Search

Marine litter in the Arctic Basin is influenced by transport from Atlantic and Pacific waters. This highlights the need for harmonization of guidelines across regions. Monitoring can be used to assess temporal and spatial trends but can also be used to assess if environmental objectives are reached, for example, to evaluate the effectiveness of mitigation measures. Seafloor monitoring by trawling needs substantial resources and specific sampling strategies to be sufficiently robust to demonstrate changes over time. Observation and visual evaluation in shallow and deep waters using towed camera systems, remotely operated underwater vehicles, and submersibles are well suited for the Arctic environment. The use of imagery still needs to be adjusted through automation and image analyses, including deep learning approaches and data management, but will also serve to monitor areas with a rocky seafloor. We recommend developing a monitoring plan for seafloor litter by selecting representative sites for visual inspection that cover different depths and substrata in marine landscapes, and recording the litter collected or observed across all forms of seafloor sampling or imaging. We need better coverage and knowledge of status of seafloor litter for the whole Arctic and recommend initiatives to be taken for regions where such knowledge is lacking.

In this review, we investigated published data on the occurrence of microplastic in Arctic fish, and the suitability of the data and species for risk assessment and monitoring. As of 11 November 2021, we found nine studies in the peer-reviewed literature, one thesis and one report, confirming the occurrence of microplastic in fishes from multiple Arctic regions. The studies varied in methodology, detection, and quantification limitations, reported categories of size, shape, and chemical identity. All these factors influence the numbers of microplastic reported, thus limiting comparability and hindering integrative analysis. The physiological impacts of the reported microplastic contamination cannot be determined, as all studies targeted stomach/intestine contents and did not use methods with limits of detection low enough to determine particle translocation from the intestine to other organs, tissues, or body fluids within the fish. Furthermore, there is a fundamental lack of understanding the transfer and the effects of plastic additives to Arctic fishes. In addition to discussing methodological challenges and knowledge gaps, we consider ecosystem needs, commercial interests, Indigenous people’s subsistence, food safety and food sovereignty concerns, and developed a framework to harmonize and facilitate pan-Arctic microplastic monitoring.

The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme has published a plan and guidelines for the monitoring of litter and microplastics (MP) in the Arctic. Here, we look beyond suggestions for immediate monitoring and discuss challenges, opportunities, and future strategies in the long-term monitoring of litter and MP in the Arctic. Challenges are related to environmental conditions, lack of harmonization and standardization of measurements, and long-term coordinated and harmonized data storage. Furthermore, major knowledge gaps exist with regard to benchmark levels, transport, sources, and effects, which should be considered in future monitoring strategies. Their development could build on the existing infrastructure and networks established in other monitoring initiatives in the Arctic, while taking into account specific requirements for litter and MP monitoring. Knowledge existing in northern and Indigenous communities, as well as their research priorities, should be integrated into collaborative approaches. The monitoring plan for litter and MP in the Arctic allows for an ecosystem-based approach, which will improve the understanding of linkages between environmental media of the Arctic, as well as links to the global problem of litter and MP pollution.

Few studies have been published on the occurrence and distribution of microplastics (MPs) in invertebrates from the Arctic. We still need to develop harmonized methods to enable good comparison between studies taking into account recovery rates, size ranges, shapes, and polymer types. Here, we review studies on MPs in invertebrates from the Arctic and present suggestions on sampling protocols and potential indicator species. Since information on MPs in Arctic invertebrates is vastly lacking, we recommend to at least include suspension feeding bivalves like mussels in monitoring programmes to function as indicator species in the Arctic. Mussels have also been suggested as indicator species for MP monitoring in coastal regions further south. Although we recognize the challenge with particle selection and egestion in mussels as well as the relatively low concentrations of MPs in Arctic waters, uptake levels seem to represent recent exposures. More research is needed to understand these selection processes and how they affect the bioaccumulation processes. Future research should include studies on whether different functional groups of invertebrates have different exposures to MPs, e.g., if there are differences between sessile versus motile species or different feeding strategies. More knowledge on monitoring strategies for pelagic and benthic species is needed.

