PJZ_58_3_1953-1969

INTRODUCTION

The contamination of aquatic ecosystems by microplastics (MPs) has become a significant environmental concern in the Anthropocene (Hale et al., 2020). These particles, composed of synthetic polymers and smaller than 5 mm, can accumulate in water bodies, posing serious risks to aquatic organisms (Frias and Nash, 2019). MPs enter aquatic ecosystems through various channels, exposing organisms to diverse biological stressors (Koelmans et al., 2022). There are two main types of MPs. Primary MPs are made on purpose to be used in cosmetics, personal care products, and industrial abrasives (Jaikumar et al., 2019; Song et al., 2024). Secondary MPs, on the other hand, form when larger plastic debris gradually breaks down through biological activity, mechanical abrasion, and photochemical weathering (Laskar and Kumar, 2019; Lehtiniemi et al., 2018). These particles resist natural biodegradation due to their synthetic polymer composition, which allows them to persist in the environment for extended periods of time and accumulate over several decades across food webs and geochemical cycles (Filella, 2015; Kum et al., 2025). MPs get into water bodies through a mix of human activities and natural movements of water (Rochman, 2018). City runoff, untreated sewage, and particles falling from the air are the main ways they reach rivers and oceans. Most MP pollution comes from land-based sources (Hale et al., 2020; Kay et al., 2018) (Fig. 1).

Some MPs, called secondary MPs, form when plastic waste breaks into smaller pieces. Rivers can carry these pieces into the ocean, where sunlight and waves break them down even more (Kum et al., 2025). These tiny

plastics are now found in the most remote places, including deep-sea sediments and Arctic ice, showing just how persistent and widespread they are (Ivleva et al., 2017). Aquatic animals often ingest MPs, which is one of the main ways these particles enter the food chain (De Sá et al., 2018; Jovanović, 2017). Animals of all sizes, from small filter-feeding invertebrates to large predators, can eat MPs by accident. This happens because the particles are tiny (1 μm–5 mm), appear in many shapes like fibers, fragments, and microbeads, and are present throughout aquatic environments (Galafassi et al., 2021; Lehtiniemi et al., 2018). MPs can harm animals in different ways. Chemicals they carry, such as plasticizers, flame retardants, and pollutants they pick up, can get into tissues and cause mild toxic effects. They can also physically harm the animals, causing blocked intestines, internal scratches, or a false sense of fullness, which can lead to starvation (Bhuyan, 2022). Over time, long-term exposure can weaken immune systems, affect reproduction, and interfere with hormones in fish, mollusks, and crustaceans (Chen et al., 2022; Jaikumar et al., 2019). Top predators often end up with more MPs because of what they eat. As these plastics move through the food chain, they can build up over time and become more concentrated, which is a serious concern for the health of these animals and the ecosystem (De Sá et al., 2018).

MP pollution can change how ecosystems work and how different groups of organisms interact, not just affecting individual species. These effects happen in many ways and can influence the balance of entire aquatic communities (Issac and Kandasubramanian, 2021; Rakib et al., 2023). High amounts of MPs in the water can reduce light penetration and make it harder for plants and algae to perform photosynthesis, which may lower overall primary productivity (Sharma and Chatterjee, 2017). MPs can also help spread invasive species, harmful algae, and disease-causing microbes, acting as surfaces and carriers for these organisms (Galafassi et al., 2021; Ivleva et al., 2017). With climate change and other human pressures potentially making these effects worse, we still do not fully understand the combined impacts of MPs on aquatic ecosystems (Issac and Kandasubramanian, 2021). Plastic production is increasing every year, and as these plastics break down into tiny pieces, they end up in water and ecosystems (Hale et al., 2020; Koelmans et al., 2022). Plastics are becoming more common in the environment, and tiny pieces of plastic end up in rivers, lakes, and oceans. People are noticing this problem more, but we still do not fully understand how these small plastics affect fish, plants, and even humans over time (Rochman, 2018). To protect the environment, it is important to have reliable ways to find these plastics, study what they do, and figure out the risks (Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2012). Understanding how they affect aquatic life means looking at different areas at once, like pollution, water systems, animal health, and materials science (Ivleva et al., 2017; Kum et al., 2025). When we look at aquatic animals, it is clear that tiny plastics can cause problems, even if we do not know all the details yet. Paying attention to these effects also shows us where more research is needed and can help guide future studies and ways to manage plastics in the environment (Gola et al., 2021; Rakib et al., 2023).

CLASSIFICATION AND CHARACTERISTICS OF MPS

Size, shape, and polymer types

MPs come in many different shapes and sizes, which affects how they move and settle in the environment. The tiniest of these, called nanoplastics, are so small that they are almost invisible and behave more like particles in a colloid, while larger fragments are easier to see (Rodríguez-Seijo and Pereira, 2017). The different sizes of MPs affect basic behaviors like how they sink, how they reflect light, and how they interact with aquatic animals (Kooi and Koelmans, 2019). Their shapes also influence how they behave in the environment. In freshwater systems, fibrous particles are the most common, mainly coming from textile shedding and laundry wastewater, and they often have long, thin shapes (Ali et al., 2024). In contrast, marine habitats tend to have more irregularly shaped particles because larger plastic debris breaks down over time (Shim et al., 2018). Laboratory studies with model organisms have shown that the shape of MP particles can strongly influence how animals feed and how efficiently they ingest these particles (Lehtiniemi et al., 2018). Looking at the types of plastics helps us understand where pollution comes from. Polyethylene and polypropylene are seen almost everywhere, probably because so much of these plastics is made for packaging (Gündoğdu, 2022). When we look closer at different regions, polystyrene shows up more near cities and coasts than in the open ocean (Digka et al., 2018).

Chemical properties and bioavailability

MPs are made up of complex chemical mixtures and can pick up contaminants in several ways. During production, manufacturers often add substances like flame retardants, which help prevent fires, and plasticizers, which make the plastic more flexible (Beiras et al., 2021). Once in the environment, factors like water conditions and the type of plastic influence how quickly these chemicals are released into aquatic habitats (Yu et al., 2024). MPs can pick up contaminants because of the way their surfaces interact with the environment. As these particles stay in water, they attract and hold hydrophobic chemicals from nearby sources, which makes them even better at gathering pollutants (Wang et al., 2021). This is particularly important for persistent organic pollutants, which tend to stick strongly to plastics (Tang et al., 2022). When aquatic animals come into contact with these plastics, the chemicals can interfere with their hormones and harm reproduction, posing serious risks to their health (Chen et al., 2019). MPs last a long time in the environment because their plastic backbones are man-made and do not break down easily. Complete mineralization is still very uncommon in aquatic environments, even if photodegradation and mechanical weathering gradually break up particles (Xiong et al., 2022). Instead of eliminating them, this results in constant size reduction, which over time produces particles that are more bioavailable (Maddison et al., 2023). Across trophic levels, bioavailability patterns show a definite size dependence. From filter feeders to visual predators, a variety of creatures can more easily consume smaller particles (Botterell et al., 2019). By changing their physical and chemical cues to resemble natural food sources, surface alterations brought about by biofilm growth greatly improve particle ingestion (Kalčíková, 2023).

OCCURRENCE AND DISTRIBUTION of mps IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS

According to (Xiong et al., 2022), MPs are found in freshwater habitats all over the world, and their distribution patterns are greatly impacted by both human activity and natural hydrology. In linked water systems, aquaculture activities dramatically increase MP concentrations by three to five times when compared to natural circumstances (Xiong et al., 2022). Lakes have distinctive accumulation zones that are influenced by their hydrodynamic properties and water retention periods (D’Avignon et al., 2022), whereas rivers have noticeable MP hotspots close to cities and wastewater outfalls (He et al., 2020). How MPs settle in water depends on layers in the water and seasonal changes (Gunaalan et al., 2024). In the sediments at the bottom, biofilms can trap more MPs, increasing retention by about 38–42%, especially where the sediment has a lot of organic matter (Wang et al., 2022). Coastal areas act as final collection points for MPs. They are important zones where plastics from land meet the ocean (Strafella et al., 2021).

Near cities, the amount of MPs in coastal waters can be four to seven times higher than in less developed areas. This is closely linked to how much the coast has been built up (Jang et al., 2020). The water column has layers where MPs settle differently, depending on the type of plastic and the growth of biofilms (Choy et al., 2019). While sediments along coasts store many MPs, the accumulation of floating plastics in open ocean gyres is affected by organic matter in the water and the movement of surface currents (Shim et al., 2018).

Sediments act as long-term storage areas for MPs. How the particles settle depends on water movement and the characteristics of the plastics themselves (Bellasi et al., 2020). In rivers, the amount of MPs is closely linked to organic matter, which suggests that similar processes control their deposition (He et al., 2020). Most particles eventually move downstream, but strong water flows can temporarily lift them back into the water (Xia et al., 2021). The growth of biofilms at the boundary between sediment and water can move MPs between different layers. At the same time, the water surface remains very dynamic because of animal activity and wind (Pasquier et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2022). To measure MP concentrations accurately, careful sampling is needed to account for these changing conditions (Razeghi et al., 2021).

