JPI/Healthy Oceans and ICES open session on microplastics€¦ · ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE...
Transcript of JPI/Healthy Oceans and ICES open session on microplastics€¦ · ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE...
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI/Healthy Oceans and ICES open session on microplastics
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
Why is this topic important?
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
PlasticsEurope, 2013
1.7MioT
288MioT
• We use plastics
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
• We discard plastics
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
„Prä-Plastik Ära“
mellumrat.de
• We act irresponsible
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
• We have limited knowledge... on pathways, sources and sinks
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
• We have limited knowledge... on persistence
• Please note: Plastics are not part of biogeochemical cycles
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
MacroplasticsMicroplastics
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
• We have limited knowledge... MP numbers & identities ...because...
• we use different methods for sampling, extraction, purification AND identification
Wright et al., Environmental Pollution (2013)
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
• We have limited knowledge... on effects
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”
OK...
but do we really know quantities and what is causing “harm” and how?
We need facts (and standardizations)!
• “Properties and quantities of marine litter…cause harm to the coastal and marine environment” (known as ‘Descriptor 10’).
• This definition includes microparticles (particularlymicroplastics)“
MSFD
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
• BASEMAN - Defining the baselines and standards for microplastics analyses in European waters (Gunnar Gerdts, AWI, Germany)
• PLASTOX - Direct and indirect ecotoxicological impacts of microplastics on marine organisms (Andy Booth, SINTEF, Norway)
• WEATHERMIC - How microplastic weathering changes its transport, fate and toxicity in the marine environment (Annika Jahnke, UFZ, Germany)
• (EPHEMARE - Ecotoxicological effects of microplastics in marine ecosystems)
• MikrOMIK - Microplastic as vector for microbial populations in the ecosystem of the Baltic Sea (Sonja Oberbeckmann, IOW, Germany)
JPI-O pilot action “Ecological Aspects of Microplastics”Start January 2016
ICES ANNUAL SCIENCE CONFERENCE 2016
Defining the BASElines and standards for Microplastics ANalyses in European Waters (BASEMAN)
Gunnar GerdtsMicrobial EcologyShelf Seas Systems EcologyAlfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Centre for polar and marine research27483 Helgoland
• 24 partners from 11 countries (AWI in lead)• 5 workpackages
WP1 Defining baselines for all relevant identification approachesParticipating institutions
UBAY, UGOT, UDC, AWI, ICBM, NILU, GEOMAR, Rap-ID, IMMM, CNR-IAMC, IVL, CNRS-LOV
Objectives
• To develop and provide a MP reference kit for baseline definition and spiking of samples
• To characterize the effects of artificial/natural weathering on reference MPs
• To generate a spectra database (FT-IR, Raman, Pyrolysis-GCMS, HySpex) for pristine and weathered reference particles
• To evaluate the strengths and limitations of different analytical techniques without interferences of environmental matrices
• To develop methods with submicron capability in order to define a reasonable (methodological) lower size limit of MP
WP 2 Preparation of standardized test samples for inter-lab comparisonsParticipating institutions
AWI, ICBM, NIFES
Objectives
• To generate and provide standardized MP-spiked test samples (sediment, plankton, biota) for inter-lab comparisons (feeding into WP3)
• To generate and provide standardised test samples (sediment, plankton, biota) for inter-method comparisons (feeding into WP3)
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisons
Participating institutions
AWI, ICBM, UBAY, NIFES, NIVA, GEOMAR, CNRS-LOV, TUT, IEO, UGOT, VUT, SYKE, Rap-ID, IMMM, CNR-IAMC, NOVA.ID FCT, IVL, IPMA, UDC, UL
Objectives
• To analyse MP-spiked reference samples (sediment, plankton, biota) according to the current analytical workflows in the participating labs with respect to identification, quantification and sizing of MP
• To analyse environmental samples (sediment, plankton, biota) provided by WP4 according to the current analytical workflows in the participating labs with respect to identification, quantification and sizing of MP
• To optimize the extraction of MP from sediment
• To optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
WP 4 Sampling methodologies for MPs in the marine environment: standardization, suitability and intercomparison
Participating institutions
IEO, GMIT, NIVA, UBAY, OGS, CNRS-LOV, AWI, ICBM, IMMM, CNR-IAMC, NOVA.ID FCT, TUT, IVL, IPMA, SAHFOS, UDC
Objectives
• To develop standardized methods for sampling MPs in the water column and sediments
• To identify marine biota species appropriate for MPs monitoring in European regions
• To evaluate alternative methods for sampling MPs in the marine environment, particularly those deployable from platforms of opportunity
• To intercalibrate sampling methods for MPs of varying size
• To facilitate interlab comparisons and analyses of environmental samples of MPs
• To develop validated conversion coefficients and harmonized reporting units for MPs
WP 5 Coordination, Integration and Synthesis
Participating institutions
AWI & all
Objectives
• To provide “best practice” and “best compromise” SOPs
• To advice stakeholders with respect to MP sampling, detection & analysis
Some preliminary results
Defining the BASElines and standards for Microplastics ANalyses in European Waters (BASEMAN)
WP1 Defining baselines for all relevant identification approachesObjectives
• To develop and provide a MP reference kit for baseline definition and spiking of samples
Methodological comparisons
Methodological thresholds
Best compromise (→ MSFD) & best practise
Different polymers(different size classes)( 1 lab in charge)
• Cryo-milling• Thieving• Size analysis• Polymer-kit prep.