The pollution of the environment with plastics is of growing concern worldwide, including the Arctic region. While larger plastic pieces are a visible pollution issue, smaller microplastics are not visible with the naked eye. These particles are available for interaction by Arctic biota and have become a concern for animal and human health. The determination of microplastic properties includes several methodological steps, i.e., sampling, extraction, quantification, and chemical identification. This review discusses suitable analytical tools for the identification, quantification, and characterization of microplastics in the context of monitoring in the Arctic. It further addresses quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC), which is particularly important for the determination of microplastic in the Arctic, as both contamination and analyte losses can occur. It presents specific QA/QC measures for sampling procedures and for the handling of samples in the laboratory, either on land or on ship, and considering the small size of microplastics as well as the high risk of contamination. The review depicts which data should be mandatory to report, thereby supporting a framework for harmonized data reporting.

Litter and microplastic assessments are being carried out worldwide. Arctic ecosystems are no exception and plastic pollution is high on the Arctic Council's agenda. Water and sediment have been identified as two of the priority compartments for monitoring plastics under the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP). Recommendations for monitoring both compartments are presented in this publication. Alone, such samples can provide information on presence, fate, and potential impacts to ecosystems. Together, the quantification of microplastics in sediment and water from the same region produce a three-dimensional picture of plastics, not only a snapshot of floating or buoyant plastics in the surface water or water column but also a picture of the plastics reaching the shoreline or benthic sediments, in lakes, rivers, and the ocean. Assessment methodologies must be adapted to the ecosystems of interest to generate reliable data. In its current form, published data on plastic pollution in the Arctic is sporadic and collected using a wide spectrum of methods which limits the extent to which data can be compared. A harmonised and coordinated effort is needed to gather data on plastic pollution for the Pan-Arctic. Such information will aid in identifying priority regions and focusing mitigation efforts.

Lack of knowledge on levels and trends of litter and microplastics in the Arctic, is limiting our understanding of the sources, transport, fate, and effects is hampering global activities aimed at reducing litter and microplastics in the environment. To obtain a holistic view to managing litter and microplastics in the Arctic, we considered the current state of knowledge and methods for litter and microplastics monitoring in eleven environmental compartments representing the marine, freshwater, terrestrial, and atmospheric environments. Based on available harmonized methods, and existing data in the Arctic, we recommend prioritization of implementing litter and microplastics monitoring in the Arctic in four Priority 1 compartments—water, aquatic sediments, shorelines, and seabirds. One or several of these compartments should be monitored to provide benchmark data for litter and microplastics in the Arctic and, in the future, data on spatial and temporal trends. For the other environmental compartments, methods should be refined for future sources and surveillance monitoring, as well as monitoring of effects. Implementation of the monitoring activities should include community-based local components where possible. While organized as national and regional programs, monitoring of litter and microplastics in the Arctic should be coordinated, with a view to future pan-Arctic assessments.

The atmosphere and cryosphere have recently garnered considerable attention due to their role in transporting microplastics to and within the Arctic, and between freshwater, marine, and terrestrial environments. While investigating either in isolation provides valuable insight on the fate of microplastics in the Arctic, monitoring both provides a more holistic view. Nonetheless, despite the recent scientific interest, fundamental knowledge on microplastic abundance and consistent monitoring efforts are lacking for these compartments. Here, we build upon the work of the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme's Monitoring Guidelines for Litter and Microplastic to provide a roadmap for multicompartment monitoring of the atmosphere and cryosphere to support our understanding of the sources, pathways, and sinks of plastic pollution across the Arctic. Overall, we recommend the use of existing standard techniques for ice and atmospheric sampling and to build upon existing monitoring efforts in the Arctic to obtain a more comprehensive pan-Arctic view of microplastic pollution in these two compartments.