Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Environmental Pollution
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envpol

Abundance and characteristics of microplastics in an urban wastewater

treatment plant in Turkey☆
Gökhan Ekrem Üstün *, Kübra Bozdaş, Tuğba Can
Bursa Uludağ University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, Bursa, 16059, Turkey

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are considered one of the important sources of aquatic/terrestrial
Microplastics microplastic (MP) pollution. Therefore, the abundance and properties of MPs in the wastewater and sludge of an
Wastewater treatment plant urban WWTP in Bursa Turkey were investigated. The amount, properties, and removal of MPs were evaluated.
Sludge
The results showed that the average abundance of MPs was 135.3 ± 28.0 n/L in the influent and 8.5 ± 4.7 n/L in
Removal
Abundance
the effluent, with a 93.7% removal rate, MP was removed and transferred to the sludge. The daily MP amount
Characteristics released in the aquatic environment is calculated as 525 million MPs, and the annual amount is 1.9 × 1011 MPs.
The abundance of MPs in the sludge thickening and sludge filter cake is 17.9 ± 2.3 and 9.5 ± 2.3 n/g dry weight
(dw), respectively. The sludge disposal amount of WWTP is 81.5 tons/day and the approximate amount of MP
accumulated in the sludge per year is calculated as 2.8 × 1011 MPs. In wastewater and sludge samples, fragment
dominant shape, black main colour, and 500–1000 μm sizes are the most common size. The main MP types in
wastewater samples at the influent are polypropylene (PP, 36.8%), polyethylene (PE, 31.0%), polystyrene (PS,
11.8%), polyethylene terephthalate (PET, 8.0%), and polyamide (PA, 7.1%), at the effluent (PE, 33.0%), (PP,
52.5%), and (PS, 8.2%). In the sludge cake, the distribution is (PE, 40.8%), (PP, 27.6%), (PS, 18.7%) and (PET,
8.0%). The results of this study show that MPs are removed from wastewater with high efficiency by treatment
processes and a significant amount accumulates in the sludge. Therefore, it is suggested that to integrate
advanced treatment processes into urban WWTPs and use effective sludge disposal management practices to
reduce the amount of MP released into the environment with effluent and sludge.

1. Introduction absorb/adsorb pollutants (e.g. heavy metals, persistent organic pollut­

The increase in the production and use of plastic materials and the
inadequate management of plastic waste cause the world to be polluted
with these wastes rapidly. About 6.3 billion Mt of plastic polymers was
produced and discarded in 2015, of which only 9% were recycled, 12%
were incinerated, and the remaining 79% accumulated in landfills or
terrestrial environments (Mendenhall, 2018). Plastic production is
projected to double over the next 20 years if current growth rates
continue (Lebreton and Andrady, 2019). Microplastics (MPs) which are
generally defined as solid polymer residues smaller than 5 mm
(Thompson, 2015), attract attention with their potential negative effects
on ecosystems. The high resistance to degradation, hydrophobic nature
and lightness of MPs cause them to spread rapidly on a global scale with
storms, runoff, and winds and pose a risk of pollution (Piñon-Colin et al.,
2020; Zaki et al., 2021; Zhou et al., 2021). In addition, MPs can easily
ants (POPs), toxic substances) from the surrounding environment with
their hard to degrade surfaces and high surface areas (Batel et al., 2018).
WWTPs are one of the most important sources for the release of MPs
into aquatic/terrestrial environments (Ziajahromi et al., 2017). Despite
around 90% MP removal from WWTPs, high volume treated wastewater
discharge is a potential source of MP for aquatic environments (Bozdaş
et al., 2020). It has been reported that MPs abundances in the influent of
WWTPs in different parts of the world range from 0.28 n/L to 31,400 n/L
(Liu et al., 2021). The MP abundances in the effluent of WWTPs are in
the range of 0–447 n/L and these large differences in MP abundances
could be related to the different sampling methods applied in the
studies, the pretreatment, and the analysis of the samples (Sun et al.,
2019). Most MPs removed from WWTPs accumulate in sludge (Li et al.,
2018). The MP abundance in the treated sludge has been reported to
range from 4400 n/kg to 240,000 n/kg depending on the treatment

