Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Microplastic analysis—are we measuring the same? Results on the first global comparative study for microplastic analysis in a water sample

  • Communication
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents the results of the first international comparative study of commonly applied analytical methods for microplastic analysis. Although it was shown that the comparability between previously published studies is highly limited, there are ambitious efforts regarding the standardization of microplastic analysis. This comparative study serves as a first step to assess the suitability of frequently used methods in microplastic research. Furthermore, it highlights obstacles when conducting a comparative study for microplastics. Results from 17 laboratories from eight different countries are compared. Samples comprised of five different types of microplastic reference particles with diameters ranging from 8 µm to 140 μm suspended in ultrapure water. Microscopy, Fourier-transform infrared microspectroscopy (μ-FTIR), Raman microspectroscopy (μ-Raman), thermo-extraction-and-desorption- or pyrolysis- combined with gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (Σ-GC/MS), scanning electron microscopy and particle counter were compared regarding results on total particle number, polymer type, number of particles and/or particle mass for each polymer type. In the scope of this comparative study, for the identification of polymer type μ-Raman and Σ-GC/MS performed best. The quantification of polymer mass for identified polymer types was questionable for Σ-GC/MS, whereas other methods failed to determine the correct polymer mass. Quantification of particle number per identified polymer type was evaluated successful for μ-FTIR and the quantification of total particle numbers was best for microscopy and to a lesser extent for μ-FTIR. Remarkable was the large variance of results between the methods but also within the methods. The latter is likely due to individual interpretations of methods and preparation protocols, in particular in regard to the handling of blank values. Results strongly emphasize the need for standardization and validation of analytical methods in microplastic research both on a global scale as well as in the context of individual laboratories.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  1. Hartmann NB, Hüffer T, Thompson RC, Hassellöv M, Verschoor A, Daugaard AE, et al. Are we speaking the same language? Recommendations for a definition and categorization framework for plastic debris. Environ Sci Technol. 2019;53(3):1039–47. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b05297.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Auta HS, Emenike C, Fauziah S. Distribution and importance of microplastics in the marine environment: a review of the sources, fate, effects, and potential solutions. Environ Int. 2017;102:165–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2017.02.013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schymanski D, Goldbeck C, Humpf H-U, Fürst P. Analysis of microplastics in water by micro-Raman spectroscopy: release of plastic particles from different packaging into mineral water. Water Res. 2018;129(129):154–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.11.011.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wright SL, Kelly FJ. Plastic and human health: a micro issue? Environ Sci Technol. 2017;51(12):6634–47. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Triebskorn R, Braunbeck T, Grummt T, Hanslik L, Huppertsberg S, Jekel M, et al. Relevance of nano- and microplastics for freshwater ecosystems: a critical review. TrAC Trends Anal Chem. 2019;110:375–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.11.023.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zarfl C. Promising techniques and open challenges for microplastic identification and quantification in environmental matrices. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2019;411:3743–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-019-01763-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Renner G, Schmidt TC, Schram J. Analytical methodologies for monitoring micro(nano)plastics: which are fit for purpose? Curr Opin Environ Sci Health. 2018;1:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2017.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang Z-M, Wagner J, Ghosal S, Bedi G, Wall S. SEM/EDS and optical microscopy analyses of microplastics in ocean trawl and fish guts. Sci Total Environ. 2017;603-604:616–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.047.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Primpke S, Wirth M, Lorenz C, Gerdts G. Reference database design for the automated analysis of microplastic samples based on Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410:5131–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-018-1156-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Araujo CF, Nolasco MM, Ribeiro AMP, Ribeiro-Claro PJA. Identification of microplastics using Raman spectroscopy: latest developments and future prospects. Water Res. 2018;142:426–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.05.060.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dümichen E, Eisentraut P, Celina M, Braun U. Automated thermal extraction - desorption gas chromatography mass spectrometry: a multifunctional tool for comprehensive characterization of polymers and their degradation products. J Chrom A. 2019;1592:133–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2019.01.033.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Dierkes G, Lauschke T, Becher S, Schumacher H, Földi C, Ternes T. Quantification of microplastics in environmental samples via pressurized liquid extraction and pyrolysis-gas chromatography. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2019;411(26):6959–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-019-02066-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. PlasticsEurope. Plastics – the Facts 2016: An analysis of European latest plastics production, demand and waste data 2016.

  14. Schindelin J, Arganda-Carreras I, Frise E, Kaynig V, Longair M, Pietzsch T, et al. Fiji: An open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat Methods. 2012;9:676–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2019.15 R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2016.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Normenausschuss Wasserwesen (NAW) im DIN. Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-, Abwasser- und Schlammuntersuchung - Allgemeine Angaben (Gruppe A) - Teil 45: Ringversuche zur Eignungsprüfung von Laboratorien (A 45). Berlin: Beuth Verlag; 2014. (vol 13.060.45) Juni 2014.

  16. Elert AM, Becker R, Duemichen E, Eisentraut P, Falkenhagen J, Sturm H, et al. Comparison of different methods for MP detection: what can we learn from them, and why asking the right question before measurements matters? Environ Pollut. 2017;231(2):1256–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.08.074.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Imhof HK, Laforsch C, Wiesheu AC, Schmid J, Anger PM, Niessner R, et al. Pigments and plastic in limnetic ecosystems: a qualitative and quantitative study on microparticles of different size classes. Water Res. 2016;98:64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.03.015.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Huppertsberg S, Knepper TP. Instrumental analysis of microplastics—benefits and challenges. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2018;410:6343–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-018-1210-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Miller ME, Kroon FJ, Motti CA. Recovering microplastics from marine samples: a review of current practices. Mar Pollut Bull. 2017;123(1–2):6–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.08.058.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wiesheu AC, Anger PM, Baumann T, Niessner R, Ivleva NP. Raman microspectroscopic analysis of fibers in beverages. Anal Methods. 2016;8(28):5722–5. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6AY01184E.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Dai Z, Zhang H, Zhou Q, Tian Y, Chen T, Tu C, et al. Occurrence of microplastics in the water column and sediment in an inland sea affected by intensive anthropogenic activities. Environ Pollut. 2018;242:1557–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.07.131.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank all participants for delivering their results. The Global Water Research Coalition (GWRC), namely the Foundation for Applied Water Research (STOWA, the Netherlands), the Water Research Foundation (WRF, USA) and the Water Environment and Reuse Foundation (WE&RF, USA) for funding this comparative study for microplastics. The authors further thank Public Utility Board (PUB, Singapore) as well as the SUEZ Group (France) for financial contribution. The authors thank Dr. Sacher, Dr. Scheurer and Dr. Nödler for scientific feedback.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Theo Wernicke

    Present address: UFZ-Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, 04318, Leipzig, Germany

  2. Florian R. Storck

    Present address: Federal Office for the Environment FOEN (Hydrology Division), 3003, Bern, Switzerland

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TZW: DVGW-Technologiezentrum Wasser (German Water Centre), Karlsruher Str. 84, 76139, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Yanina K. Müller, Theo Wernicke, Marco Pittroff, Cordula S. Witzig, Florian R. Storck, Josef Klinger & Nicole Zumbülte

Authors
  1. Yanina K. Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Theo Wernicke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Pittroff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cordula S. Witzig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Florian R. Storck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Josef Klinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nicole Zumbülte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicole Zumbülte.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

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.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM1

(PDF 347 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Müller, Y.K., Wernicke, T., Pittroff, M. et al. Microplastic analysis—are we measuring the same? Results on the first global comparative study for microplastic analysis in a water sample. Anal Bioanal Chem 412, 555–560 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-019-02311-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-019-02311-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation