Abstract
Microplastics have now been identified as a class of emerging pollutants and is considered as a threat to aquatic organisms. This baseline paper investigated the distribution, composition, and potential ecological risks of microplastic (MP) pollution on St. Mary's Island, revealing an average abundance of 0.218 particles/L in water samples. Blue fibres and white foams were the primary MPs identified, and fishing activities and packaging were the main sources of pollution. Six types of polymers were identified: low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polystyrene (PS), polyamide (PA), polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). The Polymer Hazard Index (PHI) and Potential Ecological Risk Index (PERI) indicated a medium environmental risk for the island. Additionally, it was discovered that MPs’ surfaces contained dangerous substances that could endanger aquatic life. The research emphasizes the significance of implementing measures such as responsible disposal, management, elimination, regulatory policies, and local administration techniques to mitigate the impact of MP pollution on the island’s shores and marine biota. This research provides a baseline for monitoring MP contamination and underscores the need for continuous investigation to assess their impacts on marine life.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The excessive use of plastics, without considering their long-lasting effects, is known to harm our planet. In the 15 years since 2000, plastic production has increased by a staggering 70%. Notably, 39.7% of this increase can be attributed to the packaging industry (Kosior & Mitchell, 2020). In recent years, global plastic production has continued to rise, increasing from approximately 359 million metric tonnes to 390.7 million tonnes in 2021 (Plastics Europe, 2022). On average, approximately 14 million metric tons of plastic waste reach the global oceans each year (IUCN, 2018).
Plastic waste generated on land is carried into the ocean and persists there for extended periods (Li et al., 2016), eventually breaking down into tiny pieces of plastic. The term “microplastics” (MPs) refers to these tiny fragments of plastic, which range in size from 1 µm to 5 mm. (Amrutha et al., 2023; Thompson et al., 2004). They can also be divided into primary and secondary MPs. Primary MPs are microbeads that are used in facial cleansing products or in industrial processes, and in synthetic fabrics (Andrady, 2011). Secondary MPs, on the other hand, are the broken-down remains of larger plastic debris. The breakdown of these materials is accelerated by various physical, chemical, and biological processes, including exposure to ultraviolet radiation, the mechanical action of waves, abrasion from coarse rock particles, and the formation of biofilms (Kernchen et al., 2022).
Carpenter et al. (1972) was the first to observe small pieces of plastic floating on the water’s surface off the coast of New England. Since then, numerous studies have discovered MPs in locations such as the Arctic (Choudhary et al., 2022; Morgana et al., 2018), the Antarctic (Jones-Williams et al., 2020), and even the deepest parts of our oceans (Zhang et al., 2020). Rivers transport pollutants from land to the oceans (Amrutha & Warrier, 2020). Upon entering the oceans, waves and currents play a significant role in dispersing MPs into offshore areas. Additionally, various marine organisms, including fish, molluscs, crustaceans, and seabirds, ingest these MPs (Amélineau et al., 2016; da Costa et al., 2023; Hamilton et al., 2021). MPs can adsorb pollutants from both terrestrial and aquatic environments, including heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs) as well as host the colonies of bacteria that carry antibiotic genes (Keswani et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2021). Additional biochemical stress can be brought on by toxic substances like phthalates and bisphenols that can enter the organisms.
In India, MPs have been discovered in lakes, rivers, estuaries, soils, and various living organisms (Amrutha & Warrier, 2020; Pandey et al., 2021; Sruthy & Ramasamy, 2017; Unnikrishnan et al., 2023; Valsan et al., 2023; Warrier et al., 2022). Islands are critical ecosystems, providing habitats for a diverse range of species (Kueffer et al., 2016; Royle, 2008). They hold cultural importance, as they support the livelihoods of local inhabitants (Gillespie & Clague, 2009; Royle, 2014). However, islands are often threatened by both natural and human-induced factors, such as increased tourism, overexploitation of natural resources, and rising sea levels due to climate change (Baldacchino & Niles, 2011; Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2019; Royle, 2014; Walker & Bellingham, 2011).
Despite their significance, there are limited reports on the presence and distribution of MPs in the Indian Ocean islands, particularly the Arabian Sea (Khaleel et al., 2022; Mugilarasan et al., 2017). To close this knowledge deficit, we investigated the spatial distribution of tiny plastic particles in water samples collected from St. Mary’s Island located in the southeast Arabian Sea. Our goals were to: (i) analyze the abundance, shape, size, and colour of microplastics; (ii) determine the polymer composition of MPs and look at their surface morphology; and (iii) determine the possible risks that MPs pose to the local biota.
Methods and materials
Study area and water sampling
St. Mary’s Island, also known as Coconut Island or Parashurama Dveepa, is in the Udupi Region (Fig. 1). The island is three kilometres off the shore of Malpe in Karnataka, southwest India, at 13° 22′ 46.2′′ N and 74° 40′ 22.8′′ E. It has a 2.17-km circumference and a 0.11 square kilometre surface size. Beach cast can build up on shorelines and other places at elevations of 12 m or less (Selvam et al., 2011). Coconut Island, Bahudurgari Island, North Island, and South Island together form the group of four islands that comprise St. Mary’s Island. These islands are not perfectly aligned in a north–south orientation (Selvam et al., 2011). The study area serves as an excellent example of a volcanic island formed by rift extensional movements (Marion hotspot – Melluso et al., 2009). Pyroxene rhyolites, exposed in the island’s well-known columnar joints, underwent Au-Pb-Zircon dating, which estimated their age to be 91.2 ± 0.2 million years (Late Cretaceous; Bhushan et al., 2010; Torsvik et al., 2000).
Most of the year in the archipelago is associated with tropical weather, and different wind patterns throughout the year cause a monsoon season between June and September. This results in 2,893 mm of precipitation on average each year, and the average yearly temperature is 26.5 °C. The island is affected by strong gusts during the southwest monsoon. During the northeast monsoon, however, winds blow from the north (Udupi District Environmental Plan, accessed on May 24, 2022). In 2016, the Geological Survey of India designated St. Mary's Island as a National Geological Monument (Geo-Heritage Sites; https://pib.gov.in/newsite/printrelease.aspx?relid=137573, accessed on 11th March 2023). To promote sustainable use of the island, a time limit of one hour has been set for each visitor to engage in tourist activities. This measure aims to manage the number of tourists visiting the island, which has become a popular destination for both domestic and international visitors. Access to the island is limited to boats operating from October to May each year.