☆
This paper has been recommended for acceptance by Eddy Y. Zeng.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gokhaneu@uludag.edu.tr (G.E. Üstün).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119890
Received 9 May 2022; Received in revised form 29 July 2022; Accepted 31 July 2022
Available online 3 August 2022
0269-7491/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
G.E. Üstün et al.
Fig. 1. WWTP flow chart and sampling points: inlet of raw wastewater (Influent, labeled as W1), outlet of the grit chamber (labeled as W2), outlet of the secondary
sedimentation tank (Effluent, labeled as W3), returned sludge (labeled as S1), outlet of sludge thickener (labeled as S2) and sludge filter cake (labeled as S3).
technologies (Liu et al., 2021). In addition, the use of sludge formed in
WWTP as fertilizer in agricultural lands plays an important role in the
terrestrial input of MPs (Edo et al., 2020). There are few studies on the
amount, removal, and environmental release of MPs in WWTPs in
Turkey and there is no effective policy for the management and disposal
of plastic waste.
Bursa is the 4th largest city in Turkey with its industrialization and
population. In this study, the abundance, properties, and removal effi­
ciency of MPs in wastewater and sludge samples taken from different
treatment stages of a WWTP located in one of the anthropogenically
affected regions of Turkey were examined, and the amount of MP
released into the environment was evaluated.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Study location
The WWTP where the study took place, is located at (40◦ 14′ 14.4′′ N
28 55′ 07.7′′ E) and in the drainage basin; urban areas, industrial facil­
◦ Wastewater samples were passed through a size of stainless steel
ities (textile, metal plating, laundry, casting, machinery manufacturing,
auto subsidiary industry, chemical industry) and landfill leachate
treatment plant. The design flow of the facility was 87,500 m3/day, and
the average current flow rate was 61,800 m3/day in the 4 months (be­
tween August and November 2021) when the sampling was conducted.
Approximately 90% of the wastewater coming to the plant is domestic
and the remaining part originates from the above-mentioned areas. The
plant was designed according to the modified five-stage Bardenpho
process. The plant receives wastewater from over 650,000 inhabitants
and applies treatment processes that include screening (coarse mesh size
of 150 mm, fine mesh size of 20 mm), grit removal, biological process,
and sedimentation. Effluent is discharged to the Marmara Sea via Nilüfer
Creek. The sludge coming from the sedimentation is first transferred to
the sludge thickening unit and then to the sludge dewatering unit by
dosing the cationic polymer. The average daily production of sludge
cakes is 81.5 tons/day, and the sludge cakes are sent to the Sludge
Incineration Plant to generate electricity. The flow chart of the facility
and the sampling points of the samples are shown in Fig. 1.
2.2. Sampling methodology
The sampling points, sampling status, sample volumes, and sieve
sizes of the plant are shown in Table 1 of Supplementary Material. It is
recommended to take samples in dry weather so that rainy weather does
not affect the samples (F. Liu et al., 2019). For this reason, samples were
collected on dry days. Wastewater samples (influent and effluent) were
2
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
taken as 24-h composite (equal volume, every hour) with Enderes
Houser automatic sampling devices. Autosamplers were programmed to
sample hourly composite samples (250 mL every 15 min) for a total
period of 1 day. Samples were taken from a depth of 50 cm and collected
in 1 L PE sample containers (8.5 cm square bottom) and stored in a 4 ◦ C
refrigerator until analysis. Grab samples were collected using a 10 L steel
bucket (Lares et al., 2018). According to Table 1, wastewater volumes at
sampling points throughout the treatment units have been increased. At
each sampling point, the volume of sampling was dependent on the
ability to filter samples with high organic matter that rapidly clogs the
sieves and causes overflow (Ben-David et al., 2021). Also, due to the low
concentrations and uneven distribution of MPs in treated wastewater,
recent efforts have used a more representative sampling approach by
increasing the sampling volume (Talvitie et al., 2017).
2.3. Extraction of MP from wastewater
sieves of 5 mm, 3 mm, 1 mm, 500 μm, and 300 μm at room temperature