Freshwater and marine systems have different patterns of MP pollution. Rivers are key pathways, carrying plastics from land to the ocean (Luo et al., 2019). In Asia, rivers contribute about 86% of the world’s plastic inputs to the seas, which is a very large share (Tang et al., 2023). Differences in MP types between regions are linked to local waste management, industrial activity, and water conditions (Jiang, 2018). In tropical areas, strong sunlight can break down plastics more quickly (Atugoda et al., 2020). Using standardized methods is still important to make sure measurements are accurate across different environments (Li et al., 2021).

INGESTION AND BIOACCUMULATION of mps IN AQUATIC FAUNA

Ingestion of MPs by fish

Fish can take in MPs in different ways, depending on what they eat and where they live (Jovanović, 2017). Some plastics look or move like the fish’s normal food. Visual predators, such as bass (Micropterus salmoides) and perch (Perca fluviatilis), may eat these plastics on purpose (Lusher et al., 2020). Microbes can grow on plastic surfaces and produce chemical signals that make the plastics seem even more like food, which increases the chance of fish eating them by mistake (De Vries et al., 2020).

MPs can also enter fish by accident during normal feeding or when water flows over their gills. This is called passive ingestion (Sacco et al., 2024). Fish that live near cities or areas with wastewater discharge usually have more MPs in their bodies compared to fish that live farther out in open waters (Wootton et al., 2021). The distribution of polymers reflects global output, with polyethylene accounting for 42%, polypropylene for 31%, and PET for 18% (Wootton et al., 2021). Nanoplastics (less than 1 μm) have been found in hepatic tissues using sophisticated detection techniques as Raman microscopy and μFTIR spectroscopy, suggesting a systemic dispersion outside of the digestive tract (Jovanović, 2017). Figure 2 illustrates the exposure of fish to MPs through gills and gut ingestion.

MP uptake in amphibians

Because amphibians have complex biphasic life cycles, they are especially susceptible to MP pollution (Boyero et al., 2020). During filter-feeding, aquatic larval stages consume particles; tadpoles exhibit a preference for consuming 80-200 μm MPs that correspond to their gape size and feeding current velocities (Burgos-Aceves et al., 2022). Both larvae and adults’ porous integument promotes dermal uptake, especially for nanoplastics that are able to cross cutaneous barriers (Szkudlarek et al., 2024). According to research on chronic exposure, MPs build up in digestive tracts and interfere with hormones to cause metamorphic processes to be disrupted (Rahman et al., 2024). Superoxide dismutase and catalase activity, two indicators of oxidative stress, sharply rise after exposure, suggesting cellular harm from plastic additives and adsorbed pollutants (Burgos-Aceves et al., 2022). Due to their comparatively sluggish metabolic clearance rates, several species of adult frogs store MPs for lengthy periods of time, and they continue to acquire them through their diet and the environment (Hou and Rao, 2022). As shown in Figure 2, tadpoles experience endocrine disruption due to MP accumulation.

MP ingestion in mollusks and crustaceans

Because of their extensive range and effective filter-feeding processes, bivalve mollusks are useful bioindicators for MP contamination (Ding et al., 2022). Large amounts of water are processed by mussels (Mytilus spp.) and oysters (Crassostrea spp.), which passively concentrate MPs that are then stored in digestive glands (Wang et al., 2021). Within hour of ingestion, MPs smaller than 100 μm can penetrate intestinal epithelial barriers and enter circulatory systems, according to particle translocation studies (Ding et al., 2022). MPs physically occupy the space of the digestive canal, these exposure paths frequently result in misleading satiation signals and poor food absorption (Prata et al., 2023). Different species have significantly different depuration rates, some bivalves remove over 90% of particles in 72 h, while others hold onto MPs for weeks (Wang et al., 2021). Figure 2 further illustrates MP retention in mollusks digestive tissues and impaired digestion in crustaceans.

Bioaccumulation and trophic transfer

MPs distribute differentially across tissues and organ systems according to particle characteristics and organism physiology (Miller et al., 2020). Chemical additives including plasticizers and stabilizers leach from MPs under physiological conditions, with release rates accelerated by gut acidity and enzymatic activity (Franzellitti et al., 2019). Retention times vary phylogenetically, reflecting fundamental differences in digestive system morphology and metabolic rates (Li et al., 2021). Bivalves generally retain MPs longer than fish due to more efficient particle sequestration in digestive glands (Hou and Rao, 2022).

Predator-prey relationships allow MPs to spread across food webs (Au et al., 2017). Particles introduced by primary consumers cause higher trophic species to biomagnify (McHale and Sheehan, 2024). The adsorptive properties of MPs enhance their role as vectors for hydrophobic contaminants, creating complex exposure scenarios that vary across ecosystem types (Au et al., 2017). Through species that live in sediment, benthic channels demonstrate effective transmission (O’Connor et al., 2022). The highest trophic retention rates are found in fibers (McHale and Sheehan, 2024). Transfer is very effective in deep-sea food webs (O’Connor et al., 2022). These processes may have cascading effects on ecosystem structure and function through impacts on keystone species and trophic interactions (McHale and Sheehan, 2024).

PHYSIOLOGICAL AND HISTOPATHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF MPS IN AQUATIC FAUNA

Tissue-specific pathologies and systemic effects

When aquatic creatures are subjected to MPs, their branchial systems gradually deteriorate (Xing et al., 2023). Gill filaments exhibit epithelial lifting at first, which eventually progresses to full lamellar fusion. Both chemical irritation from leached plastic additives and physical abrasion from particle surfaces cause this structural degradation (Wang et al., 2022). In response, the respiratory epithelium secretes large amounts of mucus, usually two to three times the normal amount (Bhagat et al., 2020). This results in notable diffusion barriers that reduce the effectiveness of oxygen intake. Chloride cells exhibit substantial ciliary damage and mitochondrial enlargement, according to ultrastructural investigations (Zhang et al., 2024). Important osmoregulatory processes are interfered with by these alterations.

Damage to intestinal tissues shows a clear development. In situations involving prolonged exposure, this starts with microvilli shortening and progresses to total villous atrophy (Rakib et al., 2023). Tight connection protein structure between enterocytes gradually degrades. This results in elevated intestinal permeability and possible systemic absorption of poisons (Subaramaniyam et al., 2023). Histological analyses reveal a significant infiltration of leukocytes in the lamina propria. Phagocytosed MP particles are seen in many macrophages (Jeyavani et al., 2023). Hepatic disease presents as a series of metabolic abnormalities that change during the course of exposure (Patra et al., 2022). In situations involving extended exposure, initial steatosis develops into lobular inflammation and, ultimately, periportal fibrosis. Hepatocytes show megamitochondria production and a progressive build-up of lipofuscin granules, persistent oxidative stress is indicated by both (Pirsaheb et al., 2020). The hepatic stellate cell population gets activated, They become myofibroblasts, which spread extracellular matrix components all across the liver parenchyma (Hu et al., 2023).

Molecular stress pathways and cellular dysfunction

When mitochondrial electron transport chains are disrupted, the oxidative cascade starts. Significant amounts of superoxide radicals are produced as a result (Osman et al., 2023). Large-scale lipid peroxidation chain events are started by these reactive oxygen species. They specifically target cellular membrane polyunsaturated fatty acids (Jewett et al., 2022). Reactive aldehydes are created as a result, including malondialdehyde and 4-hydroxynonenal. These produce long-lasting protein adducts that impair the integrity of the cytoskeleton and prevent essential enzymes from functioning (Bilal et al., 2023).

Phase II detoxification enzymes are coordinatedly upregulated in cellular antioxidant responses, the Nrf2-Keap1 signaling pathway is responsible for this (Sussarellu et al., 2016). But these defenses are eventually overpowered by long-term exposure to MPs (Uguen et al., 2025). As a result, the thioredoxin system eventually collapses due to significant glutathione depletion. Eight-oxoguanine lesions and strand breaks are signs of oxidative damage to DNA, they are especially concentrated in tissues that are metabolically active (Prinz and Korez, 2020).

Pattern recognition receptors are activated to start inflammatory reactions, these consist of the NLRP3 inflammasome complex and Toll-like receptors (Egbeocha et al., 2018). NF-κB is translocated to the nucleus by subsequent signaling cascades (Mason et al., 2022). Pro-inflammatory cytokines such TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β are significantly released as a result (Mason et al., 2022). Different macrophage activation characteristics are caused by persistent inflammation, it also results in widespread fibroblast proliferation (Gola et al., 2021). Tissue fibrosis is caused by these factors taken together.

Reproductive and developmental toxicity

Multiple parallel processes lead to endocrine dysregulation. These consist of inhibition of aromatase, competitive receptor binding, and suppression of several steroidogenic enzymes (Corinaldesi et al., 2021). There is a change in the pulsatility of gonadotropin-releasing hormones in the hypothalamic-pituitary axis (Lusher et al., 2020). As a result, gonadotropin secretion patterns are disrupted. Numerous metabolic processes are compromised in steroidogenesis, these include 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase activity and StAR-mediated cholesterol transfer (Cera and Scalici, 2021).

Accelerated atresia rates are seen in ovarian follicles. Alongside this, there is aberrant zona pellucida development and decreased vitellogenin uptake (Kaloyianni et al., 2021). Numerous pathological alterations are indicative of testicular injury, these include impaired blood-testis barrier integrity, Sertoli cell vacuolization, and germ cell death (Hou and Rao, 2022). Asynchronous development patterns are common in spermatogenic phases, the frequency of aberrant sperm morphology has increased (Honda and Suzuki, 2020). Transgenerational effects result from germ cell epigenetic reprogramming, many generations are affected by these (Yin et al., 2022). Stable alterations in DNA methylation at imprinted sites are among the consequences . Additionally, histone modification patterns are continuously changing and small RNA profiles undergo significant changes (Xie et al., 2021). These epigenetic changes significantly change the course of an offspring’s development, even when there is no direct exposure to MPs, this still happens.

Organismal and ecosystem impacts of MPs

MPs use a variety of stress pathways to significantly limit population persistence and organismal growth. During crucial growth times, intestinal blockage and poor nutrition absorption cause developmental bottlenecks in larval stages (Uy and Johnson, 2022). Reduced size-at-age results from disruption of skeletal development and protein metabolism, which changes juvenile growth trajectories (De Sá et al., 2018). Resources from somatic development are diverted when cellular stress responses trigger energetically expensive detoxification pathways (Wright et al., 2013). Climate change intensifies these physiological effects by raising metabolic rates and MP toxicity (Prokić et al., 2019). Through a combination of physical and biological mechanisms, MP contamination causes systemic alterations in the way aquatic ecosystems function. As bioturbation rates decrease, benthic-pelagic connection is disrupted, impacting nutrient transport across sediment-water interfaces (Mason et al., 2022). Reduced filter-feeder activity modifies particulate organic matter export and changes carbon cycling (Wright et al., 2013).

When coupled with additional stressors like eutrophication and climate change, these functional alterations may cause regime shifts in the status of the ecosystem (Du et al., 2021). According to long-term monitoring, these consequences are getting worse as the amount of MP pollution in the world keeps rising (Issac and Kandasubramanian, 2021). Because MPs disrupt both optical and chemical threat assessment systems, prey species exhibit weakened antipredator responses (Savoca et al., 2021).

MPS AND CHEMICAL POLLUTANTS IN AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS

Adsorption dynamics of heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants

MP surfaces display substantial adsorption capacities for both heavy metals and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) due to their hydrophobic qualities and high surface area-to-volume ratios (Bayo et al., 2018). The way MPs attract contaminants depends on the type of plastic. Polyethylene and polypropylene tend to attract nonpolar pollutants, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), more strongly. Polyvinyl chloride (PVC), on the other hand, picks up more heavy metals, like lead and cadmium (Zhu et al., 2023). Environmental factors, such as pH, salt levels, and dissolved organic matter, also affect how well contaminants stick to plastics. For example, lower pH can make metals attach more easily to the plastic surface (Liu et al., 2021). Over time, MPs change due to sunlight and mechanical wear. This aging process makes their surfaces more porous and adds oxygen-containing groups, which help them bind more contaminants (Brennecke et al., 2016). Because of this, MPs can carry pollutants from rivers to the sea, acting as transporters in estuarine ecosystems (Bakir et al., 2014). Microbes can grow on plastic surfaces, and this changes how chemicals stick to the plastics. The sticky substances made by the microbes, called extracellular polymers, help some pollutants attach more easily (Gilewski et al., 2025).

Combined toxic effects on aquatic animals

When fish and other aquatic animals eat MPs carrying pollutants, the effects can be worse than with either the plastic or chemicals alone. These combined exposures can harm their health in several ways. Because of their altered speciation and extended retention in digestive systems, heavy metals linked to MPs exhibit higher toxicity (Chen et al., 2023). MPs hinder organisms capacity to digest co-occurring chemical pollutants by interfering with detoxification enzymes such cytochrome P450 at the cellular level (Avio et al., 2015). By producing reactive oxygen species, the presence of MPs intensifies oxidative stress reactions to contaminants, increasing lipid peroxidation and DNA damage (Vo and Pham, 2021). Larval fish display developmental defects and lower survival rates, indicating that early life stages are especially sensitive to these combined exposures (Botterell et al., 2019). When the reported toxicity surpasses the sum of the effects of the individual components, the combined effects frequently exhibit non-additive patterns (Marchant et al., 2022). These interactions differ between species, with benthic invertebrates and filter-feeding organisms responding most strongly to MP-chemical combinations (Scherer et al., 2017).

Ecological consequences of MP-mediated contaminant transport

Through special transport mechanisms, MPs change the temporal and geographical distribution of contaminants in aquatic environments. Many plastics are buoyant, which makes it easier for absorbed pollutants to travel horizontally over large distances across ecosystem boundaries (Gateuille and Naffrechoux, 2022). Pollutants are transferred from surface waters to benthic sediments through vertical transport, which happens when biofouled particles lose their buoyancy (Haque and Fan, 2023). By creating novel exposure pathways through ingestion and direct touch, MPs alter established contamination pathways in freshwater systems (Lambert and Wagner, 2018). Since MPs avoid conventional sedimentation processes and keep pollutants in biologically active zones, marine habitats undergo altered pollutant cycling (Amelia et al., 2021). In contaminated locations, the contaminant load carried by MPs frequently accounts for a sizable portion of the overall pollutant burden (Rodrigues et al., 2019).

When MPs move through an ecosystem, they can change which animals and plants live there. The species that can handle pollution survive, while others may disappear (Rakib et al., 2023). Sometimes, MP levels rise suddenly because of seasonal changes. These spikes can make it harder for the ecosystem to bounce back after being disturbed (Lambert and Wagner, 2018).

HUMAN HEALTH IMPLICATIONS VIA AQUATIC FOOD CHAINS

Trophic transfer and bioaccumulation dynamics

Zooplankton and small filter-feeding animals play a key role in bringing MPs into the ocean food chain because they eat almost anything in the water (Miller et al., 2020). Plastics can attract harmful chemicals from the water, creating mixtures of pollutants that can build up as they move through the food chain (Carbery et al., 2018). Studies show that meat-eating fish tend to have more MPs in their bodies than plant-eating fish (McIlwraith et al., 2021). Some shellfish, like mussels and oysters, filter water directly and remove MPs very efficiently (Van Raamsdonk et al., 2020). Bioaccumulation patterns vary significantly among aquatic habitats due to ecosystem-specific characteristics such as hydrology, sedimentation rates, and community structure (O’Connor et al., 2022). Understanding the flow of MPs through food webs has improved due to recent developments in stable isotope analysis, which have shown surprising paths such as detrital feeding routes (Li et al., 2023).

Seafood contamination and human exposure pathways

MP contamination is very ubiquitous in commercial seafood, according to market surveys; contamination levels in farmed and wild-caught seafood are similar (Fig. 3, Smith et al., 2018). Bivalves have the highest particle concentrations due to their filter-feeding ecology and extensive whole-body consumption; oysters have far greater levels of MPs than do crustaceans or finfish (Ding et al., 2022). Seafood from urbanized estuaries has higher particle loads, indicating that coastal proximity is a significant factor of pollution levels, according to geographic study (Danopoulos et al., 2020).

Multiple paths of seafood intake expose humans, but raw or little processed goods are more dangerous since there is less particle removal during preparation (Garrido et al., 2020). MPs digestive bioavailability differs depending on the kind of polymer; bigger polystyrene particles have less intestinal absorption capacity than polyethylene and polypropylene (Unuofin and Igwaran, 2023). High-temperature preparations increase the leaching of plastic additives while perhaps lowering particle burdens, demonstrating how cooking techniques affect the transfer of contaminants (Vital et al., 2021).

Health risk assessment and research priorities

Chronic exposure to MPs may have negative health effects, such as inflammatory reactions and cellular damage processes, according to toxicological research (Alberghini et al., 2022). Particulate plastics and adsorbed pollutants may interfere with endocrine function, which might have a negative impact on reproductive and developmental health outcomes (Santonicola et al., 2023). Although there are currently few human research, there is growing evidence that MPs may change the makeup of the gut microbiota and the function of the intestinal barrier (Hantoro et al., 2019). Understanding long-term, low-dose exposure effects and possible synergistic interactions with other environmental stressors remains a critical research need (De-la-Torre, 2020). Standardizing testing procedures for nanoplastics and creating biomarkers for evaluating human exposure are two methodological problems (Ricciardi et al., 2021).