A total of 12 surface water samples, were collected from various locations on St. Mary's Island on January 22, 2022, using a stainless-steel bucket (Fig. 1). A stainless-steel test sieve with a mesh size of 0.1 mm (Haver Scientific) was used to filter about 100 L of water. The filtered residue was carefully transferred to a stainless-steel container. The samples were then brought to the laboratory and kept there until analysis at 4 °C.
Extraction of microplastics
The isolation of MPs from the water samples was performed using a modified NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) method (Masura et al., 2015; Rodrigues et al., 2018). The water samples were filtered through a series of stainless-steel sieves stacked on top of each other in decreasing mesh size (5 mm, 1 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.1 mm). Particles larger than 5 mm were kept separately, while those between 5 mm and 0.1 mm were transferred into separate glass beakers and oven-dried at 50 °C for 24 h.
The samples underwent wet peroxide oxidation (WPO) treatment to digest organic compounds (Masura et al., 2015). The desiccated sample was mixed with 20 ml of an aqueous 0.05 M Fe (II) solution and 30 ml of 30% H2O2 before being heated on a hot plate at 50 °C. The Fe (II) Solution serves as a catalyst to accelerate the organic matter digestion process when combined with 30% H2O2. To isolate the floating MPs from the denser inorganic material, 150 ml of ZnCl2 (933.3 g L−1 with a density of 1.6 g cm−3) was added to the samples enabling the separation of heavier organic matter settling at the bottom from lighter MP particles floating in the solution. The lighter particles were separated according to their size after the denser ones were removed. The gathered particles were put into petri dishes and dried for 24 h in a hot-air oven at 50 °C.
Identification of microplastics
The presence of microplastics was observed using a Nikon SMZ745 Stereozoom Microscope with a magnification of 40x. The identified MPs were picked up using stainless steel forceps and transferred into glass vials. A hot-needle test was conducted to identify problematic particles (Ruggero et al., 2020). Based on their shape, the MPs were categorized into fibre, foam, pellet, fragment, and film (Ruggero et al., 2020).
Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) with Attenuated Total Reflectance (ATR) was used to analyse the polymer composition of the identified MPs (Browne et al., 2011). The obtained spectra were compared with Open Specy, an online reference spectra library, to ensure accuracy and validity (Cowger et al., 2021). Around 20 samples belonging to the size range of 1–5 mm were tested for their polymer composition using ATR-FTIR. A Scanning Electron Microscope (EVO MA18 with Oxford EDS(X-act)) was utilized to investigate the surface characteristics of the selected microplastics (MPs) larger than 1 mm. The microscope has a magnification range of 1x (minimum) to 100,000x (maximum). Since plastics are non-conductive materials, gold sputtering is used to enhance the conductivity of plastic samples, facilitating their imaging using a scanning electron microscope. Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) was used to obtain real-time compositional spectra of microplastics (Wang et al., 2017).
Risk assessment studies
Risk assessment indices of three types were calculated to study the extent of microplastic pollution in the study area. The Polymer Hazard Index (PHI) was computed by recognizing their chemical toxicities. Apart from the abundance of microplastics (MPs), the toxicity of MPs is primarily influenced by the type of polymer they are made of (Qiu et al., 2023). The formula used to calculate PHI is:
where, Sn is the hazard score of polymers and Pn is the proportion of each MPs polymer type. The PHI is calculated using Sn, the hazard score of polymers, and Pn, the proportion of each MP's polymer type. The PHI was classified into different hazard levels as described by Lithner et al. (2011). The five hazard levels of PHI are as follows: 0–1 (I), 1–10 (II), 10–100 (III), 100–1000 (IV), and > 1000 (V) (Qiu et al., 2023; Nithin et al., 2022, 2023; Liu et al., 2021; Ranjani et al., 2021; Li et al., 2020a, b).
The second index, Potential Ecological Risk Index (PERI), was proposed by Hakanson (1980) to evaluate the potential risk to the ecology of a given environment. This index helps assess the combined effect of diverse pollutants contaminating the environment (Peng et al., 2018). The PERI was calculated using the following equations:
where, \({C}^{i}\) is the concentration of contaminant 'i', \({C}_{n}^{i}\) is the abundance of non-contaminated samples (background value), \({T}_{r}^{i}\) is the toxicity coefficient, Pn is the concentration of the specific polymer in MPs, and Sn is the hazard score of MP polymers. The coefficient of toxicity indicates the toxicity level and biological sensitivity (Hakanson, 1980). The five levels of toxicity are: 150 (minor), 150–300 (medium), 300–600 (high), 600–1200 (dangerous), and > 1200 (extreme) (Ranjani et al., 2021).
The Coefficient of Microplastic Impact (CMPI) was assessed to determine the impact of different categories of microplastics, which derive their relationship from shape (Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2021). This coefficient represents the correlation between the total quantity of a particular shape of MPs (e.g., pellets or fibres) and the overall number of MPs identified within a given sampling unit. The CMPI was calculated by using the formula:
According to Rangel-Buitrago et al. (2021), the CMPI can be classified into four categories: 0.0001–0.1 (minimum), 0.11–0.5 (average), 0.51–0.8 (maximum), and 0.81–1 (extreme).
Data Analysis, quality assurance and quality control
The total number of particles obtained in each water category was normalized to particles/L. The number of microplastic particles identified was denoted as the mean (± standard deviation) (SD) of MP particles. The physical attributes of the microplastic particles, such as size, colour, and shape, were presented as relative abundance (%). The normality of the data distribution was evaluated using the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. The Kruskal–Wallis H test was introduced to identify dissimilarities in the types of MPs found in the sampled locations where the distribution was found to be variable. The significance threshold was set at 0.05. All the data are provided in the supplementary Tables S1–S5. Proper care was taken at all stages of experiments to avoid contamination inside the clean laboratory. Only metal and glass items were used for sample collection and analysis. The workbench was regularly cleansed with ethanol. At the time of conducting the analysis, cotton apron and nitrile gloves were worn. Atmospheric blanks inside the laboratory to check for airborne contamination.
Results and discussion
Abundance of microplastics
The laboratory blank samples contained five microplastic fibres, which were reduced in the final dataset. Microplastics were found in all the surface seawater samples collected around the island. The MPs frequency of varied from one place to another (Fig. 2a, Supplementary Table S1). A total of 262 MPs were identified, with an abundance ranging between 1 and 123 particles/100L. The average (± standard deviation) microplastic abundance in surface water for the 12 sampled locations was 0.218 (± 0.329) particles/L. The highest MP abundance (1.23 particles/L) was found in the eastern part of SMI at location W3, with a highly significant difference. An estimated 46.94% of total MPs were identified from this location. The second-highest abundance (0.3 particles/L) was at location W11. The lowest concentration of MPs found was at W10 with 0.01 particles/L. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test showed that the rate of abundance in surface water (D = 0.37, p = 0.056, Skewness = 3.10, Kurtosis = 10.17) does not differ significantly from that which is normally distributed.
Microplastics are less common on St. Mary's Island than in the South China Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean, where studies have been conducted (Table 1). Nie et al. (2019) found that there were between 1,250 and 3,200 microplastic particles/m3 in the South China Sea. This is much more than what was found on St. Mary's Island. Chen et al. (2022) reported an abundance of 4.6 ± 7.0 × 107 items/km2 in the Nansha Islands, which is also much higher than the abundance reported on St. Mary's Island. Similarly, the study conducted by Morgana et al. (2018) in the North Atlantic Ocean reported an average microplastic abundance of 2.4 items/m3, which is much lower than the abundance reported on St. Mary's Island. Goswami et al. (2020) reported a mean abundance of 0.93 ± 0.59 items/m3 in Port Blair Bay, Andaman Island, Bay of Bengal, which is lower than the abundance reported on St. Mary's Island. However, it is important to note that the sampling locations in the two studies are different, and the abundance of microplastics can vary significantly depending on the sampling location. The studies conducted in the Bay of Bengal, such as Jeyasanta et al. (2020) and Patterson et al. (2020), reported microplastic abundances ranging from 24 ± 9 to 126.6 ± 97 items/L, which is relatively higher than the abundance reported on St. Mary's Island. Nahian et al. (2022) conducted a study on Saint Martin Island, Bay of Bengal, and reported an average abundance of 0.118 ± 0.034 items/m3, which is much lower than the abundance reported on St. Mary's Island.
Size, shape, and colour of MPs
The MPs physical characteristics were investigated based on three factors: size, shape, and colour. The size of the extracted microplastics was classified into three ranges: 0.1–0.3 mm, 0.3–1 mm, and 1–5 mm, respectively. The Kruskal–Wallis H test exhibited significance (p < 0.05) between the three size ranges in surface water samples. The highest concentration of MPs in the surface water was found in the size range of 0.1–0.3 mm (37.40%), followed by 0.3–1 mm (32.44%), and 1–5 mm (30.15%) (Fig. 2b, Supplementary Table S1). Identified microplastics at locations W9 and W10 were completely contributed by MPs of 0.1–0.3 mm sizes. The highest abundance of MPs of the three size ranges was found at location W3. Microplastics of size 1–5 mm were dominant (50.41%) at W3. The behaviour, fate, and impacts of microplastics are significantly influenced by particle size (Carbery et al., 2022). Small microplastics possess unique features that distinguish them from plastic debris and larger MPs. They have several properties that make them particularly effective in adsorbing and transporting toxic elements due to their high surface area-to-volume ratio. They can form biofilms that alter their surface charge and ability to clump together with other suspended particles, leading to increased bioavailability in marine ecosystems (Wright et al., 2013). As particle size decreases, MPs become more prevalent and more bio-accessible to marine organisms (Khaleel et al., 2022; Lindeque et al., 2020; Unnikrishnan et al., 2023).
Comparing our data with previously presented studies, the size range of microplastics in this study is between 0.1 mm to 5 mm (Table 1). For example, Morgana et al. (2018) reported the size of microplastics ranging from 0.7 µm to 5 mm in Greenland and the North Atlantic Ocean. Similarly, the study by Ding et al. (2019) in the Xisha Islands, South China Sea, reported microplastics ranging from 20 µm to 5 mm in size. On the other hand, the study by ) on Chongming Island, China, reported microplastics ranging from 300 µm to 4000 µm in size, which overlaps with the size range observed in the St. Mary's Island study.
Microplastics shapes were classified into five categories: foam, film, fibre, fragment, and pellet. The Kruskal–Wallis H test (p < 0.05) revealed a significant difference in the distribution of various types of MPs in surface water. In the surface water samples, four shapes were identified: foam, film, fibre, and fragment (Fig. 2c). Fibre was the predominant shape, accounting for 50.38%, followed by foam (28.35%), fragment (19.08%), and film (2.29%), respectively (Fig. 3a). Pellets were absent in surface waters. Locations W2, W4, W7, W9, and W10 were completely dominated by fibres. Most of the foams (97.30%), fragments (56%), films (50%), and fibres (15.15%) were identified at location W3.
A wide range of colours, including white, blue, transparent, black, red, green, yellow, brown, orange, violet, and pink, were observed in the water samples collected from St. Mary's Island (Fig. 3b, Supplementary Table S2). The dominant colour observed was white (43.60%), followed by blue (21.93%) and transparent (9.66%). The primary microplastics (MPs) identified in the surface water were white foams and blue fibres. These MPs are primarily derived from the fishing industry located near the island. The Styrofoam packaging and fishing nets used in the industry become abraded and float in the water, making them vulnerable to ingestion by aquatic organisms. This, in turn, increases ecological toxicity in the surrounding environment (Trestrail et al., 2020).
The Coefficient of Microplastic Impact (CMPI) gives details regarding the environmental effects of a specific MP shape. Here, the CMPI has been calculated for the water samples of St. Mary's Island (Supplementary Table S3). In all four types of shapes that were identified, the coefficient of foam impact was "maximum" (0.51 – 0.8) at site W3 and "minimum" (0.0001 – 0.1) at the other locations (Fig. 4a). The impact of the film was "minimum" at all sampled locations in water except W1, which showed an "average" impact (Fig. 4b). Overall, 66.66% of the locations in water showed a "minimum" impact for fragments, and the rest (W3, W8, W11, and W12) showed an "average" impact (Fig. 4c). There was no "minimum" impact for fibres in water (Fig. 4d). Half of the sampled locations (W1, W3, W4, W7, W9, and W10) in water showed an "extreme" impact of fibres. The "average" impact was on W5 and W11, and the remaining location was categorized under "maximum" impact. All locations registered a "minimum" impact for pellets. The movement of microplastics in the environment is significantly influenced by their shape. Different shapes, such as spherical MPs or elongated fibres, exhibit distinct behaviours, impacting their distribution and accumulation patterns. In the present study, the prevalence and impact of fibres is particularly noteworthy. These fibres, due to their buoyancy, have a higher likelihood of floating in water, posing a considerable risk to aquatic organisms that might inadvertently consume them as food. Additionally, the foams' porous structure makes them highly susceptible to hosting external organic and inorganic agents, providing a conducive environment for the formation and growth of colonies.
