacts and effectiveness of advanced oxidation processes applied for their removal from aqueous matrices. Chem Eng J 2021; 424:130282 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Rummel CD, Jahnke A, Gorokhova E, Kühnel D, Schmitt-Jansen M. Impacts of biofilm formation on the fate and potential effects of microplastic in the aquatic environment. Environ Sci Technol Lett 2017; 4:258–267 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Amalfitano S, Corno G, Eckert E, Fazi S, Ninio S et al. Tracing particulate matter and associated microorganisms in freshwaters. Hydrobiologia 2017; 800:145–154 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Nguyen HT, Choi W, Kim EJ, Cho K. Microbial community niches on microplastics and prioritized environmental factors under various urban riverine conditions. Sci Total Environ 2022; 849:157781 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Zettler ER, Mincer TJ, Amaral-Zettler LA. Life in the “plastisphere”: microbial communities on plastic marine debris. Environ Sci Technol 2013; 47:7137–7146 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chinglenthoiba C, Amesho KTT, Reddy D, Chellappan S, Lani MN. Microplastic as an emerging environmental threat: a critical review on sampling and identification techniques focusing on aquatic ecosystems. J Polym Environ 2023; 31:1725–1747 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Hartmann NB, Hüffer T, Thompson RC, Hassellöv M, Verschoor A et al. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ Sci Technol 2019; 53:1039–1047 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Keßler S, Pohlert T, Breitung V, Wilcsek K, Bierl R. Comparative evaluation of four suspended particulate matter (SPM) sampling devices and their use for monitoring SPM quality. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2020; 27:5993–6008 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Harhash M, Schroeder H, Zavarsky A, Kamp J, Linkhorst A et al. Efficiency of five samplers to trap suspended particulate matter and microplastic particles of different sizes. Chemosphere 2023; 338:139479 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Browne MA, Crump P, Niven SJ, Teuten E, Tonkin A et al. Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines woldwide: sources and sinks. Environ Sci Technol 2011; 45:9175–9179 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Tirkey A, Pandey M, Tiwari A, Sahu RL, Kukkar D et al. Global distribution of microplastic contaminants in aquatic environments and their remediation strategies. Water Environ Res 2022; 94:e10819 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Katare Y, Singh P, Sankhla MS, Singhal M, Jadhav EB et al. Microplastics in aquatic environments: sources, ecotoxicity, detection & remediation. Biointerface Res Appl Chem 2022; 12:3407–3428 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Sharma S, Chatterjee S. Microplastic pollution, a threat to marine ecosystem and human health: a short review. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2017; 24:21530–21547 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Pasquier G, Doyen P, Kazour M, Dehaut A, Diop M et al. The Golden method for sampling surface water microplastics in aquatic environments. Front Environ Sci 2022; 10:811112 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Pan Z, Liu Q, Jiang R, Li W, Sun X et al. Microplastic pollution and ecological risk assessment in an estuarine environment: the Dongshan Bay of China. Chemosphere 2021; 262:127876 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Song YK, Hong SH, Jang M, Kang J-H, Kwon OY et al. Large accumulation of micro-sized synthetic polymer particles in the sea surface microlayer. Environ Sci Technol 2014; 48:9014–9021 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lindeque PK, Cole M, Coppock RL, Lewis CN, Miller RZ et al. Are we underestimating microplastic abundance in the marine environment? A comparison of microplastic capture with nets of different mesh-size. Environ Pollut 2020; 265:114721 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lenaker PL, Baldwin AK, Corsi SR, Mason SA, Reneau PC et al. Vertical distribution of microplastics in the water column and surficial sediment from the Milwaukee River basin to Lake Michigan. Environ Sci Technol 2019; 53:12227–12237 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Berov D, Klayn S. Microplastics and floating litter pollution in Bulgarian Black Sea coastal waters. Mar Pollut Bull 2020; 156:111225 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kovač Viršek M, Palatinus A, Koren Š, Peterlin M, Horvat P et al. Protocol for microplastics sampling on the sea surface and sample analysis. J Vis Exp 2016e55161 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Conkle JL, Báez Del Valle CD, Turner JW. Are we underestimating microplastic contamination in aquatic environments?. Environ Manage 2018; 61:1–8 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Marine Debris Program N. Laboratory methods for the analysis of microplastics in the marine environment: recommendations for quantifying synthetic particles in waters and sediments; 2015
