Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 May 15:155:410-422.
doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.054. Epub 2019 Feb 28.

Microplastics in freshwaters and drinking water: Critical review and assessment of data quality

Affiliations
Review

Microplastics in freshwaters and drinking water: Critical review and assessment of data quality

Albert A Koelmans et al. Water Res. .

Abstract

Microplastics have recently been detected in drinking water as well as in drinking water sources. This presence has triggered discussions on possible implications for human health. However, there have been questions regarding the quality of these occurrence studies since there are no standard sampling, extraction and identification methods for microplastics. Accordingly, we assessed the quality of fifty studies researching microplastics in drinking water and in its major freshwater sources. This includes an assessment of microplastic occurrence data from river and lake water, groundwater, tap water and bottled drinking water. Studies of occurrence in wastewater were also reviewed. We review and propose best practices to sample, extract and detect microplastics and provide a quantitative quality assessment of studies reporting microplastic concentrations. Further, we summarize the findings related to microplastic concentrations, polymer types and particle shapes. Microplastics are frequently present in freshwaters and drinking water, and number concentrations spanned ten orders of magnitude (1 × 10-2 to 108 #/m3) across individual samples and water types. However, only four out of 50 studies received positive scores for all proposed quality criteria, implying there is a significant need to improve quality assurance of microplastic sampling and analysis in water samples. The order in globally detected polymers in these studies is PE ≈ PP > PS > PVC > PET, which probably reflects the global plastic demand and a higher tendency for PVC and PET to settle as a result of their higher densities. Fragments, fibres, film, foam and pellets were the most frequently reported shapes. We conclude that more high quality data is needed on the occurrence of microplastics in drinking water, to better understand potential exposure and to inform human health risk assessments.

Keywords: Drinking water; Human health; Microplastics; Surface water; Waste water.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Image 1
Graphical abstract
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Box and whisker plot showing median and variation in microplastic number concentrations in individual samples taken from different water types. Data relate to individual samples unless only means were reported, in which case the mean value was taken into account n times, with n being the number of samples which the mean was based on. References included: (Estahbanati and Fahrenfeld, 2016; Faure et al., 2015; Fischer et al., 2016; Hoellein et al., 2017; Kosuth et al., 2018; Leslie et al., 2017; Magnusson and Norén, 2014; Mason et al. 2016a, 2018; McCormick et al. 2014, 2016; Michielssen et al., 2016; Mintenig et al., 2019b; Oβmann et al., 2018; Pivokonsky et al., 2018; Rodrigues et al., 2018; Schymanski et al., 2018; Simon et al., 2018; Talvitie et al. 2015, 2017a, 2017b; Vollertsen and Hansen, 2017; Wang et al. 2017, 2018; Ziajahromi et al., 2017), with n = 27. For statistical significances of differences among water types, see Table S4.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Number of studies reporting a particular shape of microplastic particles (from a total of 55 records).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Number of studies reporting a particular polymer type of microplastic particles (32 out of 55 records reported polymer type).
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Size ranges used (A) and number concentrations per size range reported (B) in studies on microplastics in drinking, surface and waste waters (referenced in Fig. 1). Arrows indicate that no upper or lower size limit was specified, in which case values of 5 mm or 1 μm were assigned, respectively. Panel A: Size ranges per study are ordered alphabetically per author name. Data points represent the average of the size range. Panel B: reported concentrations as a function of size range. Colours of arrows (Panel B) correspond to colours of the box and whiskers in Fig. 1. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

References

    1. Anderson P.J., Warrack S., Langen V., Challis J.K., Hanson M.L., Rennie M.D. Microplastic contamination in lake Winnipeg, Canada. Environ. Pollut. 2017;225:223–231. - PubMed
    1. Andrady A.L. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011;62(8):1596–1605. - PubMed
    1. Baldwin A.K., Corsi S.R., Mason S.A. Plastic debris in 29 Great Lakes tributaries: relations to watershed attributes and hydrology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016;50(19):10377–10385. - PubMed
    1. Bergmann M., Gutow L., Klages M. Springer; 2015. Marine Anthropogenic Litter.
    1. Bond T., Ferrandiz-Mas V., Felipe-Sotelo M., van Sebille E. The occurrence and degradation of aquatic plastic litter based on polymer physicochemical properties: a review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018:1–38.