Polymer composition of the MPs
Six types of polymers were identified: low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polystyrene (PS), polyamide (PA), polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). It was found that PS was the most prevalent polymer type in surface water, accounting for 28.24% of the MPs. HDPE, PA, and PE were also identified in significant amounts, accounting for 19.08%, 15.27%, and 11.83%, respectively (Supplementary Table S4). The relative compositions of the different types of polymers are provided in Supplementary Fig. S1, and the FTIR spectra can be found in Khaleel et al. (2022). The results confirm that the primary source of the polymers HDPE and PA is derived from fishing nets. Additionally, the higher quantity of PS indicates significant usage of styrofoam in the storage and transportation of fish from the nearby harbour. The presence of mesoplastics and macroplastics in the samples further supports the inference that LDPE and PE originate from flexible plastic bags and covers.
Surface morphology and chemical composition of MPs
The surface characteristics of MPs provide insight into the extent of their weathering, which can be determined by observing their morphology under a scanning electron microscope (Zhou et al., 2018). The presence of different surface features on MPs, including scratches, cracks, and pits, offers insights into the extent of their surface abrasion and oxidative reduction. Smooth and clean surfaces are indicative of recently emerged MPs, whereas weathered MPs with signs of abrasion suggest they have been present in the environment for an extended period. This conclusion is supported by relevant morphological evidence (Michael et al., 2015). The roughness of MPs' surfaces can increase microbial accumulation, as demonstrated by Nauendorf et al. (2016).
Various heavy metals and inorganic elements, such as aluminum (Al), arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chlorine (Cl), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), lead (Pb), magnesium (Mg), nickel (Ni), silicon (Si), titanium (Ti), and zinc (Zn), were noticed on the surface of the MPs after their surface composition was examined using an energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometer (Fig. 5). According to Wang et al. (2017), these metals' endogenous origin or the adsorption of pollutants from the nearby marine environment could be the cause of their coexistence with MPs (Brennecke et al., 2016). The ZnCl2 solution that was employed during the density separation procedure when isolating MPs is most likely to blame for the elevated concentration of Zn and Cl. It is significant to note that metal contamination from a variety of sources, including metal-based anti-fouling paints, industrial refuse, and fuel combustion, is frequently present in harbours and ports (Deheyn & Latz, 2006). Additionally, inorganic pigments like Fe and Cd are frequently used to colour materials, such as red and yellow (Michael et al., 2015), while chromium is frequently used to stop water corrosion (Oliveira, 2012).
Risk assessment studies
The polymer hazard index (PHI) values for the identified polymers range from 11.832 (PP) to 847.328 (PS), with a total hazard index of 1933.588, denoting a hazard level of V (> 1000) (Supplementary Table S5). The results indicate that PS and PA have the highest Hazard Index in water, suggesting that their disposal in bodies of water could have significant adverse effects on aquatic life. Conversely, PP has the lowest hazard index, indicating that it poses a relatively lower risk to the environment. According to Yuan et al. (2022), the polymers PS and HDPE can pose a significant threat to human health for those who consume fish that thrive in the ocean waters, which are polluted with these MPs.
The potential ecological risk index (PERI) has been calculated for the water of St. Mary's Island (Supplementary Table S5). The impact is minor (< 150) in three locations. Nearly half of the locations were categorized as medium (150–300). The impact was high (300–600) in two locations (W7 and W9). The average PERI value (203.594) suggests that the island is currently facing a medium environmental risk of MPs. In some specific locations (W7 and W9), the elevated levels of PA and PS led to a more significant PERI value. The island exhibits diversified polymer types with different hazard scores, which indicate a change in pollution levels in the study area.
The highest and lowest MPs concentrations observed were 1.23 particles/L and 0.01 particles/L, respectively, with an average abundance of 0.218 particles/L. The geographical and structural features of the island, as well as hydrological and meteorological conditions, appear to influence this variation (Luo et al., 2019). The northeast side of the island (W3) exhibited the highest MP concentration, which could be attributed to prevailing meteorological conditions during the sampling period. Winds blowing from land towards the sea were recorded by NCEP-NCAR Reanalysis monthly zonal and meridional winds at standard pressure levels on a 2.5° lat/long grid (Khaleel et al., 2022). The distribution of MPs in the north Indian Ocean is significantly influenced by ocean currents, particularly in the vicinity of the island. The transportation and dispersion of MPs from various regions of the Arabian Sea are primarily facilitated by sea surface currents that move toward the island (Khaleel et al., 2022).
The study identified blue fibres and white foams as the primary MPs, followed by blue fragments and fibres of red and black colours. The island receives microplastics from nearby coastal regions and fishing harbours due to its exposure to ocean currents. The island's distinctive hexagonal rhyolitic rock columns, formed from past volcanic activity, play a role in influencing the movement of water and affecting the deposition and distribution of microplastics. These columnar rhyolites create partially enclosed shores, making certain areas hotspots for the accumulation of microplastic particles brought in by waves, particularly notable at location W3. The elevated columnar rhyolites along the island's beaches act as a barrier, leading to the clustering of microplastics in these locations. Main sources of microplastics, identified through collected macroplastics from various sampled spots, include fishing gear and packaging, with the Malpe fishing harbour being a significant contributor in the Arabian Sea. Additionally, rivers near the northeast part of the island are also found to be major pathways for microplastics entering the ocean. Despite being a popular tourist destination, the island's microplastic pollution is not predominantly caused by tourism activities, as strict regulations prohibit plastics within the island perimeter. Instead, the pollution is transported from the shoreline to the island through currents and winds.