firstly. Some PE microbeads recommend keeping temperatures 60 ◦ C or
lower to minimize MP damage as they begin to melt during heating
water when the temperature reaches 60 ◦ C (Munno et al., 2018).
Therefore, the temperature was chosen as 60 ◦ C during the drying and
oxidation phase of the samples. Freshly prepared 20 mL FeSO4 solution
(0.05 M) and 20 mL H2O2 solution (30%) were added to the beakers for
organic matter removal on dry samples and mixed vigorously (Hossain
et al., 2021; Patchaiyappan et al., 2020). The beakers were incubated for
5 min at room temperature. It was then heated to 60 ◦ C on a magnetic
stirrer for 30 min 20 mL of H2O2 was added to beakers with visible solid
particles and continued to add H2O2 until no solid particles were visible
(Yang et al., 2019). The beakers were then covered with needle-punched
aluminum foil to allow gas to escape (Koelmans et al., 2019). The bea­
kers were left to cool for 1–2 h at room temperature until no reaction
was observed (Ziajahromi et al., 2021). The material from the oxidation
step was transferred to a separatory funnel with distilled water and a 5 M
NaCl solution (Masura et al., 2015). The saturated solution of NaCl (1.2
g/cm3) is preferred because it is environmentally friendly, inexpensive,
and easy to find. The low recovery rates of high-density MPs (such as
PVC and PET) are the disadvantage of using NaCl. NaI (1.6 g/cm3) and
ZnCl2 (1.7 g/cm3) salts, which can be used for high-density MPs, have
disadvantages such as being expensive and toxic to aquatic biota
(Crichton et al., 2017). Natural fibers (cotton, wool, unknown cellulose)
(Barrows et al., 2018) were not included in the analysis. Samples were
filtered using glass fiber filters with a pore diameter of 0.45 μm
(Whatman GF/F) using vacuum filtration. The filters were placed in
G.E. Üstün et al.
Fig. 2. Number of MPs in wastewater and sludge samples.
glass petri dishes and left to dry for 24-h at room temperature. The filters
were then visually examined under a stereo microscope.
2.4. Extraction of MP from sludge
S1 and S2 samples were placed in clean glass bottles (2 L) using a
stainless steel container. The S3 sample was placed in 500 mL glass
bottles with a volume of 250 g (wet weight) using a stainless steel
spatula. All sludge samples are covered with aluminum foil to prevent
possible contamination and stored in a 4 ◦ C refrigerator until analysis.
All sludge samples dried at 60 ◦ C for 15–20 days in glass beaker (Jiang
et al., 2020). After weighing the dry samples by 10 g, density separation
was performed with saturated NaCl solution. Especially in sludge sam­
ples, it is preferred to separate the MP particles from the sludge by
density separation before purification (Gies et al., 2018; Magni et al.,
2019). Sludge sample after drying was placed in a beaker, and a satu­
rated NaCl solution was added in a ratio of 1:2 (V/V) placed on 300 rpm
a stirrer for 1 h while stirring, and then immersed overnight using glass
separation funnel. This procedure has been repeated 3 times to prevent
possible MP losing. After the separation, the supernatant was filtered
and digested according to the wastewater sample treatment method.
Differently, since the organic content of the sludge samples is thought to
be high, the purification process was carried out by adding H2O2 and
FeSO4 solution, 2 times as much as the wastewater samples.
2.5. MP quantification and characterization
MPs were classified according to size (300–500 μm, 501–1000 μm,
1001–3000 μm and 3001–5000 μm); shape (fiber, film, fragment, and
granular), and colour (white, black, transparent, red, blue, yellow/or­
ange, green, pink, and purple) were also recorded. Firstly, the mem­
brane filters were studied under a dissecting LEICA EZ4E
stereomicroscope (8-35x objective combined with a digital camera). The
series of images obtained from the stereomicroscope was stacked and
the particle number, shape, colour, and size of the MPs were recorded
with the help of LibreOffice Draw Imaging Software (version 4.2.7.2).
After visual inspection, the particles were rinsed with Milli-Q water to
remove residual residue and a representative fraction (~10%) greater
than >300 μm (Blair et al., 2019) was randomly taken to determine the
polymer type (Raju et al., 2020). The measurements of all samples using
the ATR-FTIR spectroscopy (PerkinElmer) instrument in the range of
4000–400 cm− 1 were made with the attenuated total reflectance (ATR)
technique, and the measurement parameters were 10 scans at a scan
