Search

Abstract The ongoing international negotiations on a global plastics treaty will have pivotal implications for future efforts to transform the plastic economy. This is essential since the current use of plastic in the economy impacts the environment beyond the planetary carrying capacity. To ensure that the forthcoming Treaty can provide the foundation for this transition, the best available science must be made available in the negotiations, but with no formal scientific mechanism to inform the negotiations process, this is not ensured. The Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastic Treaty serves as an example of how the global scientific community has self-organized and come together to address this task, working with five different categories of science-policy communication. The Scientists’ Coalition’s work is made transparent here with the hope that it can inspire organization of scientific input into other future policy areas.

Plastic production and plastic waste have increased to such an extent that it has become globally ubiquitous. Several studies already have investigated the meso- and microplastic pollution along the German Baltic and North Sea coasts, but were all limited to a few locations. To obtain representative bulk samples from sandy beaches along the entire German coast, we initiated a citizen-science project entitled “Microplastic Detectives.” Here, we describe in detail 1) how we recruited, instructed, and engaged citizen scientists, 2) why we chose bulk sampling over reduced-volume sampling, and 3) the laboratory methods we used. The citizen scientists collected 1,139 samples from 71 locations along the German coast, totalling 2.2 tons of sand. After drying, sieving with a 1 mm sieve, and visual inspection of the retained fraction under a binocular microscope, all putative plastic particles ≥1 mm were analysed by attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy. 177 out of 1,139 samples (15.5%) contained a total of 260 plastic particles, with a large right-skewed variation among locations. Most of the particles were fragments, foils, foams, fibres, and pellets (96.2% in total), and 89.6% of the particles were made of polyethylene, polypropylene, polyester, and polystyrene. The unweighted mean pollution densities were 4.12 particles m−2, 0.17 particles kg−1 and 0.27 particles L−1, and the weighted mean pollution densities were 3.77 particles m−2, 0.11 particles kg−1 and 0.18 particles L−1. These densities are lower than in other similar studies, but previous studies had important methodological differences. We discuss how these differences could have influenced the results and make recommendations for improving future studies. Two important recommendations are 1) to use random or stratified random sampling and 2) to run transects perpendicular (rather than parallel) to the waterline. Our study highlights that large-scale, scientifically rigorous monitoring of meso- and microplastic pollution is possible at the national level, and possibly even at much larger spatial and temporal scales. With the help of local authorities, such a monitoring program could be established.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Plastic production and plastic waste have increased to such an extent that it has become globally ubiquitous. Recent research has highlighted that it has also invaded remote Polar Regions including the Arctic, where it is expected to accumulate over time due to transport from distant sources, rising local anthropogenic activities and increasing fragmentation of existing ocean plastics to microplastics (plastic items

Objective: Video-polysomnography (VPSG) and prolonged video-EEG-monitoring (pVEEG-M) are neurophysiological investigation modalities. Depending on indication either is performed, but occasionally patients undergo both (during the same or separate stays). We sought to assess the reasons and potential benefits of dual diagnostic assessments with both modalities. Methods: A retrospective chart-review was performed to identify patients who underwent both VPSG and pVEEG-M during the 10 year period between 2007 and 2017. One-hundred-nine patients were identified who had undergone both studies. Patients were grouped according to indication and outcome. Results: One-hundred-nine patients had both, a VPSG and pVEEG-M, in 62 (56.9%) the studies were performed because of separate diagnoses independent from each other. In 47 patients (43.1%) investigation with both modalities was needed to clarify the suspected diagnosis or to refute differential diagnoses. Out of these 47, 11 (10.1% of the whole group) arrived a new final diagnosis whereas in 36 (33%) the primary diagnosis was corroborated with the second modality. Conclusions: In the majority of cases VPSG plus pVEEG-M were indicated to diagnose or monitor different comorbid diseases (e.g. sleep-related breathing disorder and epilepsy). In the other cases, performing both modalities was useful to achieve a higher diagnostic accuracy or to refute differential diagnoses. Significance: VPSG and pVEEG-M are neurophysiological investigations which complement each other, especially in case of two different comorbid diseases in a single patient, to rule out differential diagnosis or when a higher diagnostic certainty is seeked.

Plastic debris is ubiquitous in all ecosystems and has even reached locations that humans will hardly reach such as the deep ocean floor and the atmosphere. Research has highlighted that plastic debris is now pervasive even in remote Arctic regions. While modeling projections indicated local sources and long-distance transport as causes, empirical data about its origin and sources are scarce. Data collected by citizen scientists can increase the scale of observations, especially in such remote regions. Here, we report abundance and composition data of marine debris collected by citizen scientists on 14 remote Arctic beaches on the Spitsbergen archipelago. In addition, citizen scientists collected three large, industrial sized canvas bags (hereafter: big packs), filled with beached debris, of which composition, sources and origin were determined. A total debris mass of 1,620 kg was collected on about 38,000 m2 (total mean = 41.83 g m-2, SEM = ± 31.62). In terms of abundance, 23,000 pieces of debris were collected on 25,500 m2 (total mean = 0.37 items of debris m-2, SEM = ± 0.17). Although most items were plastic in both abundance and mass, fisheries waste, such as nets, rope, and large containers, dominated in mass (87%), and general plastics, such as packaging and plastic articles, dominated in abundance (80%). Fisheries-related debris points to local sea-based sources from vessels operating in the Arctic and nearby. General plastics could point to both land- and ship based sources, as household items are also used on ships and debris can be transported to the north via the oceans current. Overall, 1% of the items (206 out of 14,707 pieces) collected in two big packs (2017 and 2021), bore imprints or labels allowing an analysis of their origin. If the categories ‘global’ and ‘English language’ were excluded, most of identifiable items originated from Arctic states (65%), especially from Russia (32%) and Norway (16%). But almost a third of the items (30%) was of European provenance, especially from Germany (8%). Five percent originated from more distant sources (e.g. USA, China, Korea, Brazil). Global measures such as an efficient and legally binding plastic treaty with improved upstream measures and waste management are urgently needed, to lower the amount of plastic entering our environments and in turn lifting the pressure on the Arctic region and its sensitive biota.

The North Atlantic biological pump has the most intense absorption of C globally, but how this will fare in light of climate changes (especially sea-ice melting) is poorly understood. Here the authors present a 24-month continuous time series of physical, chemical, and biological observations in the Fram Strait.

Floating marine debris is ubiquitous in marine environments but knowledge about quantities in remote regions is still limited. Here, we present the results of an extensive survey of floating marine debris by experts, trained scientists from fields other than pollution or non-professional citizen scientists. A total of 276 visual ship-based surveys were conducted between 2015 and 2020 in the Northeast (NE) Atlantic from waters off the Iberian Peninsula to the Central Arctic, however, with a focus on Arctic waters. Spatiotemporal variations among regional seas (Central Arctic, Barents Sea, Greenland Sea, Norwegian Sea, North Sea) and oceanic regions (Arctic waters and the temperate NE Atlantic) were explored. The overall median debris concentration was 11 items km-2, with considerable variability. The median concentration was highest in the North Sea with 19 items km-2. The Nordic seas, except the Central Arctic showed median concentrations ranging from 9 to 13 items km-2. Plastic accounted for 91% of all floating items. Miscellaneous fragments, films, ropes and nets, packaging materials, expanded polystyrene and straps were the most frequently observed plastic types. Although the median debris concentration in the Central Arctic was zero, this region was not entirely free of floating debris. The variations between regional seas and oceanic regions were statistically not significant indicating a continuous supply by a northward transportation of floating debris. The data show a slight annual decrease and clear seasonal differences in debris concentrations with higher levels observed during summer. A correlation between debris concentrations and environmental and spatial variables was found, explaining partly the variability in the observations. Pollution levels were 500 times lower than those recorded on the seafloor indicating the seafloor as a sink for marine debris. The Arctic was characterised by similar pollution levels as regions in temperate latitudes highlighting that Arctic ecosystems face threats from plastic pollution, which add to the effects of rapid climate change.

The rapid growth in microplastic pollution research is influencing funding priorities, environmental policy, and public perceptions of risks to water quality and environmental and human health. Ensuring that environmental microplastics research data are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR) is essential to inform policy and mitigation strategies. We present a bibliographic analysis of data sharing practices in the environmental microplastics research community, highlighting the state of openness of microplastics data. A stratified (by year) random subset of 785 of 6,608 microplastics articles indexed in Web of Science indicates that, since 2006, less than a third (28.5%) contained a data sharing statement. These statements further show that most often, the data were provided in the articles’ supplementary material (38.8%) and only 13.8% via a data repository. Of the 279 microplastics datasets found in online data repositories, 20.4% presented only metadata with access to the data requiring additional approval. Although increasing, the rate of microplastic data sharing still lags behind that of publication of peer-reviewed articles on environmental microplastics. About a quarter of the repository data originated from North America (12.8%) and Europe (13.4%). Marine and estuarine environments are the most frequently sampled systems (26.2%); sediments (18.8%) and water (15.3%) are the predominant media. Of the available datasets accessible, 15.4% and 18.2% do not have adequate metadata to determine the sampling location and media type, respectively. We discuss five recommendations to strengthen data sharing practices in the environmental microplastic research community.