Figure - uploaded by Kelly Sheridan
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Microplastic pollution is ubiquitous, with textiles being a major source of one of the dominant microplastic types—microfibres. Microfibres have been discovered in the aquatic environment and marine biota, demonstrating direct infiltration in the environment. However, the impact of non-plastic microfibres has been overlooked until recently despite...
Context in source publication
Citations
... Geographically, discrepancies persist in our knowledge of MPs as a global pollutant with studies from the African continent (with the exception of South Africa) largely absent from the early stages of MP research (Blettler et al., 2018;Khan et al., 2018). However, a significant body of work is now beginning to emerge from East Africa (Honorato-Zimmer et al. 2022) with studies conducted in marine waters (Kosore et al., 2022;Nchimbi et al., 2022a;KeChi-Okafor et al., 2023), sediments (Mayoma et al. 2020, Nchimbi et al., 2022b and biota (Mayoma et al., 2020, Ombongi et al., 2021. Furthermore, the impact of MPs on native East African fish following laboratory exposures is starting to be investigated, e.g. ...
... acrylic, nylon, and polyester), and natural fibers (e.g. cotton, wool or viscose) may be present within environmental samples (KeChi-Okafor et al., 2023). Indeed, 55 % of 2403 microfibers characterized from water samples from the Kenyan and Tanzanian coast were natural fibers (KeChi-Okafor et al., 2023). ...
... cotton, wool or viscose) may be present within environmental samples (KeChi-Okafor et al., 2023). Indeed, 55 % of 2403 microfibers characterized from water samples from the Kenyan and Tanzanian coast were natural fibers (KeChi-Okafor et al., 2023). The presence of natural fibers in our samples cannot be ruled out, although none were identified using micro-FTIR spectroscopy, and the generic terminology of anthropogenic fibers may be more applicable. ...
In the present study we collected the Thumbprint emperor (Lethrinus harak) from seven landing sites from the coastal waters around Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar (Tanzania) to (i) quantify and characterize microplastics (MPs) in their digestive tracts and (ii) use previously assessed environmental levels in nearshore surface waters and seabed sediments to determine whether L. harak could be a relevant biomonitor for MP pollution in the region. L. harak (n=387) had an overall frequency of occurrence (FO%) of 48 % and displayed spatial variation between sites with Kunduchi (FO=66.7 %) and Mijimwena (FO=17.1 %) having the highest and lowest FO%, respectively. Fish from Mjimwema had a mean MP content of 0.17 ± 0.38 MPs individual-1 whilst fish from Kizimkazi had the highest MP abundance (1.75 ± 2.33 MPs individual-1). Fibers (overall 64.7 %, range across sites 48-86 %) and fragments (17.9 %, 5-25 %) were the most dominant MP types whilst black (46.9 %, 40-58 %) and blue (22.5%, 7-36 %) MPs were the most common colours. Fish length (ρ=-0.09, p=0.09) or weight (ρ=0.07, p=0.18) did not significantly correlate to MP abundance in fish (Spearman rank correlations). Neither MP occurrence nor abundance was linked to MP concentrations in either surface waters or seabed sediments (Spearman rank correlation), but MPs in the fish better reflected MPs in the sediment compared to surface water (two-way ANOVA on ranked data). Whilst L. harak presents as a promising candidate to monitor MP pollution along the East African coast due to its ecology, overall, it lacks reliability. Nonetheless, the present study fills important knowledge gaps both geographically on the East African Coast and with an underrepre-sented taxonomic family (Lethrinidae 'Emporer fishes').
The microplastic body burden of marine animals is often assumed to reflect levels of environmental contamination, yet variations in feeding ecology and regional trait expression could also affect a species’ risk of contaminant uptake. Here, we explore the global inventory of individual microplastic body burden for invertebrate species inhabiting marine sediments across 16 biogeographic provinces. We show that individual microplastic body burden in benthic invertebrates cannot be fully explained by absolute levels of microplastic contamination in the environment, because interspecific differences in behaviour and feeding ecology strongly determine microplastic uptake. Our analyses also indicate a degree of species-specific particle selectivity; likely associated with feeding biology. Highest microplastic burden occurs in the Yellow and Mediterranean Seas and, contrary to expectation, amongst omnivores, predators, and deposit feeders rather than suspension feeding species. Our findings highlight the inadequacy of microplastic uptake risk assessments based on inventories of environmental contamination alone, and the need to understand how species behaviour and trait expression covary with microplastic contamination.