speed of 0.20 cm s− 1 with spectral resolution of 4 cm− 1. Spectra were
compared between molecules in the system’s built-in database. The
PerkinElmer software (PerkinElmer Spectrum version 10.5.1) library
was used to determine the relevant polymer type for the spectra (Jung
et al., 2018; Raju et al., 2020). Positive match between samples and
3
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
database or standards was evaluated when a minimum of ≥0.7 simi­
larity was obtained (Magni et al., 2019).
2.6. Quality control
All glassware and equipment were rinsed with distilled water before
use to avoid potential contamination during sampling and laboratory
processing. The dried glassware and equipment were then covered with
aluminum foil (Radityaningrum et al., 2021). In order not to affect the
test results of MPs that may be present in the environment and cause
contamination; glass and metal equipment were preferred instead of
plastic, 100% cotton lab coat was used, filtered samples were stored in
closed glass petri dishes, all glass after the experiment, the items were
washed with tap water and then 2 times using distilled water (Bayo
et al., 2021; Prata et al., 2019). Before the experiments, the bench was
wiped 3 times with 70% ethanol and distilled water (Xu et al., 2021).
2.7. Data analysis
The average values and standard deviations of samples were calcu­
lated, which was expressed as mean ± standard deviation (std). All the
data were initially tested for normality (Shapiro-Wilk Test) and homo­
geneity of variance (Levene’s Test). One-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was used to investigate the significance of differences in the
number of MPs between different stages in the treatment process. The
post-hoc Tukey test was used to determine which groups differed
significantly from each other (p < 0.05). The tests were performed in
SPSS 26.0 software and the level of statistical significance was set at p <
0.05.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. The abundance of MPs in treatment stages
The abundance of MPs at the WWTP influent is affected by several
factors, including the population of the watershed served by the WWTPs,
industrial facilities in the area, and the level of urban development (Raju
et al., 2020). The wastewater samples W1, W2, and W3 reflect the dis­
tribution of MPs after treatment in various structures in the WWTP. The
abundance of MPs at these three points is 135.3 ± 28.0, 78.3 ± 38.6,
and 8.5 ± 4.7 n/L, respectively (Fig. 2). The results showed that MP was
removed from wastewater with a removal rate of 93.7% and transferred
to the sludge. Wastewater data was homogeneously and normally
distributed (p > 0.05). The MP abundance in the W3 significantly
decreased compared to W1 (One-way ANOVA, p < 0.05). The Tukey test
showed that a significant difference between the W1 and W3. The
abundance of MPs reported in WWTP effluent varied between 0.13 and
129.13 n/L (Lv et al., 2019; Cunsolo et al., 2021). Due to the high MP
G.E. Üstün et al.
Fig. 3. The relative percentage (%) of the sizes of the MPs during treat­
ment processes.
removal efficiency in WWTPs, a significant amount of MP is retained in
the sewage sludge (Lofty et al., 2022). Removal rates of MPs in waste­
water on a unit basis were calculated as 41.3% (W1–W2), 89.1%
(W2–W3). MPs with a higher density than water can be removed by
physical precipitation in the grit chamber (Sun et al., 2019; Yang et al.,
2019). In the secondary sedimentation tank, MPs are attached to the
suspended solids or wrapped in activated sludge in the wastewater and
removed by settling (Bretas Alvim et al., 2020; Okeke et al., 2022).
The abundances of MPs in sludge samples of S1, S2, and S3 are 167
± 27.2 × 102 n/kg, 179 ± 22.5 × 102 n/kg, and 95 ± 22.8 × 102 n/kg,
respectively (Fig. 2). Sludge data was homogeneously and normally
distributed (p > 0.05). The ANOVA showed no significant difference
between the abundance of sludge units (p < 0.05). While the solids
concentration of the sludge increases in the sludge thickening tank, the
sludge volume is reduced. The abundance of MPs in the sludge thickener
than in the sludge cake means that a significant amount of MP is
returned to the treatment system via rejected water. It has been noted
that the dehydrated sludge contains 54% less MP than the previous
aerobically digested sludge (Alavian Petroody et al., 2021).
3.2. Size of MPs
The size distributions of MPs of wastewater and sludge samples
collected in various parts of the WWTP are shown in Fig. 3. The
500–1000 μm and 300–500 μm MP were the common size of MPs in all
wastewater samples, accounting for 46.2%–32.4% (W1), 53.7%–22.7%
(W2), 29.9%–45.3% (W3), respectively. Vardar et al. (2021) found that
the dominant size range was 500–1000 μm in wastewater samples, and
1000–2000 μm and then 500–1000 μm in sludge samples. Larger MPs
(>3000 μm) decrease along wastewater treatment units (from 6.8% in
W1 to 3.4% in W3) while increasing in sludge samples (from 3.4% in S1
to 4.5% in S3). Yang et al. (2021) note that large MPs decreased during
purification.
During WWTP units, large MP particles become smaller particles due
to wear and fragmentation (X. Liu et al., 2019) and therefore small MP
particles can be found in high proportion in WWTP effluent (Jiang et al.,
2020). Size distribution percentages of W1 and W2 samples are close to
each other since the MP removal is not at an effective level in the screen
and grit chamber units. Smaller particle size MPs were detected in the
return sludge, sludge thickener and filter cake especially the 500–1000
μm and 300–500 μm MP, in which the proportion was 60.7%–20.2%
(S1), 54.3%–27.1% (S2), 44.44%–26.48% (S3), respectively. Jiang et al.
(2020), have found that MPs of 500–1000 μm are common in waste­
water and sludge samples in studies conducted and that the removal rate
of small-sized MPs in wastewater is low. Nevertheless, due to the
4
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
Fig. 4. The relative percentage (%) of the shapes of the MPs during treat­
ment processes.
difficulties in the collection and analysis of small size MPs (e.g. <300
μm), it was stated that a significant portion (80.5%) of the studies in
aquatic environments were performed with larger size MPs (Conkle
et al., 2018). For this reason, MPs quantifications could be under­
estimated (Carr et al., 2016).
3.3. Shape of MPs
The fragment and fiber occupied a significant proportion
(47.5–58.5% and 20.3–30.9%, respectively) among all of the WWTP
units (Fig. 4), while granular and film occupied a relatively small pro­
portion (10.3–18.4% and 4.6–10.0%, respectively). In the W1, the
fractions of fragments, fibers, granular and films are 50.6%, 27.7%,
15.2%, and 6.5%, respectively. Proportions of fragments and granular
decrease from 50.6% to 15.2% in the influent to 47.5% and 13.6% in the
effluent, respectively.
In contrast, the percentage of fibers and films increases from 27.7%
to 6.5% in the influent to 30.9% and 8.1% in the effluent, respectively.
The most frequently observed MP shapes in wastewater samples were
fragment (58.5%) and fiber (27.7%), followed by granular (15.2%) and
film (8.1%). The proportion of fibers increased from 27.7% at the
influent to 30.9% in the effluent, and it has been reported that due to the
small size and morphology of the fibers, they can release through the
treatment stages to the environment (Talvitie et al., 2017).
In sludge samples, the shape distribution was observed as fragment
(57.9%), fiber (26.4%), granular (18.4%) and film (11.1%). Fragments
are the dominant MP shape in both the water and sludge samples similar
to data previously reported (Lv et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2021). Frag­
ments are usually related to anthropogenic activities and the decom­
position of larger plastics (Vianello et al., 2013; Wei et al., 2020). Fibers
in wastewater often originate from the textile and tourism industries; the
daily washing of clothes contributes to most of the fibers in WWTPs (Sun
et al., 2019). A garment made from synthetic materials can release more
than 1900 fibers per wash (Browne et al., 2011). As with the two species
(fragment and film) in all samples in this study, similar results were
reported by Murphy et al. (2016), who found that MP species in
wastewater (fragment 67.3% and film 18.5%). On the whole, the dis­
tributions of MPs of different shapes among WWTP units are similar,
with no significant differences.
3.4. Colour distribution of MPs
Colour distribution in wastewater and sludge samples is shown in
Fig. 5. MPs in wastewater samples were black (35.3–45.6%), followed
by transparent (19.5–27.1%), blue (9.7–13.9%), white (8.5–9.7%), and
red (5.5–7.6%) colour distribution. In sludge samples, most of the MPs
found were black (29.0–40.4%), followed by transparent (29.7–34.3%),
blue (9.5–12.2%), white (5.7–8.0%), and red (6.6–7.2%).
G.E. Üstün et al. Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890