Implications to human health
St. Mary's Island is a habitat for various seaweeds and macroalgae, such as Phaeophyceae, Rhodophyceae, and Chlorophyceae, as well as a substantial population of Asian green mussels, Perna viridis (L.) (Hemachandra & Thippeswamy, 2008; Hemachandra et al., 2017). Previous research has shown that marine organisms, including seaweeds, mussels, and fish, ingest microplastics (Kibria et al., 2022; Kolandhasamy et al., 2018). The size of microplastics appears to be a crucial factor in their ingestion by marine organisms, rather than their shape, with smaller-sized microplastics being more likely to be ingested (Lehtiniemi et al., 2018; Wright et al., 2013). In this study, microplastics with a size range of 0.1–0.3 mm was identified, increasing the bioaccumulation risk. Exposure to microplastics can lead to changes in food habits and various diseases, including endocrine disorders and neoplasia in marine organisms (Ahrendt et al., 2020; Chapron et al., 2018). The study also revealed the presence of harmful elements on the surface of microplastics, which can cause fatal diseases or even death when ingested by organisms. Fishing activities near the island can increase the transfer of microplastics to humans through the food chain. The risk assessment study indicates that while the abundance of microplastics does not pose a significant threat to marine animals, their polymer type and the heavy metals present in them could pose a significant risk. If pollution continues to increase in the future, it may lead to levels that could have adverse consequences for marine biota.
Compared to global islands, the present study suggests that microplastic pollution is of a lower magnitude on St. Mary's Island. To halt or minimize the current production of MPs in the research area, it is essential to address scientific measures such as the provision of incentives for responsible disposal, management, elimination, removal/clean-up strategies, regulatory measures, behavioural change strategies, extended producer liability, source and origin controls, and alteration of conduct (Ogunola et al., 2018; Williams & Rangel-Buitrago, 2019, 2022). The local administration should incorporate techniques (such as beach cleaning exercises and penalizing tourists who pollute the region with plastics) to lessen the convergence of plastics into the marine environment, in addition to measures to alleviate the extended jeopardy of MPs on the island shores. This study provides baseline data for monitoring MP contamination along the island shore, and further investigations on marine biota are expected on a continuous basis to assess the effect of MP ingestion by marine animals.
Conclusions
This study provides valuable insights into the distribution, composition, and potential ecological risks of microplastic pollution on St. Mary's Island. It was found that the microplastic concentrations in the water samples collected from the island varied, with an average abundance of 0.218 particles/L. The primary microplastics identified were blue fibres and white foams, followed by blue fragments and fibres of red and black colours. The presence of elevated columnar rhyolites along the beaches acted as a barrier, favouring the clustering of microplastics in these locations. Fishing activities and packaging were identified as the main sources of microplastic pollution. The study also revealed the presence of harmful elements on the surface of microplastics, which may pose significant risks to marine organisms.
Based on the Polymer Hazard Index (PHI) and the Potential Ecological Risk Index (PERI), the risk assessment of microplastics showed that the amount of microplastics may not be a big threat to marine animals, but the type of polymer they are made of and the heavy metals they contain could be. The island is currently facing a medium environmental risk from microplastics, and in specific locations, elevated levels of certain polymers led to a higher PERI value. It is crucial to monitor and manage microplastic pollution in the area to mitigate potential adverse effects on marine biota.
To address microplastic pollution on St. Mary's Island, it is vital to implement scientific measures and local administration techniques. These may include incentivizing responsible disposal, management, and elimination of microplastics; implementing regulatory measures and behavioural change strategies; as well as beach cleaning exercises and penalizing tourists who pollute the region with plastics. This study serves as a baseline for monitoring microplastic contamination along the island's shores and emphasizes the need for continuous investigation of marine biota to assess the impact of microplastic ingestion on marine animals.
Data availability
The datasets generated for this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.
References
Ahrendt, C., Perez-Venegas, D. J., Urbina, M., Gonzalez, C., Echeveste, P., Aldana, M., Pulgar, J., & Galbán-Malagón, C. (2020). Microplastic ingestion cause intestinal lesions in the intertidal fish Girella laevifrons. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 151, 110795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110795
Amélineau, F., Bonnet, D., Heitz, O., Mortreux, V., Harding, A. M., Karnovsky, N., Walkusz, W., Fort, J., & Grémillet, D. (2016). Microplastic pollution in the Greenland Sea: Background levels and selective contamination of planktivorous diving seabirds. Environmental Pollution, 219, 1131–1139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.09.017
Amrutha, K., & Warrier, A. K. (2020). The first report on the source-to-sink characterization of microplastic pollution from a riverine environment in tropical India. Science of the Total Environment, 739, 140377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140377
Amrutha, K., Shajikumar, S., Warrier, A. K., et al. (2023). Assessment of pollution and risks associated with microplastics in the riverine sediments of the Western Ghats: A heritage site in southern India. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 32301–32319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-24437-z
Andrady, A. L. (2011). Microplastics in the marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 62, 1596–1605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.05.030
Baldacchino, G., & Niles, D. (Eds.). (2011). Island futures. Conservation and development across the Asia-Pacific region. Springer.
