Name(s) of the author(s): Julie C. Anderson, Bradley J. Park, Vince P.

Palace
Title of article: Microplastics in aquatic environments: Implications for Canadian Ecosystems
Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page number: Environmental Pollution, 218
(July 2016) 269-280

The issue discussed in the article includes the effects of the alarming increase in number
of microplastics in aquatic environments, specifically in Canada. This is done by showing the
growing concerns under the categories of: sources, environmental fate, behaviour, abundance
and toxicological effects. The current status of the aquatic environment in the Canadian setting
also needs to be further researched. Conclusions weren’t stated since there are other factors
that could affect the microplastics in aquatic environments.

In the title “Microplastics in aquatic environments: Implications for Canadian

ecosystems”, “Aquatic”, and “Canadian” indicates the scope and limitation of the article.
Therefore, by reading the title itself readers would be aware that the whole article would focus
on aquatic systems in Canada. The abstract was also specific though it lacked data since the
authors weren’t able to state the important key points under the four main points. For the
introduction it included the discussion of the more general topic, which is plastics. Then it was
narrowed down to the topic of microplastics, then the problem was also raised.The purpose of
the article was also stated with supporting statistics. It was also stated why their focus location
is aquatic environments in Canada.

However, the researchers observed that there was a lack of similarity between a source
stated in the article and the statement mentioned in the article. Imhof, Ivleva, Schmid, Niessner
and Laforsch stated that they found primarily low density polymers, namely polystyrene (45.6%),
polyethylene (43.1%) and polypropylene (9.8%) [1]. According to Imhof et. al, polyamide and
polyvinylchloride were also identified while polyvinylchloride was ranked among the five most
hazardous plastic polymers [1]. On the contrary, Anderson, Park & Palace said that common
plastic polymers include PP, PE, low-density polyethylene (LDPE), and polyacrylates [2]. There
may be a discrepancy here since it was mentioned in the article “low density polyethylene” but
PE (polyethylene) and PP (polypropylene) was also included under low density polymers, not
only polyethylene [2]. Also, It was not mentioned that these were the common plastic polymers,
it was only mentioned that these were only low density polymers.

Then, the discussions in the article were all relevant and all helped in giving a better
understanding on the topic. The authors gave needed statistics and a detailed discussion on
each of the four main points. Going through the article, a lot of information was discussed on the
abundance of microplastics in sediments in particularly on coastlines and around the world [2].
This may be true because sampling and gathering of microplastics is a lot more accessible
compared to the vastness of marine and freshwater ecosystems which includes the surface
water, the water column and the ocean floor. These findings does not mean that microplastic
presence in sediments should be neglected but great time and research should be allocated for
microplastics in aquatic environments too. This will also open the discussion on the behavior of
primary and secondary microplastics. Needless to say, Anderson, Park & Palace also included
information on abundance of microplastics in the aquatic systems [2]. Microplastics are reported
to be found near cities or in populated areas but other reports also show that microplastic are
also present in areas without much human use [2]. Overall, the information included in the
article was beneficial because it discussed a lot on microplastics. Another characteristic that the
article contains is objectivity since Anderson et. al, referred to previous knowledge on
microplastics as well as the information gathered along Canadian ecosystems. This produces a
more sounding and helpful background on the state of microplastics.

The authors of the article were also able to explain the procedure of how the article
came to be. Though this was not an experiment and more of a review on the current knowledge
on microplastics, specifically in Canadian ecosystems, they stated their methods. They included
that they made use of Stantec’s Research and Development Resource eLibrary and there they
inputted key words. Some examples of the words are microplastics(s), freshwater and Canada
[2]. Other searches were done using Google Scholar and the University of Manitoba libraries [2].
From this information it can be deduced that the methods are clear and detailed therefore the
reader has the capability to duplicate it. Though this article was produced abroad, the reader
may still access the resources since the authors made use of online libraries. On the other
hand, Anderson et, al. also briefly introduced the sampling and analysis of microplastics which
made use of different sizes of mesh and filters [2]. More information in the article is needed
about the methods for sampling and determining microplastics.