In order to stop MPs from entering aquatic environments, risk management techniques are placing a greater emphasis on source reduction and enhanced wastewater treatment (Bellasi et al., 2020).

CURRENT MITIGATION STRATEGIES FOR MP POLLUTION

Wastewater treatment upgrades and removal technologies

The removal efficiency of conventional wastewater treatment plants vary; basic treatment stages remove 50–98% of particles through physical settling processes, with an average removal of ~80% across systems (Talvitie et al., 2017). By fusing physical filtration methods with biological degradation, advanced tertiary treatments like as membrane bioreactors and fast sand filtration attain removal rates of 95–99% (Bayo et al., 2020). Membrane technologies are especially promising; using size-exclusion principles, ultrafiltration devices can efficiently capture particles as small as 10 nm (Yang et al., 2021). By causing particle aggregation through charge neutralization, emerging electrochemical techniques improve removal efficiency and make it simpler to separate from wastewater streams (Corpuz et al., 2024). Adaptive treatment techniques are necessary due to seasonal differences in MP burdens; studies have shown that sophisticated systems work consistently under varying influent circumstances (Iordachescu et al., 2024). Alum and ferric chloride-based natural coagulation techniques have the potential to be economical ways to remove MPs in environments with limited resources (Reza et al., 2023).

Public awareness campaigns and policy frameworks

The general public’s awareness of MP pollution is still uneven, with coastal towns showing higher levels of awareness than inland ones (Omoyajowo et al., 2022). To improve risk perception, effective communication tactics include visual examples of MP deposition in common seafood items (Henderson and Green, 2020). Programs for environmental education at the university level greatly increase understanding of the causes of MPs and ways to prevent them (Janoušková et al., 2020). The European Union has implemented extensive restrictions on primary MPs in cosmetics through REACH rules, however there are significant differences in international policy responses (Lam et al., 2018). Localized restrictions on single-use plastics are becoming more common in developing countries, however their implementation is difficult because of inadequate waste management infrastructure (Usman et al., 2022). In order to encourage the reduction of plastic trash at the source, new legislative strategies center on extended producer responsibility programs (Munhoz et al., 2022).

Biodegradable alternatives and sustainable materials

While retaining the material qualities required for packaging applications, bioplastics made of polylactic acid (PLA) and polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) show encouraging degradation patterns in marine settings (Acharjee et al., 2023). The production of biodegradable MPs during partial degradation and their possible ecological effects, however, continue to raise concerns (Wang et al., 2022). Biopolymers made from agricultural waste provide sustainable substitutes, cellulose-based materials exhibit the most potential for products with limited lifespans (Samer et al., 2022). Because some bioplastics demand large energy inputs and agricultural land for feedstock production, life cycle studies show complex tradeoffs (Atiwesh et al., 2021). The broad use of biodegradable substitutes in some applications is now hampered by performance limits in mechanical strength and moisture barrier qualities (Cruz et al., 2022). Ongoing material science innovations focus on improving the marine degradation rates of bioplastics while maintaining functional durability during product use (Ali et al., 2023). Regulatory frameworks must evolve to distinguish between truly compostable materials and conventional plastics marketed as biodegradable without proper certification (Prata et al., 2019).

RESEARCH GAPS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS IN MP STUDIES

Knowledge gaps

Understanding of long-term ecological effects is limited by the paucity of longitudinal studies investigating the effects of chronic, multigenerational MP exposure in current research (Issac and Kandasubramanian, 2021). The majority of lab investigations use brief exposures that last a few weeks to months, but field research never lasts longer than one cycle every year. Comprehensive evaluation of ecosystem-level consequences and transgenerational effects is hampered by this temporal constraint (Rakib et al., 2023; Vo and Pham, 2021). Regarding population resilience and the possibility of recovery after extended exposure to MPs, there are still important knowledge gaps (Li et al., 2021). Current studies have significant taxonomic and regional biases. Despite their ecological sensitivity, tropical freshwater systems and polar marine settings are still significantly underrepresented in studies, which disproportionately concentrate on economically valuable species and temperate coastal ecosystems (Harris et al., 2021; Stanton et al., 2020). In studies on MPs, most attention goes to fish and marine mammals. Small animals, like insects and shellfish, are often ignored (Varg et al., 2022). Even creatures living on the ocean floor or in deep-sea habitats are rarely studied, even though MPs are present there (Nawaz et al., 2025).

Standardization needs

Scientists around the world agree that we need consistent ways to collect, process, and analyze MPs (Al-Azzawi et al., 2020). Right now, different labs use very different methods, such as how they digest samples, filter particles, or identify plastics with spectroscopy. These differences make it hard to compare studies or combine data (Sharma et al., 2024). To improve this, researchers suggest standardizing how we classify MP sizes, creating reference materials, and thinking about how environmental conditions affect measurements (Sharma et al., 2024). Special care is also needed when processing tissues, because some techniques can change the properties of MPs (Hermsen et al., 2018). Many experts recommend using multiple analytical methods but staying flexible so that each study can meet its own specific goals (Mitrano et al., 2023).

CONCLUSION

MP pollution is now one of the biggest environmental problems, affecting waters from the ocean surface down to deep-sea sediments. This review shows that different aquatic animals can suffer from ecological disruption, stress on their bodies, and even damage at the cellular level because of these tiny plastics. Eating seafood can also pose risks to humans, as harmful substances carried by MPs can move up the food chain and build up over time.Particularly in delicate arctic and deep-sea ecosystems, there are still significant knowledge gaps about long-term, intergenerational implications. Worldwide efforts to analyze and mitigate are hampered by the absence of standardized detection techniques. Innovation in biodegradable materials, strict international legal frameworks, and modern wastewater treatment must be integrated in a way never seen before in order to provide effective solutions. The magnitude of this problem necessitates quick, coordinated response from the public, business, and scientific sectors. Source reduction, better waste management, and consistent research investment are necessary to preserve aquatic biodiversity and provide food security. Despite the seriousness of the problem, this assessment confirms that the spread of MP contamination can be stopped by scientifically based remedies and a coordinated worldwide reaction. The time for serious action is now, as our window for meaningful involvement is closing.

Declarations

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful to their institution for academic support and access to scientific literature.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Generative AI and AI-assisted technology statement

The authors declare that no genrative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.

Statement of conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.

REFERENCES

Acharjee, S.A., Bharali, P., Gogoi, B., Sorhie, V., Walling, B. and Alemtoshi, 2023. PHA-based bioplastic: A potential alternative to address microplastic pollution. Water Air Soil Pollut., 234: 21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-022-06029-2

Al-Azzawi, M.S.M., Kefer, S., Weißer, J., Reichel, J., Schwaller, C., Glas, K., Knoop, O. and Drewes, J.E., 2020. Validation of sample preparation methods for microplastic analysis in wastewater matrices reproducibility and standardization. Water, 12: 2445. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12092445

Alberghini, L., Truant, A., Santonicola, S., Colavita, G. and Giaccone, V., 2022. Microplastics in fish and fishery products and risks for human health: A review. Int. J. environ. Res. Publ. Hlth., 20: 789. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010789

Ali, A.A.M., Khalid, A.A., Razak, N.I.A., Maulana, N.S.M., Roslan, N.S., Razmi, R.S.B., Ruseli, W.M.A.W., Ibrahim, Y.S., Jaafar, M., Shahrudin, R., Ismail, K. and Anuar, S.T., 2024. A review on the presence of microplastics in environmental matrices within Southeast Asia: elucidating risk information through an analysis of microplastic characteristics such as size, shape, and type. Water Emerg. Contam. Nanoplast., 3. https://doi.org/10.20517/wecn.2023.73

Ali, W., Ali, H., Gillani, S., Zinck, P. and Souissi, S., 2023. Polylactic acid synthesis, biodegradability, conversion to microplastics and toxicity: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett., 21: 1761–1786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01564-8

Amelia, T.S.M., Khalik, W.M.A.W.M., Ong, M.C., Shao, Y.T., Pan, H.J. and Bhubalan, K., 2021. Marine microplastics as vectors of major ocean pollutants and its hazards to the marine ecosystem and humans. Prog. Earth Planet. Sci., 8: 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-020-00405-4

Atiwesh, G., Mikhael, A., Parrish, C.C., Banoub, J. and Le, T.A.T., 2021. Environmental impact of bioplastic use: A review. Heliyon, 7: e07918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07918

Atugoda, T., Piyumali, H., Liyanage, S., Mahatantila, K. and Vithanage, M., 2020. Fate and behavior of microplastics in freshwater systems. In: Handbook of microplastics in the environment (eds. T. Rocha-Santos, M. Costa and C. Mouneyrac). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10618-8_42-1

Au, S.Y., Lee, C.M., Weinstein, J.E., Van Den Hurk, P. and Klaine, S.J., 2017. Trophic transfer of microplastics in aquatic ecosystems: Identifying critical research needs. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage., 13: 505–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1907