Bhushan, S. K., Rao, K. N., & Vidyadharan, K. T. (2010). Petrography and geochemistry of St. Mary Islands, near Malpe, Dakshina Kannada District, Karnataka. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 76, 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-010-0088-7
Brennecke, D., Duarte, B., Paiva, F., Caçador, I., & Canning-Clode, J. (2016). Microplastics as vector for heavy metal contamination from the marine environment. Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 178, 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2015.12.003
Browne, M. A., Crump, P., Niven, S. J., Teuten, E., Tonkin, A., Galloway, T., & Thompson, R. (2011). Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: Sources and sinks. Environmental Science and Technology, 45(21), 9175–9179. https://doi.org/10.1021/es201811s
Carbery, M., Herb, F., Reynes, J., Pham, C. K., Fong, W. K., & Lehner, R. (2022). How small is the big problem? Small microplastics< 300 μm abundant in marine surface waters of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 184, 114179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114179
Carpenter, E. J., Anderson, S. J., Harvey, G. R., Miklas, H. P., & Peck, B. B. (1972). Polystyrene spherules in coastal waters. Science, 178, 749–750. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.178.4062.749
Chapron, L., Peru, E., Engler, A., Ghiglione, J. F., Meistertzheim, A. L., Pruski, A. M., Purser, A., Vétion, G., Galand, P. E., & Lartaud, F. (2018). Macro- and microplastics affect cold-water corals growth, feeding and behaviour. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-33683-6
Chen, H., Wang, S., Guo, H., Huo, Y., Lin, H., & Zhang, Y. (2022). The abundance, characteristics and diversity of microplastics in the South China Sea: Observation around three remote islands. Frontiers in Environmental Science and Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-021-1443-1
Choudhary, S., Neelavanan, K., & Saalim, S. M. (2022). Microplastics in the surface sediments of Krossfjord-Kongsfjord system, Svalbard, Arctic. Marine Pollution Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113452
Cowger, W., Steinmetz, Z., Gray, A., Munno, K., Lynch, J., Hapich, H., Primpke, S., de Frond, H., Rochman, C., & Herodotou, O. (2021). Microplastic spectral classification needs an open-source community: Open specy to the rescue! Analytical Chemistry, 93(21), 7543–7548. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.1c00123
da Costa, I. D., Costa, L. L., da Silva Oliveira, A., de Carvalho, C. E. V., & Zalmon, I. R. (2023). Microplastics in fishes in amazon riverine beaches: Influence of feeding mode and distance to urban settlements. Science of the Total Environment, 863, 160934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160934
Deheyn, D. D., & Latz, M. I. (2006). Bioavailability of metals along a contamination gradient in San Diego Bay (California, USA). Chemosphere, 63(5), 818–834. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.07.066
Ding, J., Jiang, F., Li, J., Wang, Z., Sun, C., Wang, Z., Fu, L., Ding, N. X., & He, C. (2019). Microplastics in the coral reef systems from Xisha Islands of South China Sea. Environmental Science and Technology, 53(14), 8036–8046. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b01452
Geo-Heritage Sites. Retrieved date Mar 11, 2023, from https://pib.gov.in/newsite/printrelease.aspx?relid=137573
Gillespie, R. G., & Clague, D. A. (Eds.). (2009). Encyclopedia of Islands. University of California Press.
Goswami, P., Vinithkumar, N. V., & Dharani, G. (2020). First evidence of microplastics bioaccumulation by marine organisms in the Port Blair Bay, Andaman Islands. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 155, 111163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111163
Hakanson, L. (1980). An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control. A sedimentological approach. Water Research, 14(8), 975–1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(80)90143-8
Hamilton, B. M., Bourdages, M. P., Geoffroy, C., Vermaire, J. C., Mallory, M. L., Rochman, C. M., & Provencher, J. F. (2021). Microplastics around an Arctic seabird colony: Particle community composition varies across environmental matrices. Science of the Total Environment, 773, 145536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145536
Hemachandra, A., & Thippeswamy, S. (2008). Allometry and condition index in green mussel Perna viridis (L.) from St Mary’s Island off Malpe, near Udupi, India. Aquaculture Research, 39(16), 1747–1758. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1365-2109.2008.02051.X
Hemachandra, A., Tenjing, S. Y., & Thippeswamy, S. (2017). Population dynamics of the Asian green mussel Perna viridis (L.) from St. Mary’s Islands off Malpe, India. Indian Journal of Geo Marine Sciences, 46(08), 1659–1666.
IUCN. (2018). Red list of species. Retrieved date June 15, 2022, from https://www.iucnredlist.org/search
Jeyasanta, K. I., Patterson, J., Grimsditch, G., & Edward, J. K. P. (2020). Occurrence and characteristics of microplastics in the coral reef, sea grass and near shore habitats of Rameswaram Island, India. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 160, 111674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111674
Jones-Williams, K., Galloway, T., Cole, M., Stowasser, G., Waluda, C., & Manno, C. (2020). Close encounters-microplastic availability to pelagic amphipods in sub-antarctic and antarctic surface waters. Environment International, 140, 105792. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105792
Kernchen, S., Löder, M. G., Fischer, F., Fischer, D., Moses, S. R., Georgi, C., Nölscher, A. C., Held, A., & Laforsch, C. (2022). Airborne microplastic concentrations and deposition across the Weser River catchment. Science of the Total Environment, 818, 151812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.151812
Keswani, A., Oliver, D. M., Gutierrez, T., & Quilliam, R. S. (2016). Microbial hitchhikers on marine plastic debris: Human exposure risks at bathing waters and beach environments. Marine Environmental Research, 118, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.04.006
Khaleel, R., Valsan, G., Rangel-Buitrago, N., & Warrier, A. K. (2022). Hidden problems in geological heritage sites: the microplastic issue on Saint Mary’s Island, India, Southeast Arabian Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 182, 114043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114043
Kibria, G., Nugegoda, D., & Haroon, A. K. Y. (2022). In: Microplastic pollution and contamination of seafood (including fish, sharks, mussels, oysters, shrimps and seaweeds): A Global overview, pp. 277–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89220-3_14
Kolandhasamy, P., Su, L., Li, J., Qu, X., Jabeen, K., & Shi, H. (2018). Adherence of microplastics to soft tissue of mussels: A novel way to uptake microplastics beyond ingestion. Science of the Total Environment, 610–611, 635–640. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.053
Kosior, E., & Mitchell, J. (2020). Current industry position on plastic production and recycling. Plastic Waste and Recycling. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-817880-5.00006-2
Kueffer, C., Drake, D., & Fernandez-Palacios, J. M. (2016). Island biology. In: Oxford Bibliographies in Ecology, ed, D. Gibson. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press [www document]. Retrieved date Mar 18, 2023, from http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199830060/obo-9780199830060-0149.xml?rskey=lzfTBH&result=63
Lehtiniemi, M., Hartikainen, S., Näkki, P., Engström- Öst, J., Koistinen, A., & Setälä, O. (2018). Size matters more than shape: ingestion of primary and secondary microplastics by small predators. Food Webs, 17, e00097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2018.E00097
Li, W. C., Tse, H. F., & Fok, L. (2016). Plastic waste in the marine environment: A review of sources, occurrence, and effects. Science of the Total Environment, 566–567, 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.084
Li, Y., Lu, Z., Zheng, H., Wang, J., & Chen, C. (2020a). Microplastics in surface water and sediments of Chongming Island in the Yangtze Estuary, China. Environmental Sciences Europe, 32(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-020-0297-7
Li, R., Yu, L., Chai, M., Wu, H., & Zhu, X. (2020b). The distribution, characteristics and ecological risks of microplastics in the mangroves of Southern China. Science of the Total Environment, 708, 135025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135025
Lindeque, P. K., Cole, M., Coppock, R. L., Lewis, C. N., Miller, R. Z., Watts, A. J., Wilson-McNeal, A., Wright, S. L., & Galloway, T. S. (2020). Are we underestimating microplastic abundance in the marine environment? A comparison of microplastic capture with nets of different mesh-size. Environmental Pollution, 265, 114721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114721
Lithner, D., Larsson, A., & Dave, G. (2011). Environmental and health hazard ranking and assessment of plastic polymers based on chemical composition. Science of the Total Environment, 409(18), 3309–3324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.04.038
Liu, Y., Liu, W., Yang, X., Wang, J., Lin, H., & Yang, Y. (2021). Microplastics are a hotspot for antibiotic resistance genes: Progress and perspective. Science of the Total Environment, 773, 145643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145643
Luo, W., Su, L., Craig, N. J., Du, F., Wu, C., & Shi, H. (2019). Comparison of microplastic pollution in different water bodies from urban creeks to coastal waters. Environmental Pollution, 246, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.11.081
Masura, J., Baker, J. E., Foster, G. D., Arthur, C., & Herring, C. (2015). Laboratory Methods for the Analysis of Microplastics in the Marine Environment: Recommendations for quantifying synthetic particles in waters and sediments. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS-OR&R-48, 2015. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Springs, MD.