Fig. 5. The colour distribution of MPs in WWTP units. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of
this article.)

Fig. 6. Type characterization percentage of MPs in the WWTP. A) analysis transmittances of ATR-FTIR spectra of various MPs identified B) the percentage of MPs
influent (inner ring) and effluent (outer ring) wastewater samples. C) the percentage of MPs sludge thickener (inner ring) and sludge cake (outer ring) samples.

Other colours were detected below 5%. Black, transparent, white and
blue colours are dominant in all samples. In many studies, black,
transparent, gray, and white colours dominate and these are similar to
data previously reported ones (Zhang et al., 2017; Li et al., 2018; Long
et al., 2019). Vardar et al. (2021), found black and blue colours to be
dominant in wastewater and sludge samples. Yang et al. (2019) deter­
mined that black (36.60%), transparent (33.84%), and blue (11.88%)
colours predominate in China’s largest municipal WWTP effluent, sug­
gesting that the colour of MPs came from a number of different sources.
The colour distribution is similar to this study. The predominance of
black and transparent MPs could be related to the plastic bags, bottles,
cling film, cups, and packaging bags that are used daily in our lives
(Yang et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021). Coloured MP particles can
contain harmful components such as heavy metals (Wang and Wang,
2018), POPs, pathogens (Rochman et al., 2014), and it has been found
that organisms living in the aquatic environment consume more col­
oured plastic particles selectively (Oβmann et al., 2018; Su et al., 2020).
3.5. Type of MPs
A total of 791 particles (365 in wastewater samples and 426 in sludge
samples) were detected in this study, and 325 particles (146 in waste­
water samples and 179 in sludge samples) were confirmed to be plastic
using ATR-FTIR. The results demonstrate that 41% of the suspected
particles were confirmed as MP. Particles smaller than 300 μm were not
analyzed by ATIR-FTIR. 7 types of MP were detected in the samples.
They were PE, PP, PS, PET, PA, Ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA) and Styrene
acrylonitrile (SAN). Most of the other micro particles are the remaining
contains calcium stearate and glycerin, oleic acid, monooleate, cellulose
acetate, acrylic, lecithin, cellulose, wood chips, animal fur, silicone,
latex, toothpaste residues, cosmetic raw materials, and silicates. The MP
types identified in WWTP and their distribution in treatment units are
shown in Fig. 6.
According to Fig. 6 B, common types of MP observed in wastewater
samples were PP (36.8%), PE (31.0%), PS (11.8%), PET (8.0%), PA