  25. Rossatto A, Arlindo MZF, de Morais MS, de Souza TD, Ogrodowski CS. Microplastics in aquatic systems: a review of occurrence, monitoring and potential environmental risks. Environ Adv 2023; 13:100396 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. National Institute of Standards and Technology NIST standard reference database number 69. NIST chemistry webbook; 2023 https://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/ accessed 20 December 2023
  27. Chatman CC, Olson EG, Freedman AJ, Dittoe DK, Ricke SC et al. Co-exposure to polyethylene fiber and Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium alters microbiome and metabolome of in vitro chicken cecal mesocosms. Appl Environ Microbiol 2024; 90:e0091524 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Dill-McFarland K, Cox M. Microbiota processing in mothur, BRC workshop May 2018; 2018 https://rstudio-pubs-static.s3.amazonaws.com/384954_0d0b820cf23749ff8fa08edf1394a99b.html accessed 14 December 2023
  29. Schloss PD, Westcott SL, Ryabin T, Hall JR, Hartmann M et al. Introducing mothur: Open-source, platform-independent, community-supported software for describing and comparing microbial communities. Appl Environ Microbiol 2009; 75:7537–7541 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst Tech J 1948; 27:379–423 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Chao A, Lee SM. Estimating the number of classes via sample coverage. J Am Stat Assoc 1992; 87:210–217 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Simpson EH. Measurement of diversity. Nature 1949; 163:688 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Chao A. Nonparametric estimation of the number of classes in a population. Scand J Stat 1984; Available from:265–270
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Berger WH, Parker FL. Diversity of planktonic foraminifera in deep-sea sediments. Science (1979). Science 1970; 168:1345–1347 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Werbowski LM, Gilbreath AN, Munno K, Zhu X, Grbic J et al. Urban stormwater runoff: a major pathway for anthropogenic particles, black rubbery fragments, and other types of microplastics to urban receiving waters. ACS ES&T Water 2021; 1:1420–1428 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Sol D, Laca A, Laca A, Díaz M. Approaching the environmental problem of microplastics: importance of WWTP treatments. Sci Total Environ 2020; 740:140016 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  37. El Othmany R, Zahir H, Ellouali M, Latrache H. Current understanding on adhesion and biofilm development in actinobacteria. Int J Microbiol 2021; 2021:1–11 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Rampadarath S, Bandhoa K, Puchooa D, Jeewon R, Bal S. Early bacterial biofilm colonizers in the coastal waters of Mauritius. Electron J Biotechnol 2017; 29:13–21 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Chen Q, Chen Y, Yang J, Maberly SC, Zhang J et al. Bacterial communities in cascade reservoirs along a large river. Limnol Oceanogr 2021; 66:4363–4374 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Chiang E, Schmidt ML, Berry MA, Biddanda BA, Burtner A et al. Verrucomicrobia are prevalent in north-temperate freshwater lakes and display class-level preferences between lake habitats. PLoS One 2018; 13:e0195112 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Liu S, Shang E, Liu J, Wang Y, Bolan N et al. What have we known so far for fluorescence staining and quantification of microplastics: a tutorial review. Front Environ Sci Eng 2022; 16:1–14 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Winters AD, Marsh TL, Brenden TO, Faisal M. Molecular characterization of bacterial communities associated with sediments in the Laurentian Great Lakes. J Great Lakes Res 2014; 40:640–645 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Cox K, Brocious E, Courtenay SC, Vinson MR, Mason SA. Distribution, abundance and spatial variability of microplastic pollution on the surface of Lake Superior. J Great Lakes Res 2021; 47:1358–1364 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001538
Loading
/content/journal/micro/10.1099/mic.0.001538
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error