Avio, C.G., Gorbi, S., Milan, M., Benedetti, M., Fattorini, D., d’Errico, G., Pauletto, M., Bargelloni, L. and Regoli, F., 2015. Pollutants bioavailability and toxicological risk from microplastics to marine mussels. Environ. Pollut., 198: 211–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.12.021

Bakir, A., Rowland, S.J. and Thompson, R.C., 2014. Transport of persistent organic pollutants by microplastics in estuarine conditions. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 140: 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2014.01.004

Bayo, J., Guillén, M., Olmos, S., Jiménez, P., Sánchez, E. and Roca, M.J., 2018. Microplastics as vector for persistent organic pollutants in urban effluents: The role of polychlorinated biphenyls. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. Plan., 13: 671–682. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V13-N4-671-682

Bayo, J., López-Castellanos, J. and Olmos, S., 2020. Membrane bioreactor and rapid sand filtration for the removal of microplastics in an urban wastewater treatment plant. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 156: 111211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111211

Beiras, R., Verdejo, E., Campoy-López, P. and Vidal-Liñán, L., 2021. Aquatic toxicity of chemically defined microplastics can be explained by functional additives. J. Hazard. Mater., 406: 124338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124338

Bellasi, A., Binda, G., Pozzi, A., Galafassi, S., Volta, P. and Bettinetti, R., 2020. Microplastic contamination in freshwater environments: A review, focusing on interactions with sediments and benthic organisms. Environments, 7: 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments7040030

Bhagat, J., Zang, L., Nishimura, N. and Shimada, Y., 2020. Zebrafish: An emerging model to study microplastic and nanoplastic toxicity. Sci. Total Environ., 728: 138707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138707

Bhuyan, M.S., 2022. Effects of microplastics on fish and in human health. Front. Environ. Sci., 10: 827289. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.827289

Bilal, M., Ul-Hassan, H., Taj, M., Rafiq, N., Nabi, G., Ali, A., Gabol, K., Shah, M.I.A., Ghaffar, R.A., Sohail, M. and Arai, T., 2023. Biological magnification of microplastics: A look at the induced reproductive toxicity from simple invertebrates to complex vertebrates. Water, 15: 2831. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15152831

Botterell, Z.L.R., Beaumont, N., Dorrington, T., Steinke, M., Thompson, R.C. and Lindeque, P.K., 2019. Bioavailability and effects of microplastics on marine zooplankton: A review. Environ. Pollut., 245: 98–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.065

Boyero, L., López-Rojo, N., Bosch, J., Alonso, A., Correa-Araneda, F. and Pérez, J., 2020. Microplastics impair amphibian survival, body condition and function. Chemosphere, 244: 125500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125500

Brennecke, D., Duarte, B., Paiva, F., Caçador, I. and Canning-Clode, J., 2016. Microplastics as vector for heavy metal contamination from the marine environment. Estuar. Coast. Shelf. Sci., 178: 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2015.12.003

Burgos-Aceves, M.A., Faggio, C., Betancourt-Lozano, M., González-Mille, D.J. and Ilizaliturri-Hernández, C.A., 2022. Ecotoxicological perspectives of microplastic pollution in amphibians. J. Toxicol. environ. Hlth. Part B, 25: 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2022.2140372

Carbery, M., O’Connor, W. and Palanisami, T., 2018. Trophic transfer of microplastics and mixed contaminants in the marine food web and implications for human health. Environ. Int., 115: 400–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.03.007

Cera, A. and Scalici, M., 2021. Freshwater wild biota exposure to microplastics: A global perspective. Ecol. Evol., 11: 9904–9916. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7844

Chen, M., Yue, Y., Bao, X., Yu, H., Tan, Y., Tong, B., Kumkhong, S. and Yu, Y., 2022. Microplastics as contaminants in water bodies and their threat to the aquatic animals: A mini-review. Animals, 12: 2864. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12202864

Chen, Q., Allgeier, A., Yin, D. and Hollert, H., 2019. Leaching of endocrine disrupting chemicals from marine microplastics and mesoplastics under common life stress conditions. Environ. Int., 130: 104938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.104938

Chen, Q., Zhao, H., Liu, Y., Jin, L. and Peng, R., 2023. Factors affecting the adsorption of heavy metals by microplastics and their toxic effects on fish. Toxics, 11: 490. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11060490

Choy, C.A., Robison, B.H., Gagne, T.O., Erwin, B., Firl, E., Halden, R.U., Hamilton, J.A., Katija, K., Lisin, S.E., Rolsky, C.S. and Van Houtan, K., 2019. The vertical distribution and biological transport of marine microplastics across the epipelagic and mesopelagic water column. Sci. Rep., 9: 7843. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44117-2

Corinaldesi, C., Canensi, S., Dell’Anno, A., Tangherlini, M., Di Capua, I., Varrella, S., Willis, T.J., Cerrano, C. and Danovaro, R., 2021. Multiple impacts of microplastics can threaten marine habitat-forming species. Commun. Biol., 4: 431. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-01961-1

Corpuz, M.V.A., Cairone, S., Natale, M., Giannattasio, A., Iuliano, V., Grassi, A., Pollice, A., Mannina, G., Buonerba, A., Belgiorno, V. and Naddeo, V., 2024. Sustainable control of microplastics in wastewater using the electrochemically enhanced living membrane bioreactor. J. environ. Manage., 370: 122649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.122649

Cruz, R.M.S., Krauter, V., Krauter, S., Agriopoulou, S., Weinrich, R., Herbes, C., Scholten, P.B.V., Uysal-Unalan, I., Sogut, E., Kopacic, S., Lahti, J., Rutkaite, R. and Varzakas, T., 2022. Bioplastics for food packaging: Environmental impact, trends and regulatory aspects. Foods, 11: 3087. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11193087

D’Avignon, G., Gregory-Eaves, I. and Ricciardi, A., 2022. Microplastics in lakes and rivers: An issue of emerging significance to limnology. Environ. Rev., 30: 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2021-0048

Danopoulos, E., Jenner, L.C., Twiddy, M. and Rotchell, J.M., 2020. Microplastic contamination of seafood intended for human consumption: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ. Hlth. Perspect., 128: 126002. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP7171

De Sá, L.C., Oliveira, M., Ribeiro, F., Rocha, T.L. and Futter, M.N., 2018. Studies of the effects of microplastics on aquatic organisms: What do we know and where should we focus our efforts in the future? Sci. Total Environ., 645: 1029–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.207

De Vries, A.N., Govoni, D., Árnason, S.H. and Carlsson, P., 2020. Microplastic ingestion by fish: Body size, condition factor and gut fullness are not related to the amount of plastics consumed. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 151: 110827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110827

De-la-Torre, G.E., 2020. Microplastics: An emerging threat to food security and human health. J. Fd. Sci. Technol., 57: 1601–1608. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-04138-1

Digka, N., Tsangaris, C., Kaberi, H., Adamopoulou, A. and Zeri, C., 2018. Microplastic abundance and polymer types in a mediterranean environment. In: Proceedings of the international conference on microplastic pollution in the mediterranean sea, springer water (eds. M. Cocca, E. Di Pace, M.E. Errico, G. Gentile, A. Montarsolo and R. Mossotti). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 17–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71279-6_3

Ding, J., Sun, Y., He, C., Li, J. and Li, F., 2022. Towards risk assessments of microplastics in bivalve mollusks globally. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 10: 288. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse10020288

Du, S., Zhu, R., Cai, Y., Xu, N., Yap, P.S., Zhang, Y., He, Y. and Zhang, Y., 2021. Environmental fate and impacts of microplastics in aquatic ecosystems: A review. RSC Adv., 11: 15762–15784. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1RA00880C

Egbeocha, C., Malek, S., Emenike, C. and Milow, P., 2018. Feasting on microplastics: Ingestion by and effects on marine organisms. Aquat. Biol., 27: 93–106. https://doi.org/10.3354/ab00701

Filella, M., 2015. Questions of size and numbers in environmental research on microplastics: methodological and conceptual aspects. Environ. Chem., 12: 527. https://doi.org/10.1071/EN15012

Franzellitti, S., Canesi, L., Auguste, M., Wathsala, R.H.G.R. and Fabbri, E., 2019. Microplastic exposure and effects in aquatic organisms: A physiological perspective. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 68: 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2019.03.009

Frias, J.P.G.L. and Nash, R., 2019. Microplastics: Finding a consensus on the definition. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 138: 145–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.11.022

Galafassi, S., Campanale, C., Massarelli, C., Uricchio, V.F. and Volta, P., 2021. Do freshwater fish eat microplastics? A review with a focus on effects on fish health and predictive traits of microplastics ingestion. Water, 13: 2214. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13162214

Garrido, G.E., Ryder, J., Elvevoll, E.O. and Olsen, R.L., 2020. Microplastics in fish and shellfish. A threat to seafood safety? J. Aquat. Fd. Prod. Technol., 29: 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1080/10498850.2020.1739793