The two researchers had different experiences on learning about the issue. One of the
researchers, in particular Researcher Pabale, was already able to encounter microplastics when
she studied them during her thesis last Senior High. However, the thesis that she conducted
along with her fellow group mates were limited to two rivers that can be found in Calamba,
Laguna. In that study she and her group mates determined the average number of microplastics
in the respective rivers. From previous knowledge, she had information that microplastics are
very hard to quantify as the range of the size of microplastics entail different methods of
gathering [3]. Also, the fate and behavior of microplastics are very hard to determine due to their
size as well as several factors such as their introduction to the aquatic environments and their
dispersal [3]. Another effect of microplastics to the environment that Researcher Pabale has
encountered before is that, microplastics act like vectors which enables it to carry environmental
contaminants and pathogens [4]. With this said, Researcher Pabale easily understood that
microplastics are very much widespread in the aquatic environments and they could cause
harmful effects to marine and freshwater life once they are ingested. The article thus added to
the previous knowledge she had before. Most of the scholarship included was new for
Researcher Pabale since the sampling techniques and experimentation used were new except
for the scholarship entitled “The Complex Interaction between Marine Debris and Toxic
Chemicals in the Ocean” [5].

On the other hand, Researcher Escalante had no knowledge of the said topic. Naming of
compounds, strong bonds, molecular geometry, and the Lewis structure are the topics from
BASCHEM that helped her understand the article. For molecular geometry, it helped her
understand the illustrations and the structure of the components included in the article. For
strong bonds and lewis structure, this helped her understand the elements included and the
bonds included whether it is a single, double, weak, or strong bond between the elements.
Understanding this topic not only required knowledge on chemistry but it also made use
previous knowledge on biology and environmental science. But to expound more on chemistry,
one text in the article stated that plastic contains polymers which enables them to be buoyant,
neutral or sink [2]. This attributes are also dependent on the composition, density and outer
structure of the plastic [2]. All of the ideas and discussions were new scholarship for Researcher
Escalante since she had no background with microplastics.

There was no argument stated in the article however, the article mentioned that there is
a need for further research in the following categories: sources to freshwater and marine
environments; uptake and effects of microplastics; fate, behaviour, and effects of microplastics
in freshwater environments and microplastics in the arctic toxicology of associated
contaminants.

Through this article the researchers gained more knowledge on microplastics in aquatic
environments, specifically in Canada. Also, the information discussed in the article further
solidified the knowledge of Researcher Pabale on microplastics and gave her new knowledge
on microplastics in the Canadian setting. While for Researcher Escalante, the whole idea of
microplastics was new to her since this was not talked about that much. Only plastics that are
seen with the naked eye are the only things that are greatly talked about, telling about its
potential damage to the environment, and the solutions to decrease this. But microplastics and
its potential damage are not talked about that much.

Overall, the article was very informative on the current state of microplastics in the
Canadian ecosystems. This made the researchers realize the diversity of microplastics, in the
sense that microplastics can also accumulate on the ocean floor as well as in surface water.
Also, in terms of the effects of microplastics when ingested by organisms, a new issue is given
attention which goes by nanoplastics. Nanoplastics are much more smaller compared to
microplastics therefore further research is needed to understand its behavior and effects in the
environment. The article also opens the discussion and intrigue on whether this issue is also
encountered in the Philippines and if there are already studies that discuss and touch on such
issue. Referring back to the article, numerous gaps in knowledge were presented. Given such,
more studies can be conducted which can expound on the knowledge the scientific community
has today and efforts to resolve such issue can be discussed on.

References
1. Imhof HK, Ivleva NP, Schmid J, Niessner R, Laforsch C. Contamination of beach sediments
of a subalpine lake with microplastic particles. Current Biology. [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2018 Dec
6];23(19). doi:10.1016/j.cub.2013.09.001

2. Anderson JC, Park BJ, Palace VP. Microplastics in aquatic environments: Implications for
Canadian ecosystems. Environmental Pollution. [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2018 Dec 5]218:269–280

3. Lusher A. Microplastics in the Marine Environment: Distribution, Interactions and Effects.

Marine Anthropogenic Litter [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2018 Dec 5]:245–307

4. Wagner M, Scherer C, Alvarez-Muñoz D, Brennholt N, Bourrain X, Buchinger S, Fries E,

Grosbois C, Klasmeier J, Marti T, et al. Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: what we know
and what we need to know. Environmental Sciences Europe [Internet]. 2014 [cited 2018 Dec
5];26(1)

5. Engler RE. The Complex Interaction between Marine Debris and Toxic Chemicals in the
Ocean. Environmental Science & Technology. [Internet]. 2012 [cited 2018 Dec 6];46(22):12302–
12315. doi:10.1021/es3027105