Different environmental samples (3 labs in charge) • Kit + Sediment (3 x (3+1)) • Kit+ Plankton (3 x (3+1))• Kit + Biota (3 x (3 +1))
Participating labs• Optical microscopy• µFT-IR• Raman• PyGCMS
Problems…
• High organic (inorganic) load
• Interference with analytical approaches
• Overload of analytical filters
• Agressive versus inagressive agents
• Effectiveness in terms of time and costs (→MSFD)
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
Solutions…
• Gentle, plastics-preserving treatments (e.g. enzymes)
• Effectiveness in terms of costs (→MSFD)
• Technical grade agents
• “used” (in Mani et al. (2016) as pers. comm)
• “publication” soon
Lorenz, 2014; Ladehoff, 2015
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
Challenges
• Time consuming: Need for optimization
• Manual steps: Risk of contamination
Lorenz, 2014; Ladehoff, 2015
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
Challenges and plans…
• Time consuming: Need for optimization
• Manual steps: Risk of contamination
• Development of a “reactor”
• All steps (incl. incubation) in one containment
• Fill & drain through 10 µm filters (pump; vacuum/pressure)
• Processing of multiple samples
• Monitoring (→MSFD)
©Lorenz
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
Challenges and plans…
• Time consuming: Need for optimization
• Overload of analyses filters: Failure in final analyses
• Usage of “FlowCam”
• Process control
• Estimation of filtration volume for µFT-IR analysis
©Lorenz
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo optimize the purification of MP from sediment, plankton and biota in respect to matrix disintegration/removal and polymer preservation
Bruker Tensor 27
Bruker Tensor 27 with ATR
Bruker Hyperion 3000 (FPA 64 x 64)Norhof LN2 (liquid nitrogen filling system)
• Sortable (single) particles (> 500 µm): ATR-FT-IR
• Bulk samples (< 500 µm; extracts from plankton, sediment, animalhomogenates, sea ice….). Chemical imaging of whole filter areas: µFT-IR
µFT-IR analysis
From 09/2016 two Hyperion systems
FT-IR MikroscopeFPA Detector (64x64)
• ~ 106 Spektra• 1 Pixel = 10.74 µm
µFT-IR analysis
• Sortable (single) particles (> 500 µm): ATR-FT-IR
• Bulk samples (< 500 µm; extracts from plankton, sediment, animalhomogenates, sea ice….). Chemical imaging of whole filter areas: µFT-IR
VIS Image Chemical Image(polymer)
FT-IR spectrum
Polymer-signatures
µFT-IR analysis
• 100% Microplastics!• Re-analysis by µFT-IR
• 1.4 %: „Plastics“• Quartz (sand)
dominating the „MP particles“
Quartz-signature
Polymer-signature
„…up to 70% of particles thatvisually resemble microplasticsare not confirmed as plastics byFT-IR spectroscopy…“ Hidalgo-Ruz
et al. 2012
µFT-IR analysis
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo analyse environmental samples (sediment, plankton, biota) ...according to the current analytical workflows in the participating labs with respect to identification, quantification and sizing of MP
Problems…
• ~ no commercial pipeline (hardware, software)
• Raman: Horiba, Rap-ID (to be evaluated in BASEMAN)
Solutions...
• Development of an automated pipeline for µFT-IR (spectrum by spectrum and pixel by pixel...; ~ 106 spectra)
• Bruker Opus Macros
• Image analysis by Python and SimpleITKscripts
Light Microscopy µFT-IR and Image analysis
Light Microscopy µFT-IR and Image analysis
„Signature-image“
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo analyse environmental samples (sediment, plankton, biota) ...according to the current analytical workflows in the participating labs with respect to identification, quantification and sizing of MP
Solutions...
• Development of an automated pipeline for µFT-IR
• Bruker Opus Macros
• Image analysis by Python and SimpleITKscripts
Identities!
Numbers!
Sizes!
WP 3 Inter-lab and inter-method comparisonsTo analyse environmental samples (sediment, plankton, biota) ...according to the current analytical workflows in the participating labs with respect to identification, quantification and sizing of MP
Kantenlänge [µm]
0 50 100 150 200 250
N
0
100
200
300
400
Kantenlänge [µm]
0 50 100 150 200 250
N
0
100
200
300
400
y = 6012 * e-0.26 *x
adj r2 = 0.9846
< 10.74 µm ?????
10.74 µm = 1 Pixel
WP1 Defining baselines for all relevant identification approaches – to be continued....
Kantenlänge [µm]
0 50 100 150 200 250
N
0
100
200
300
400
Kantenlänge [µm]
0 50 100 150 200 250
N
0
100
200
300
400
y = 6012 * e-0.26 *x
adj r2 = 0.9846
< 10.74 µm ?????
To develop methods with submicron capability in order to define a reasonable (methodological) lower size limit of MP