Gateuille, D. and Naffrechoux, E., 2022. Transport of persistent organic pollutants: Another effect of microplastic pollution? WIREs Water, 9: e1600. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1600

Gilewski, A.L., Shrestha, S., Kahara, S.N. and Stasulli, N.M., 2025. Microbial composition on microplastics mediated by stream impairment. Environ. Microb., 20: 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-025-00685-7

Gola, D., Kumar Tyagi, P., Arya, A., Chauhan, N., Agarwal, M., Singh, S.K. and Gola, S., 2021. The impact of microplastics on marine environment: A review. Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manage., 16: 100552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2021.100552

Gunaalan, K., Almeda, R., Vianello, A., Lorenz, C., Iordachescu, L., Papacharalampos, K., Nielsen, T.G. and Vollertsen, J., 2024. Does water column stratification influence the vertical distribution of microplastics? Environ. Pollut., 340: 122865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.122865

Gündoğdu, S., 2022. Polymer types of microplastic in coastal areas. In: microplastic pollution, emerging contaminants and associated treatment technologies (ed. M.Z. Hashmi). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 77–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89220-3_4

Hale, R.C., Seeley, M.E., La Guardia, M.J., Mai, L. and Zeng, E.Y., 2020. A global perspective on microplastics. J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 125: e2018JC014719. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018JC014719

Hantoro, I., Löhr, A.J., Van Belleghem, F.G.A.J., Widianarko, B. and Ragas, A.M.J., 2019. Microplastics in coastal areas and seafood: Implications for food safety. Fd. Addit. Contam. A, 36: 674–711. https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2019.1585581

Haque, F. and Fan, C., 2023. Fate and impacts of microplastics in the environment: Hydrosphere, pedosphere, and atmosphere. Environments, 10: 70. https://doi.org/10.3390/environments10050070

Harris, L.S.T., Fennell, J., Fales, R.J. and Carrington, E., 2021. Spatial–temporal growth, distribution, and diffusion of marine microplastic research and national plastic policies. Water Air Soil Pollut., 232: 400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-021-05352-4

He, B., Wijesiri, B., Ayoko, G.A., Egodawatta, P., Rintoul, L. and Goonetilleke, A., 2020. Influential factors on microplastics occurrence in river sediments. Sci. Total Environ., 738: 139901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139901

Henderson, L. and Green, C., 2020. Making sense of microplastics? Public understandings of plastic pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 152: 110908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.110908

Hermsen, E., Mintenig, S.M., Besseling, E. and Koelmans, A.A., 2018. Quality criteria for the analysis of microplastic in biota samples: A critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol., 52: 10230–10240. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b01611

Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R.C. and Thiel, M., 2012. Microplastics in the marine environment: A review of the methods used for identification and quantification. Environ. Sci. Technol., 46: 3060–3075. https://doi.org/10.1021/es2031505

Honda, M. and Suzuki, N., 2020. Toxicities of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons for aquatic animals. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Hlth., 17: 1363. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041363

Hou, D.M. and Rao, D.Q., 2022. Microplastics: Their effects on amphibians and reptiles. A review. Pakistan J. Zool. 54: 2931–2951. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20210820080823

Hu, Y., Lin, S., Tang, J., Li, Y., Wang, X., Jiang, Y., Zhang, H. and Wang, B., 2023. Effects of microplastics and lead exposure on gut oxidative stress and intestinal inflammation in common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.). Environ. Pollut., 327: 121528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.121528

Iordachescu, L., Papacharalampos, K., Barritaud, L., Denieul, M.P., Plessis, E., Baratto, G., Julien, V. and Vollertsen, J., 2024. Microplastics in an advanced wastewater treatment plant: Sustained and robust removal rates unfazed by seasonal variations. Microplastics Nanoplastics, 4: 18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43591-024-00097-3

Issac, M.N. and Kandasubramanian, B., 2021. Effect of microplastics in water and aquatic systems. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 28: 19544–19562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13184-2

Ivleva, N.P., Wiesheu, A.C. and Niessner, R., 2017. Microplastic in aquatic ecosystems. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed., 56: 1720–1739. https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201606957

Jaikumar, G., Brun, N.R., Vijver, M.G. and Bosker, T., 2019. Reproductive toxicity of primary and secondary microplastics to three cladocerans during chronic exposure. Environ. Pollut., 249: 638–646. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.03.085

Jang, M., Shim, W.J., Cho, Y., Han, G.M., Song, Y.K. and Hong, S.H., 2020. A close relationship between microplastic contamination and coastal area use pattern. Water Res., 171: 115400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115400

Janoušková, S., Teplý, P., Fatka, D., Teplá, M., Cajthaml, T. and Hák, T., 2020. Microplastics How and what do university students know about the emerging environmental sustainability issue? Sustainability, 12: 9220. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219220

Jewett, E., Arnott, G., Connolly, L., Vasudevan, N. and Kevei, E., 2022. Microplastics and their impact on reproduction. Can we learn from the C. elegans model? Front. Toxicol., 4: 748912. https://doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2022.748912

Jeyavani, J., Sibiya, A., Stalin, T., Vigneshkumar, G., Al-Ghanim, K.A., Riaz, M.N., Govindarajan, M. and Vaseeharan, B., 2023. Biochemical, genotoxic and histological implications of polypropylene microplastics on freshwater fish Oreochromis mossambicus: An aquatic eco-toxicological assessment. Toxics, 11: 282. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics11030282

Jiang, J.Q., 2018. Occurrence of microplastics and its pollution in the environment: A review. Sustain. Prod. Consum., 13: 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2017.11.003

Jovanović, B., 2017. Ingestion of microplastics by fish and its potential consequences from a physical perspective. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manage., 13: 510–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/ieam.1913

Kalčíková, G., 2023. Beyond ingestion: Adhesion of microplastics to aquatic organisms. Aquat. Toxicol., 258: 106480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2023.106480

Kaloyianni, M., Bobori, D.C., Xanthopoulou, D., Malioufa, G., Sampsonidis, I., Kalogiannis, S., Feidantsis, K., Kastrinaki, G., Dimitriadi, A., Koumoundouros, G., Lambropoulou, D.A., Kyzas, G.Z. and Bikiaris, D.N., 2021. Toxicity and functional tissue responses of two freshwater fish after exposure to polystyrene microplastics. Toxics, 9: 289. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics9110289

Kay, P., Hiscoe, R., Moberley, I., Bajic, L. and McKenna, N., 2018. Wastewater treatment plants as a source of microplastics in river catchments. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 25: 20264–20267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2070-7

Koelmans, A.A., Redondo-Hasselerharm, P.E., Nor, N.H.M., De Ruijter, V.N., Mintenig, S.M. and Kooi, M., 2022. Risk assessment of microplastic particles. Nat. Rev. Mater., 7: 138–152. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-021-00411-y

Kooi, M. and Koelmans, A.A., 2019. Simplifying microplastic via continuous probability distributions for size, shape, and density. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett., 6: 551–557. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.9b00379

Kum, G., Berglund, O. and Hollander, J., 2025. Lost in definition: Unravelling microplastics from marine coatings through bibliometrics science mapping in thematic analysis and systematic narrative literature review. Environ. Sci. Eur., 37: 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-025-01070-4

Lam, C.-S., Ramanathan, S., Carbery, M., Gray, K., Vanka, K.S., Maurin, C., Bush, R. and Palanisami, T., 2018. A comprehensive analysis of plastics and microplastic legislation worldwide. Water Air Soil Pollut., 229: 345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-018-4002-z

Lambert, S. and Wagner, M., 2018. Microplastics are contaminants of emerging concern in freshwater environments: An overview. In: Freshwater microplastics, the handbook of environmental chemistry (eds. M. Wagner and S. Lambert). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61615-5_1

Laskar, N. and Kumar, U., 2019. Plastics and microplastics: A threat to environment. Environ. Technol. Innov., 14: 100352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eti.2019.100352

Lehtiniemi, M., Hartikainen, S., Näkki, P., Engström-Öst, J., Koistinen, A. and Setälä, O., 2018. Size matters more than shape: Ingestion of primary and secondary microplastics by small predators. Fd. Webs, 17: e00097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fooweb.2018.e00097

Li, Q., Ma, C., Zhang, Q. and Shi, H., 2021. Microplastics in shellfish and implications for food safety. Curr. Opin. Fd. Sci., 40: 192–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2021.04.017

Li, X., Bao, L., Wei, Y., Zhao, W., Wang, F., Liu, X., Su, H. and Zhang, R., 2023. Occurrence, bioaccumulation, and risk assessment of microplastics in the aquatic environment: a review. Water 15: 1768. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15091768

Liu, S., Shi, J., Wang, J., Dai, Y., Li, H., Li, J., Liu, X., Chen, X., Wang, Z. and Zhang, P., 2021. Interactions between microplastics and heavy metals in aquatic environments: A review. Front. Microbiol., 12: 652520. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.652520