Melluso, L., Sheth, H. C., Mahoney, J. J., Morra, V., Petrone, C. M., & Storey, M. (2009). Correlations between silicic volcanic rocks of the St Mary’s Islands (southwestern India) and eastern Madagascar: Implications for Late Cretaceous India-Madagascar reconstructions. Journal of the Geological Society, 166(2), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1144/0016-76492007-147
Michael, B., Jack, H., Joseph, G., & Susan, M. (2015). Crosslinking compounds/accelerators. In: Handbook for the Chemical Analysis of Plastic and Polymer Additives, Second edition, pp. 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1201/B19124-4
Morgana, S., Ghigliotti, L., Estévez-Calvar, N., Stifanese, R., Wieckzorek, A., Doyle, T., Christiansen, J. S., Faimali, M., & Garaventa, F. (2018). Microplastics in the Arctic: A case study with sub-surface water and fish samples off Northeast Greenland. Environmental Pollution, 242, 1078–1086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.08.001
Mugilarasan, M., Venkatachalapathy, R., Sharmila, N., & Gurumoorthi, K. (2017). Occurrence of microplastic resin pellets from Chennai and Tinnakkara Island: Towards the establishment of background level for plastic pollution. Indian Journal of Geo Marine Sciences, 46(6), 1210–1212.
Nahian, S. A., Rakib, M. R. J., Haider, S. M. B., Kumar, R., Mohsen, M., Sharma, P., & Khandaker, M. U. (2022). Occurrence, spatial distribution, and risk assessment of microplastics in surface water and sediments of Saint Martin Island in the Bay of Bengal. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 179, 113720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113720
Nauendorf, A., Krause, S., Bigalke, N. K., Gorb, E. V., Gorb, S. N., Haeckel, M., Wahl, M., & Treude, T. (2016). Microbial colonization and degradation of polyethylene and biodegradable plastic bags in temperate fine-grained organic-rich marine sediments. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 103(1–2), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.12.024
Nie, H., Wang, J., Xu, K., Huang, Y., & Yan, M. (2019). Microplastic pollution in water and fish samples around Nanxun Reef in Nansha Islands, South China Sea. Science of the Total Environment, 696, 134022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134022
Nithin, A., Sundaramanickam, A., Iswarya, P., & Babu, O. G. (2022). Hazard index of microplastics contamination in various fishes collected off Parangipettai, Southeast coast of India. Chemosphere, 307, 136037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.136037
Nithin, A., Sundaramanickam, A., Saha, M., Hassanshahian, M., Thangaraj, M., & Rathore, C. (2023). Risk assessments of microplastics accumulated in estuarine sediments at Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu, southeast coast of India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 195(7), 890. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11434-z
Ogunola, O. S., Onada, O. A., & Falaye, A. E. (2018). Mitigation measures to avert the impacts of plastics and microplastics in the marine environment (a review). Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 25, 9293–9310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-1499-z
Oliveira, H. (2012). Chromium as an environmental pollutant: insights on induced plant toxicity. Journal of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/375843
Pandey, D., Singh, A., Ramanathan, A., & Kumar, M. (2021). The combined exposure of microplastics and toxic contaminants in the floodplains of north India: a review. Journal of Environmental Management, 279, 111557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111557
Patterson, J., Jeyasanta, K. I., Sathish, N., Edward, J. K. P., & Booth, A. M. (2020). Microplastic and heavy metal distributions in an Indian coral reef ecosystem. Science of the Total Environment, 744, 140706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140706
Peng, G., Xu, P., Zhu, B., Bai, M., & Li, D. (2018). Microplastics in freshwater river sediments in Shanghai, China: A case study of risk assessment in mega-cities. Environmental Pollution, 234, 448–456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.11.034
Plastics Europe. (2022). Plastics-the Facts 2022. Retrieved date May 29, 2023, from https://plasticseurope.org/knowledge-hub/plastics-the-facts-2022/
Qiu, Y., Zhou, S., Zhang, C., Qin, W., & Lv, C. (2023). A framework for systematic microplastic ecological risk assessment at a national scale. Environmental Pollution, 327, 121631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.121631
Rangel-Buitrago, N., Arroyo-Olarte, H., Trilleras, J., Arana, V. A., Mantilla-Barbosa, E., & Gracia, A. (2021). Microplastics pollution on Colombian Central Caribbean beaches. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 170, 112685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112685
Rangel-Buitrago, N., Gracia, A., Vélez-Mendoza, A., Carvajal-Florián, A., Mojica-Martinez, L., & Neal, W. (2019). Where did this refuse come from? Marine anthropogenic litter on a remote island of the Colombian Caribbean Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 149, 110611.
Ranjani, M., Veerasingam, S., Venkatachalapathy, R., Mugilarasan, M., Bagaev, A., Mukhanov, V., & Vethamony, P. (2021). Assessment of potential ecological risk of microplastics in the coastal sediments of India: a meta-analysis. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 163, 111969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111969
Rodrigues, M. O., Abrantes, N., Gonçalves, F. J. M., Nogueira, H., Marques, J. C., & Gonçalves, A. M. M. (2018). Spatial and temporal distribution of microplastics in water and sediments of a freshwater system (Antuã River, Portugal). Science of the Total Environment, 633, 1549–1559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.03.233
Royle, S. A. (2008). Geography of Islands: Small Islands Insularity. London, UK, and New York, NY, USA: Routledge.
Royle, S. A. (2014). Islands: Nature and culture. Reaktion.
Ruggero, F., Gori, R., & Lubello, C. (2020). Methodologies for microplastics recovery and identification in heterogeneous solid matrices: A review. Journal of Polymers and the Environment, 28, 739–748. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10924-019-01644-3
Selvam, S., Narsimhulu, C., Manimaran, G., & Sivasubramanian, P. (2011). Geomorphological and textural characteristics of sediments of St. Marys Island Western continental shelf, India. Archives of Applied Science Research, 3(6), 480–487. Retrieved date May 24, 2022, from https://www.scholarsresearchlibrary.com/abstract/geomorphological-and-textural-characteristics-of-sediments-of-stmarys-island-western-continental-shelf-india-8547.html
Sruthy, S., & Ramasamy, E. V. (2017). Microplastic pollution in Vembanad Lake, Kerala, India: The first report of microplastics in lake and estuarine sediments in India. Environmental Pollution, 222, 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.12.038
Thompson, R. C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R. P., Davis, A., Rowland, S. J., & John, A. W. G. (2004). Lost at sea: Where is all the plastic? Science, 304, 838. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094559
Torsvik, T. H., Tucker, R. D., Ashwal, L. D., Carter, L. M., Jamtveit, B., Vidyadharan, K. T., & Venkataramana, P. (2000). Late Cretaceous India-Madagascar fit and timing of breakup related magmatism. Terra Nova, 12(5), 220–224. https://doi.org/10.1046/J.1365-3121.2000.00300.X
Trestrail, C., Walpitagama, M., Hedges, C., Truskewycz, A., Miranda, A., Wlodkowic, D., Shimeta, J., & Nugegoda, D. (2020). Foaming at the mouth: ingestion of floral foam microplastics by aquatic animals. Science of the Total Environment, 705, 135826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.135826
Udupi District Environmental Plan, Udupi District, India. Retrieved date May 24, 2022, from https://udupi.nic.in/en/udupi-district-environment-plan/
Unnikrishnan, V., Valsan, G., Amrutha, K., Joju, G. S., Rangel-Buitrago, N., Khaleel, R., Chandran, T., Reshma, S. R., & Warrier, A. K. (2023). A baseline study of microplastic pollution in a Southern Indian Estuary. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 186, 114468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114468
Valsan, G., Warrier, A. K., Amrutha, K., Anusree, S., & Rangel-Buitrago, N. (2023). Exploring the presence and distribution of microplastics in subterranean estuaries from southwest India. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 190, 114820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114820
Walker, L. R., & Bellingham, P. (2011). Island Environments in a Changing World. Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Z. M., Wagner, J., Ghosal, S., Bedi, G., & Wall, S. (2017). SEM/EDS and optical microscopy analyses of microplastics in ocean trawl and fish guts. Science of the Total Environment, 603–604, 616–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.047
Warrier, A. K., Kulkarni, B., Amrutha, K., Jayaram, D., Valsan, G., & Agarwal, P. (2022). Seasonal variations in the abundance and distribution of microplastic particles in the surface waters of a Southern Indian Lake. Chemosphere, 300, 134556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134556
Williams, A. T., & Rangel-Buitrago, N. (2019). Marine litter: Solutions for a major environmental problem. Journal of Coastal Research, 35, 648–663.
Williams, A. T., & Rangel-Buitrago, N. (2022). The past, present, and future of plastic pollution. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 176, 113429.
Wright, S. L., Thompson, R. C., & Galloway, T. S. (2013). The physical impacts of microplastics on marine organisms: A review. Environmental Pollution, 178, 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.02.031
Yuan, Z., Nag, R., & Cummins, E. (2022). Ranking of potential hazards from microplastics polymers in the marine environment. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 429, 128399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.128399
Zhang, D., Liu, X., Huang, W., Li, J., Wang, C., Zhang, D., & Zhang, C. (2020). Microplastic pollution in deep-sea sediments and organisms of the Western Pacific Ocean. Environmental Pollution, 259, 13948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.113948
Zhou, Q., Zhang, H., Fu, C., Zhou, Y., Dai, Z., Li, Y., Tu, C., & Luo, Y. (2018). The distribution and morphology of microplastics in coastal soils adjacent to the Bohai Sea and the Yellow Sea. Geoderma, 322, 201–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2018.02.015
Acknowledgements
This study is a research collaboration between the Department of Sciences and Department of Civil Engineering at Manipal Academy of Higher Education, as well as Universidad del Atlántico, Colombia. AKW thanks the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, for a research project on microplastics (File no. CRG/2021/004725 dated 24th June 2022). The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Ms. K. Amrutha during the research process. Mr. Praveen, the instrument technician, and Dr. Suma A. Rao, Head of the Department of Chemistry at MIT, are thanked for granting permission to use the instrument for ATR-FTIR analysis. Additionally, the authors appreciate the assistance provided by the Central Instrumentation Facility at MIT during the SEM-EDS analysis. We thank the associate editor and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments, which helped improve the quality of the manuscript.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal. Anish Kumar Warrier thanks the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India, for a research project on microplastics (File no. CRG/2021/004725 dated 24th June 2022).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Rizwan Khaleel: Methodology, investigation, formal analysis, visualization, writing – review and editing. Gokul Valsan: Methodology, investigation, formal analysis, visualization, writing – review and editing. Anish Kumar Warrier: Conceptualization, funding acquisition, resources, project administration and writing – review and editing. Nelson Rangel-Buitrago: Statistical analysis, writing – review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval statement
This is an observational study for which no ethical approval is required.
Informed consent statement
Samples of human beings or animals were not used for this study. Instead, the experiments were conducted on water samples, and hence no consent statement is needed for this study.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Khaleel, R., Valsan, G., Rangel-Buitrago, N. et al. Microplastics in the marine environment of St. Mary's Island: implications for human health and conservation. Environ Monit Assess 195, 1034 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11651-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11651-6