Microplastic contamination is documented in marine organisms, but little is known about bioaccumulation or biomagnification of microplastics, especially in tissues external to the gastro-intestinal (GI) tract. The objective of this work was to explore microplastic contamination in GI tracts and other tissues (abdomen and tail in crustaceans; mantle in cephalopods; fillets in fishes) of species at different trophic levels sampled in a deep-sea food web in Monterey Bay, CA, USA. The species included are tuna crab Pleuroncodes planipes , market squid Doryteuthis opalescens , northern lampfish Stenobrachius leucopsarus , chub mackerel Scomber japonicus , California halibut Paralichthys californicus , and Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha . After chemical digestion, microplastics in GI tracts were quantified and identified to material type using μ-Raman spectroscopy and in other tissues using pyrolysis-GC/MS. The concentrations of microplastics in GI tracts were significantly different among species, and microplastic contamination was dominated by microfibers. The concentrations of microplastics (mainly polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride) in other tissues also varied among species. A significant positive correlation between body size and plastic concentration in other tissues was observed for halibut only, suggesting bioaccumulation may not be ubiquitous. The trophic magnification factor for microplastics beyond the GI tract was <1, suggesting that biomagnification is not occurring in tissues. However, we did observe evidence for biomagnification of microplastics in the GI tracts. Future studies are needed to better understand these patterns and the mechanisms for translocation, bioaccumulation, and biomagnification of microplastics in aquatic organisms.
The majority of garments are made from textile fibres. These fibres are lost from garments during their lifetime. Textile fibres in an environmental context are often referred to as microfibres. Microfibres are one of the most abundant anthropogenic particle types in the environment, and may represent a serious hazard to environmental and human health. Indeed, the presence of microfibres has been documented in many types of ecosystems, including terrestrial soils, indoor and outdoor air, ice and snow, as well as in marine and freshwater environments.1 The materials of these fibres vary considerably, and the impacts of these different materials are not well understood. Whilst there is widespread concern about the impacts of plastic textile fibres, our work shows that natural textile fibres are more prevalent in the environment, and their environmental impacts have the potential to be greater than plastic fibres.
Historically, the UK was internationally renowned as a thriving manufacturing hub within fashion and textiles, with production being steeped in quality, heritage and craftsmanship. Although it is no longer a country synonymous with fashion manufacture, current industry activity contributes £20bn annually to the economy, with 34,045 businesses in operation, employing 500,000 people across manufacturing, wholesale, and retail. While this seemingly healthy industry is economically sustainable, the market continues to source products overseas, with a heavy reliance on countries such as China, Bangladesh, and Turkey. This level of global sourcing has significant environmental and social impact, the majority of which is largely unknown to stakeholders such as brands, retailers, and consumers. Despite these negative consequences, the import of fashion products continues to increase annually with £27.7bn of goods being imported in 2020, compared to £25.9bn in 2019. Meanwhile, exports remain relatively low at £8.9bn in 2020, creating a significant imbalance of the flow of goods in a post-Brexit environment.The consumption of fashion has also continued to rise, with the UK having the highest level across Europe. Annually, consumers spend more than £45bn, catalysed by the fast, and ultra-fast fashion business models providing accessibility across multiple platforms and channels. Low costs and high volumes have decreased the consumer value of clothing resulting in short-term ownership and premature disposal. Consumer understanding of global fashion supply chains remain minimal, creating a disconnect between clothing production and consumption. The imbalance of imports and exports in the UK, coupled with increasing levels of consumer purchasing, presents a significant opportunity for future innovation. Challenging current systemic norms through the reshoring of production would have positive economic impact nationally, creating a thriving, sustainable industry.This chapter challenges traditional, linear methods of overseas production and questions the reliance on overseas supply chains as opposed to more localised manufacturing options. Furthermore, it explores how advancements in technology can help fill a gap in the skilled labour force, natural resources and equipment needed for garment manufacturing at scale. Rethinking the production and consumption of fashion is long overdue, with current methods no longer practical for staying within the Earth’s planetary boundaries. Radical transformation is needed, with novel and innovative solutions required to drive forward meaningful change towards a responsible future.KeywordsReshoringSystemic changeSustainable business modelsTextilesInnovation