5
G.E. Üstün et al. Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890

Table 1
Some newly reported MPs abundance, removal and release in wastewater treatment plants.
Country The Population Mesh size (μm) Treatment Influent Effluent Removal MPs Sludge Ref.
capacity of of served level concentration concentration (%) release concentration
WWTP (n/L) (n/L) (n/day) (n/kg or n/L)
(m3/day)

China 1.0 × 106 2.4 × 106 5000, 50 S/T 12.03 (±1.29) 0.59 (±0.22) >95 0.59 N/A Yang et al.
(±0.22) x (2019)
109
China N/A 3.5 × 106 355, 125, S 6.55 0.59 90.52 6.50 × N/A Long et al.
63,43 108 (2019)
5 6
Italy 4.0 × 10 1.2 × 10 5000,2000,63 S/T 2.5(±0.3) 0.4(±0.1) 84 1.6 × 106 RAS:113 (±57) Magni et al.
× 105 n/kg (2019)
China System A: N/A 500, 250, 125, S/T System A: 0.28 System A: 0.13 System A: System A: N/A Lv et al.
5.0 × 104 62.5,25 (±0.02) (±0.01) 53.6 6.5 × 106 (2019)
China 3.0 × 105 1.0 × 105 1700, 550,80 S/T 16 2.9 81.9 8.70 × DSU: 2.92 × 103 Ren et al.
108 n/kg (2020)
Spain 3.5 × 104 2.1 × 105 0.45 S 12.43 (±2.70) 1.23 (±0.15) 90.1 6.7 × 106 N/A Bayo et al.
(GGR) (2020)
5 6
China 6.0 × 10 3.1 × 10 80 S/T 126.0 (±14.0) 30.6 (±7.8) 75.7 N/A DSU:3.63 × 104 Jiang et al.
n/kg (2020)
SFC:4.63 × 104
n/kg
China WWTP A: N/A 149 S/T WWTP A: 23.3 WWTP A: 7.9 WWTP A: 9.1 × WWTP A (SFC): Tang et al.
7.0 × 104 S/T (±2.0) (±1.1) 66.1 1010 13.4 (±0.7) n/L (2020)
WWTP B: WWTP B: 80.5 WWTP B: 30.3 WWTP B: WWTP B (SFC):
3.0 × 105 (±6.3) (±3.0) 62.7 63.4 (±3.8) n/L
Spain 1.62 × 104 7.041 × 104 0.45 T 3.78 (±0.48) 1.38 (±0.48) 64.26 1.6 × 107 N/A Bayo et al.
(2021)
Turkey 4.0 × 105 2.0 × 106 2000,50,25 S 72.6 8.2 84.7–93.0 2.2934 × SFC: 3.2 × 104 Vardar et al.
106 n/kg (2021)
Finland 3.018 × 1.6 × 105 300,100,20 S/T 61 0.8 99 0.02 × ES: 142 n/L Salmi et al.
104 109 SFC: 9.37 × 103 (2021)
n/kg
Japan 2.0 × 105 N/A 20 T 19.16 5.15 95.6 N/A SFC: 5.8 × 104 Nakao et al.
n/kg (2021)
England 1.9 × 105 4.1 × 105 100,38 S 2102.16 129.13 93 2.45 × 1.97 × 106 n/kg Cunsolo
107 et al. (2021)
China N/A N/A 0.45 S/T 288.5 22.9 92.1 3.4 × 109 RAS: 1.012 Yang et al.
(±10.2) × 104 (2021)
n/kg
BPF: 1.234
(±5.7) × 104 n/
kg
Thailand DS:1.2 × 2.27 × 105 1000, 500,50 S/T 77 (±7.21) 10.67 (±3.51) 96.97 2.8 SS: 2.63 Tadsuwan
105 (±183) (±1.26) × 104 and Babel
RS:3.0 × × 108 n/kg (2022)
105
Turkey 6.18 × 104 6.5 × 105 5000,3000, S 135.3 (±28.0) 8.5 (±4.7) 93.7 5.25 × SFC: 9.55 × 103 This study
1000,500,300 108 n/kg

Note: N/A- Not Available, S:Secondary, T: Tertiary, DS: Dry seasons, RS: Rainy seasons, DSU: Dewatering sludge unit, SFC: Sludge filter cake, DIS: Digested sludge,
GGR: Grit and grease removal, RAS: Recycled activated sludge. ES: Excess sludge, BPF: Belt press filter, SS: Sewage sludge.