Luo, W., Su, L., Craig, N.J., Du, F., Wu, C. and Shi, H., 2019. Comparison of microplastic pollution in different water bodies from urban creeks to coastal waters. Environ. Pollut., 246: 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.11.081

Lusher, A.L., Bråte, I.L.N., Munno, K., Hurley, R.R. and Welden, N.A., 2020. Is it or isn’t it: The importance of visual classification in microplastic characterization? Appl. Spectrosc., 74: 1139–1153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003702820930733

Maddison, C., Sathish, C.I., Lakshmi, D., Wayne, O. and Palanisami, T., 2023. An advanced analytical approach to assess the long-term degradation of microplastics in the marine environment. NPJ Mater. Degrad., 7: 59. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41529-023-00377-y

Marchant, D.J., Iwan Jones, J., Zemelka, G., Eyice, O. and Kratina, P., 2022. Do microplastics mediate the effects of chemicals on aquatic organisms? Aquat. Toxicol., 242: 106037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2021.106037

Mason, V.G., Skov, M.W., Hiddink, J.G. and Walton, M., 2022. Microplastics alter multiple biological processes of marine benthic fauna. Sci. Total Environ., 845: 157362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157362

McHale, M.E. and Sheehan, K.L., 2024. Bioaccumulation, transfer, and impacts of microplastics in aquatic food chains. J. Environ. Expo. Assess, 3. https://doi.org/10.20517/jeea.2023.49

McIlwraith, H.K., Kim, J., Helm, P., Bhavsar, S.P., Metzger, J.S. and Rochman, C.M., 2021. Evidence of microplastic translocation in wild-caught fish and implications for microplastic accumulation dynamics in food webs. Environ. Sci. Technol., 55: 12372–12382. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c02922

Miller, M.E., Hamann, M. and Kroon, F.J., 2020. Bioaccumulation and biomagnification of microplastics in marine organisms: A review and meta-analysis of current data. PLoS One, 15: e0240792. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240792

Mitrano, D.M., Diamond, M.L., Kim, J.H., Tam, K.C., Yang, M. and Wang, Z., 2023. Balancing new approaches and harmonized techniques in nano- and microplastics research. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng., 11: 8702–8705. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03221

Munhoz, D.R., Harkes, P., Beriot, N., Larreta, J. and Basurko, O.C., 2022. Microplastics: A review of policies and responses. Microplastics, 2: 1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/MPs2010001

Nawaz, F., Islam, Z.U., Ghori, S.A., Bahadur, A., Ullah, H., Ahmad, M. and Khan, G.U., 2025. Microplastic and nanoplastic pollution: Assessing translocation, impact, and mitigation strategies in marine ecosystems. Water Environ. Res., 97: e70032. https://doi.org/10.1002/wer.70032

O’Connor, J.D., Lally, H.T., Koelmans, A.A., Mahon, A.M., O’Connor, I., Nash, R., O’Sullivan, J.J., Bruen, M., Heerey, L. and Murphy, S., 2022. Modelling the transfer and accumulation of microplastics in a riverine freshwater food web. Environ. Adv., 8: 100192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2022.100192

Omoyajowo, K., Raimi, M., Waleola, T., Odipe, O. and Ogunyebi, A., 2022. Public awareness, knowledge, attitude and perception on microplastics pollution around Lagos lagoon. Ecol. Saf. Balanc. Use Resour., 2: 35–46. https://doi.org/10.31471/2415-3184-2021-2(24)-35-46

Osman, A.I., Hosny, M., Eltaweil, A.S., Omar, S., Elgarahy, A.M., Farghali, M., Yap, P.-S., Wu, Y.-S., Nagandran, S., Batumalaie, K., Gopinath, S.C.B., John, O.D., Sekar, M., Saikia, T., Karunanithi, P., Hatta, M.H.M. and Akinyede, K.A., 2023. Microplastic sources, formation, toxicity and remediation: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett., 21: 2129–2169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-023-01593-3

Pasquier, G., Doyen, P., Dehaut, A., Veillet, G., Duflos, G. and Amara, R., 2023. Vertical distribution of microplastics in a river water column using an innovative sampling method. Environ. Monit. Assess., 195: 1302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-11915-1

Patra, I., Huy, D.T.N., Alsaikhan, F., Opulencia, M.J.C., Van Tuan, P., Nurmatova, K.C., Majdi, A., Shoukat, S., Yasin, G., Margiana, R., Walker, T.R. and Karbalaei, S., 2022. Toxic effects on enzymatic activity, gene expression and histopathological biomarkers in organisms exposed to microplastics and nanoplastics: A review. Environ. Sci. Eur., 34: 80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-022-00652-w

Pirsaheb, M., Hossini, H. and Makhdoumi, P., 2020. Review of microplastic occurrence and toxicological effects in marine environment: Experimental evidence of inflammation. Process Saf. Environ. Prot., 142: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.05.050

Prata, J.C., Silva, A.L.P., Da Costa, J.P., Mouneyrac, C., Walker, T.R., Duarte, A.C. and Rocha-Santos, T., 2019. Solutions and integrated strategies for the control and mitigation of plastic and microplastic pollution. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Hlth., 16: 2411. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16132411

Prata, J.C., Silva, C.J.M., Serpa, D., Soares, A.M.V.M., Gravato, C. and Patrício Silva, A.L., 2023. Mechanisms influencing the impact of microplastics on freshwater benthic invertebrates: Uptake dynamics and adverse effects on Chironomus riparius. Sci. Total Environ., 859: 160426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160426

Prinz, N. and Korez, Š, 2020. Understanding how microplastics affect marine biota on the cellular level is important for assessing ecosystem function: A review. In: YOUMARES 9 - The Oceans: Our research, our future (eds. S. Jungblut, V. Liebich and M. Bode-Dalby). pp. 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20389-4_6

Prokić, M.D., Radovanović, T.B., Gavrić, J.P. and Faggio, C., 2019. Ecotoxicological effects of microplastics: Examination of biomarkers, current state and future perspectives. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem., 111: 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.12.001

Rahman, M.M., Kim, E.-S. and Sung, H.-C., 2024. Microplastics as an emerging threat to amphibians: Current status and future perspectives. Heliyon, 10: e28220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28220

Rakib, Md.R.J., Sarker, A., Ram, K., Uddin, Md.G., Walker, T.R., Chowdhury, T., Uddin, J., Khandaker, M.U., Rahman, M.M. and Idris, A.M., 2023. microplastic toxicity in aquatic organisms and aquatic ecosystems: A review. Water Air Soil Pollut., 234: 52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-023-06062-9

Razeghi, N., Hamidian, A.H., Wu, C., Zhang, Y. and Yang, M., 2021. Microplastic sampling techniques in freshwaters and sediments: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett., 19: 4225–4252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-021-01227-6

Reza, T., Mohamad, R.Z.H., Sheikh, A.S.R., Abu-Hasan, H., Ismail, N. and Izzati, O.A.R., 2023. Microplastic removal in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) by natural coagulation: A literature review. Toxics, 12: 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics12010012

Ricciardi, M., Pironti, C., Motta, O., Miele, Y., Proto, A. and Montano, L., 2021. Microplastics in the aquatic environment: Occurrence, persistence, analysis, and human exposure. Water, 13: 973. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13070973

Rochman, C.M., 2018. Microplastics research from sink to source. Science, 360: 28–29. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7734

Rodrigues, J.P., Duarte, A.C., Santos-Echeandía, J. and Rocha-Santos, T., 2019. Significance of interactions between microplastics and POPs in the marine environment: A critical overview. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem., 111: 252–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2018.11.038

Rodríguez-Seijo, A. and Pereira, R., 2017. Morphological and physical characterization of microplastics. In: Comprehensive analytical chemistry. Elsevier, pp. 49–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.coac.2016.10.007

Sacco, V.A., Zuanazzi, N.R., Selinger, A., Alliprandini Da Costa, J.H., Spanhol Lemunie, É., Comelli, C.L., Abilhoa, V., Sousa, F.C.D., Fávaro, L.F., Rios Mendoza, L.M., De Castilhos Ghisi, N. and Delariva, R.L., 2024. What are the global patterns of microplastic ingestion by fish? A scientometric review. Environ. Pollut., 350: 123972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2024.123972

Samer, M., Hijazi, O., Mohamed, B.A., Abdelsalam, E.M., Amer, M.A., Yacoub, I.H., Attia, Y.A. and Bernhardt, H., 2022. Environmental impact assessment of bioplastics production from agricultural crop residues. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy, 24: 815–827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-021-02145-5

Santonicola, S., Volgare, M., Cocca, M., Dorigato, G., Giaccone, V. and Colavita, G., 2023. Impact of fibrous microplastic pollution on commercial seafood and consumer health: A review. Animals, 13: 1736. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111736

Savoca, M.S., McInturf, A.G. and Hazen, E.L., 2021. Plastic ingestion by marine fish is widespread and increasing. Glob. Change Biol., 27: 2188–2199. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15533

