Comparison of μ-ATR-FTIR spectroscopy and py-GCMS as identification tools for microplastic particles and fibers isolated from river sediments

被引:0
作者
Andrea Käppler
Marten Fischer
Barbara M. Scholz-Böttcher
Sonja Oberbeckmann
Matthias Labrenz
Dieter Fischer
Klaus-Jochen Eichhorn
Brigitte Voit
机构
[1] Leibniz-Institut für Polymerforschung Dresden e.V. (IPF),Organische Chemie der Polymere
[2] Technische Universität Dresden,Institute for Chemistry and Biology of the Marine Environment (ICBM)
[3] Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg,undefined
[4] Leibniz Institute for Baltic Sea Research Warnemünde (IOW),undefined
来源
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry | 2018年 / 410卷
关键词
Microplastics; py-GCMS; ATR FTIR; Environmental samples; Comparison; Validation;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In recent years, many studies on the analysis of microplastics (MP) in environmental samples have been published. These studies are hardly comparable due to different sampling, sample preparation, as well as identification and quantification techniques. Here, MP identification is one of the crucial pitfalls. Visual identification approaches using morphological criteria alone often lead to significant errors, being especially true for MP fibers. Reliable, chemical structure-based identification methods are indispensable. In this context, the frequently used vibrational spectroscopic techniques but also thermoanalytical methods are established. However, no critical comparison of these fundamentally different approaches has ever been carried out with regard to analyzing MP in environmental samples. In this blind study, we investigated 27 single MP particles and fibers of unknown material isolated from river sediments. Successively micro-attenuated total reflection Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (μ-ATR-FTIR) and pyrolysis gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (py-GCMS) in combination with thermochemolysis were applied. Both methods differentiated between plastic vs. non-plastic in the same way in 26 cases, with 19 particles and fibers (22 after re-evaluation) identified as the same polymer type. To illustrate the different approaches and emphasize the complementarity of their information content, we exemplarily provide a detailed comparison of four particles and three fibers and a critical discussion of advantages and disadvantages of both methods.
引用
收藏
页码:5313 / 5327
页数:14
相关论文
共 242 条
[1]  
Andrady AL(2011)Microplastics in the marine environment Mar Pollut Bull 62 1596-1605
[2]  
Hidalgo-Ruz V(2012)Microplastics in the marine environment: a review of the methods used for identification and quantification Environ Sci Technol 46 3060-3075
[3]  
Gutow L(2017)Microplastic in aquatic ecosystems Angew Chem Int Ed 56 1720-1739
[4]  
Thompson RC(2013)Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes Mar Pollut Bull 77 177-182
[5]  
Thiel M(2015)A comparison of microscopic and spectroscopic identification methods for analysis of microplastics in environmental samples Mar Pollut Bull 93 202-209
[6]  
Ivleva NP(2015)A critical assessment of visual identification of marine microplastic using Raman spectroscopy for analysis improvement Mar Pollut Bull 100 82-91
[7]  
Wiesheu AC(2015)When microplastic is not plastic: the ingestion of artificial cellulose fibers by macrofauna living in Seagrass Macrophytodetritus Environ Sci Technol 49 11158-11166
[8]  
Niessner R(2015)A critical overview of the analytical approaches to the occurrence, the fate and the behavior of microplastics in the environment Trends Anal Chem 65 47-53
[9]  
Eriksen M(2015)Beyond the ocean: contamination of freshwater ecosystems with (micro-)plastic particles Environ Chem 12 539-8391
[10]  
Mason S(2016)Analysis of environmental microplastics by vibrational microspectroscopy: FTIR, Raman or both? Anal Bioanal Chem 408 8377-7