Abstract
The potential environmental and human health risks from microplastic (1 µm to
1 mm) and nanoplastic (<1 µm) particles (MNPs) is receiving increasing attention from
scientists and the public [1–3]. Most particles in the environment are likely secondary
particles formed from the degradation and weathering of larger pieces of plastic [4,5].
These plastic particles have a large diversity of characteristics (e.g., size, density, shape,
chemical composition, additives and degree of weathering) [6].
Currently, MNP environmental fate and hazard studies use a wide range of nonstandardized methods, resulting in the low comparability of results. This hinders the
generation of consistent and reliable hazard data, increases the uncertainty of risk determinations and limits the use of computational models. Examples of conflicting results in
the literature include some studies suggesting that MNPs pose a serious ecotoxicological
risk [7,8], while other studies report minimal toxicity after the removal of additives used in
polymer processing or surfactants and antimicrobials added to MNP suspensions [9,10].
Clearly, there is need for improved quality control in researching the environmental
hazards of MNPs. One approach to resolve discrepancies is using existing standardized
test methods. These methods were designed for dissolved substances and to avoid physical
effects from particles [11]. However, MNPs at elevated concentrations could cause physical
effects on organisms. This situation is similar to that confronted in research over the last
decade studying the environmental behavior and toxicity of engineered nanomaterials
(ENMs), where early publications also resulted in conflicting results. Given the particulate
nature of both MNPs and ENMs (Figure 1), many concepts developed for the environmental
risk assessment of ENMs may be adapted to improve MNP fate and hazard evaluations
1 mm) and nanoplastic (<1 µm) particles (MNPs) is receiving increasing attention from
scientists and the public [1–3]. Most particles in the environment are likely secondary
particles formed from the degradation and weathering of larger pieces of plastic [4,5].
These plastic particles have a large diversity of characteristics (e.g., size, density, shape,
chemical composition, additives and degree of weathering) [6].
Currently, MNP environmental fate and hazard studies use a wide range of nonstandardized methods, resulting in the low comparability of results. This hinders the
generation of consistent and reliable hazard data, increases the uncertainty of risk determinations and limits the use of computational models. Examples of conflicting results in
the literature include some studies suggesting that MNPs pose a serious ecotoxicological
risk [7,8], while other studies report minimal toxicity after the removal of additives used in
polymer processing or surfactants and antimicrobials added to MNP suspensions [9,10].
Clearly, there is need for improved quality control in researching the environmental
hazards of MNPs. One approach to resolve discrepancies is using existing standardized
test methods. These methods were designed for dissolved substances and to avoid physical
effects from particles [11]. However, MNPs at elevated concentrations could cause physical
effects on organisms. This situation is similar to that confronted in research over the last
decade studying the environmental behavior and toxicity of engineered nanomaterials
(ENMs), where early publications also resulted in conflicting results. Given the particulate
nature of both MNPs and ENMs (Figure 1), many concepts developed for the environmental
risk assessment of ENMs may be adapted to improve MNP fate and hazard evaluations
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 1332 |
Number of pages | 5 |
Journal | Nanomaterials |
Volume | 12 |
Issue number | 8 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 13 Apr 2022 |
Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 105906 Environmental geosciences
- 210004 Nanomaterials
Keywords
- testing methods
- environment
- Microplastic
- nanomaterial