Scherer, C., Brennholt, N., Reifferscheid, G. and Wagner, M., 2017. Feeding type and development drive the ingestion of microplastics by freshwater invertebrates. Sci. Rep., 7: 17006. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17191-7

Sharma, P., Sharma, P. and Abhishek, K., 2024. Sampling, separation, and characterization methodology for quantification of microplastic from the environment. J. Hazard. Mater. Adv., 14: 100416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hazadv.2024.100416

Sharma, S. and Chatterjee, S., 2017. Microplastic pollution, a threat to marine ecosystem and human health: A short review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 24: 21530–21547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9910-8

Shim, W.J., Hong, S.H. and Eo, S., 2018. Marine microplastics: Abundance, distribution, and composition. In: microplastic contamination in aquatic environments. Elsevier, pp. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813747-5.00001-1

Smith, M., Love, D.C., Rochman, C.M. and Neff, R.A., 2018. Microplastics in seafood and the implications for human health. Curr. Environ. Hlth. Rep., 5: 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40572-018-0206-z

Song, J., Wang, C. and Li, G., 2024. Defining primary and secondary microplastics: A connotation analysis. ACS ES&T Water, 4: 2330–2332. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsestwater.4c00316

Stanton, T., Johnson, M., Nathanail, P., MacNaughtan, W. and Gomes, R.L., 2020. Freshwater microplastic concentrations vary through both space and time. Environ. Pollut., 263: 114481. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114481

Strafella, P., López Correa, M., Pyko, I., Teichert, S. and Gomiero, A., 2021. Distribution of microplastics in the marine environment. In: Handbook of microplastics in the environment (eds. T. Rocha-Santos, M. Costa and C. Mouneyrac). Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10618-8_43-1

Subaramaniyam, U., Allimuthu, R.S., Vappu, S., Ramalingam, D., Balan, R., Paital, B., Panda, N., Rath, P.K., Ramalingam, N. and Sahoo, D.K., 2023. Effects of microplastics, pesticides and nano-materials on fish health, oxidative stress and antioxidant defense mechanism. Front. Physiol., 14: 1217666. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1217666

Sussarellu, R., Suquet, M., Thomas, Y., Lambert, C., Fabioux, C., Pernet, M.E.J., Le Goïc, N., Quillien, V., Mingant, C., Epelboin, Y., Corporeau, C., Guyomarch, J., Robbens, J., Paul-Pont, I., Soudant, P. and Huvet, A., 2016. Oyster reproduction is affected by exposure to polystyrene microplastics. Proc. natl. Acad. Sci., 113: 2430–2435. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1519019113

Szkudlarek, M., Najbar, B. and Jankowiak, Ł., 2024. Similarity of microplastic characteristics between amphibian larvae and their aquatic environment. Animals, 14: 717. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14050717

Talvitie, J., Mikola, A., Koistinen, A. and Setälä, O., 2017. Solutions to microplastic pollution. Removal of microplastics from wastewater effluent with advanced wastewater treatment technologies. Water Res., 123: 401–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.005

Tang, L., Feng, J.C., Li, C., Liang, J., Zhang, S. and Yang, Z., 2023. Global occurrence, drivers, and environmental risks of microplastics in marine environments. J. environ. Manage., 329: 116961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116961

Tang, Y., Mankaa, R.N. and Traverso, M., 2022. An effect factor approach for quantifying the impact of plastic additives on aquatic biota in life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., 27: 564–572. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-022-02046-9

Uguen, M., Gaudron, S.M., Cozzolino, L. and Seuront, L., 2025. Influence of the reproductive cycle and sex on microplastic toxicity in mussels. In: ASF publications (eds. J.Y. Reynaud and E.A.D. Châtelet). Association des Sédimentologistes Français, pp. 125–132. https://doi.org/10.70665/UGKJ1284

Unuofin, J.O. and Igwaran, A., 2023. Microplastics in seafood: Implications for food security, safety, and human health. J. Sea Res., 194: 102410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seares.2023.102410

Usman, S., Abdull Razis, A.F., Shaari, K., Azmai, M.N.A., Saad, M.Z., Mat Isa, N. and Nazarudin, M.F., 2022. The burden of microplastics pollution and contending policies and regulations. Int. J. Environ. Res. Publ. Hlth., 19: 6773. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116773

Uy, C.A. and Johnson, D.W., 2022. Effects of microplastics on the feeding rates of larvae of a coastal fish: direct consumption, trophic transfer, and effects on growth and survival. Mar. Biol., 169: 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-021-04010-x

Van Raamsdonk, L.W.D., Van Der Zande, M., Koelmans, A.A., Hoogenboom, R.L.A.P., Peters, R.J.B., Groot, M.J., Peijnenburg, A.A.C.M. and Weesepoel, Y.J.A., 2020. Current insights into monitoring, bioaccumulation, and potential health effects of microplastics present in the food chain. Foods, 9: 72. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9010072

Varg, J.E., Outomuro, D., Kunce, W., Kuehrer, L., Svanbäck, R. and Johansson, F., 2022. Microplastic exposure across trophic levels: effects on the host–microbiota of freshwater organisms. Environ. Microbiome, 17: 36. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-022-00429-x

Vital, S.A., Cardoso, C., Avio, C., Pittura, L., Regoli, F. and Bebianno, M.J., 2021. Do microplastic contaminated seafood consumption pose a potential risk to human health? Mar. Pollut. Bull., 171: 112769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112769

Vo, H.C. and Pham, M.H., 2021. Ecotoxicological effects of microplastics on aquatic organisms: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 28: 44716–44725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-14982-4

Wang, L.C., Lin, J.C.T., Dong, C.D., Chen, C.W. and Liu, T.K., 2021. The sorption of persistent organic pollutants in microplastics from the coastal environment. J. Hazard. Mater., 420: 126658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.126658

Wang, Q., Li, Y., Liu, Y., Zhou, Z., Hu, W., Lin, L. and Wu, Z., 2022. Effects of microplastics accumulation on performance of membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment. Chemosphere, 287: 131968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131968

Wang, Y., Zhou, B., Chen, H., Yuan, R. and Wang, F., 2022. Distribution, biological effects and biofilms of microplastics in freshwater systems. A review. Chemosphere, 299: 134370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134370

Wootton, N., Reis-Santos, P. and Gillanders, B.M., 2021. Microplastic in fish. A global synthesis. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish., 31: 753–771. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-021-09684-6

Wright, S.L., Thompson, R.C. and Galloway, T.S., 2013. The physical impacts of microplastics on marine organisms: A review. Environ. Pollut., 178: 483–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.02.031

Xia, F., Yao, Q., Zhang, J. and Wang, D., 2021. Effects of seasonal variation and resuspension on microplastics in river sediments. Environ. Pollut., 286: 117403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117403

Xie, M., Lin, L., Xu, P., Zhou, W., Zhao, C., Ding, D. and Suo, A., 2021. Effects of microplastic fibers on Lates calcarifer juveniles: Accumulation, oxidative stress, intestine microbiome dysbiosis and histological damage. Ecol. Indic., 133: 108370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.108370.

Xing, Y., Zhu, X., Duan, Y., Huang, J., Nan, Y. and Zhang, J., 2023. Toxic effects of nitrite and microplastics stress on histology, oxidative stress, and metabolic function in the gills of Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei. Mar. Pollut. Bull., 187: 114531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114531

Xiong, X., Xie, S., Feng, K. and Wang, Q., 2022. Occurrence of microplastics in a pond-river-lake connection water system: How does the aquaculture process affect microplastics in natural water bodies. J. Clean. Prod., 352: 131632. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131632

Yang, J., Monnot, M., Eljaddi, T., Ercolei, L., Simonian, L. and Moulin, P., 2021. Ultrafiltration as tertiary treatment for municipal wastewater reuse. Sep. Purif. Technol., 272: 118921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2021.118921

Yin, J., Ju, Y., Qian, H., Wang, J., Miao, X., Zhu, Y., Zhou, L. and Ye, L., 2022. Nanoplastics and microplastics may be damaging our livers. Toxics, 10: 586. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10100586

Yu, Y., Kumar, M., Bolan, S., Padhye, L.P., Bolan, N., Li, S., Wang, L., Hou, D. and Li, Y., 2024. Various additive release from microplastics and their toxicity in aquatic environments. Environ. Pollut., 343: 123219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123219

Zhang, H., Gao, Y., Zheng, Y., Zheng, J., He, J., Shi, J., Zhang, K., Song, Y., Zhang, J., Shi, X., Zhang, R., Ding, Y., Jing, Y., Xu, K. and Wang, J., 2024. Potential toxicity of microplastics on vertebrate liver: A systematic review and meta–analysis. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 286: 117166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2024.117166

Zhu, G., Yue, K., Ni, X., Yuan, C. and Wu, F., 2023. The types of microplastics, heavy metals, and adsorption environments control the microplastic adsorption capacity of heavy metals. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 30: 80807–80816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28131-6