(7.1%) at influent; PE (33.0%), PP (52.5%), PS (8.2%), PA (4.1%) and
PET (2.2%) at the effluent. Other types of MPs such as SAN and EVA with
little proportion could be observed in all samples. A decrease in the
number of polymer species and a change in the dominant polymer type
were detected in wastewater samples at the influent and effluent of the
WWTP. The most common polymer types PE, PP, PS, and PET were
found in all samples. The detection of 4 of the 5 most produced plastic
types on a global scale in all samples is compatible with the use of plastic
materials (Geyer et al., 2017). Similarly, PP and PE were determined as
the most common species in WWTP influent and effluent (Long et al.,
2019; Magni et al., 2019). In a sewage treatment plant in China (Yang
et al., 2021), the ratio of MP species in water samples was found to be PP
(33%), PE (23%), and PS (18%), respectively, which is similar to this
study. Materials containing PE, PP, and PS species are widely used in
toothpaste, cosmetic products, water bottles, food packaging bags, and
clothing. The dominance of these species also indicates that most of the
WWTP influent originates from domestic wastewater (Carr et al., 2016).
In a study examining rural domestic WWTPs, it was reported that PP, PE,
PS and PET they were the most common types in the wastewater, as in
this study (Wei et al., 2020). MP type and size analysis were examined in
the effluent of 12 WWTPs in Germany (Mintenig et al., 2017), and MPs
larger than 500 μm were determined in 10 of them. When the species
distribution and percentage of these MPs are analyzed, the dominant
species are PE (59%) and PP (16%), which is similar to the current study.
In addition, 121 WWTPs from 17 countries were examined and the most
common MP types in wastewater were reported to be PE (22%), PS
(21%), and PP (13%) (Yaseen et al., 2022).
In sludge samples (Fig. 6C) observed MP types are; PE (38.5%), PP
(30.6%), PS (17.2%), PET (6.1%) at sludge thickener while PE (40.8%),
PP (27.6%), PS (18.7%) and PET (8.0%) distributions were observed at
the sludge cake. PA, SAN, and EVA with little proportion could be
determined in samples. According to Fig. 6C, there is no significant
difference in the polymer composition of the sludge samples. The
polymer composition of MPs in sludge was similar to that of influent. PP
and PE were determined as dominant species in all samples. The sig­
nificant difference between samples is that PP increases in wastewater
samples and decreases in sludge samples. This can be explained by the
fact that the density of PP is less than that of water (X. Liu et al., 2019;
Yang et al., 2021). MPs removal is related to its density, which its type
can determine. MPs that are denser than wastewater (e.g. PET:

6
G.E. Üstün et al.
0.96–1.45 g/cm3) are easily removed from wastewater by physical
precipitation; they accumulate in sludge.
3.6. Amount of MPs released into aquatic/terrestrial ecosystems
Sources contributing MP to aquatic environments, wastewater
(municipal and industrial) effluents (Dris et al., 2015; Magni et al.,
2019), sludge/biosolids (Mintenig et al., 2017; Crossman et al., 2020),
urban surface runoff (Galafassi et al., 2019) and atmospheric deposition
(Cai et al., 2017). A recent study found that in wet weather, drainage
system overflow (wet weather flow) contributes approximately six times
the annual contribution of MPs to the watershed than the contribution of
WWTPs (Chen et al., 2020). MPs and other anthropogenic particles have
been measured in Lake Ontario surface waters and other water sources
(rainwater runoff, agricultural runoff, and wastewater effluent). The
anthropogenic particle concentrations in the lake samples were
measured as 0.8 n/L, while the amount from the water sources was 15.4
n/L, 13.3 n/L, and 0.9 n/L from the rainwater, effluent, and agricultural
runoff, respectively (Grbić et al., 2020). The removal of MPs at high
rates by WWTPs cannot prevent the release of significant amounts of MP
into aquatic environments due to the large values of treated wastewater
flow rates. Considering the average flow rate of the WWTP (61,800
m3/day) and the average MP amount from the effluent of 8.45 n/L, an
average of 525 million MPs per day is released into aquatic environ­
ments. The use of treated wastewater in the study area for irrigation and
its discharge into the sea at the basin outlet cause pollution of aqua­
tic/terrestrial environments with MP. The WWTP effluent is released
into the Nilüfer Creek and used for irrigation throughout the basin. This
stream is the influent to the Marmara Sea (Üstün, 2009). Studies on MP
removal in WWTPs in recent years are presented in Table 1. The MP
removal efficiency of observed in this study is in the same order as other
urban WWTPs, ranging from 63.41% to 99.6%. Advanced treatment
processes can be integrated into the WWTP to reduce the amount of MP
released into the aquatic environment. In the Netherlands, MP removal
rates were reported to be 88% and 97% for WWTPs without and with
advanced treatment, respectively (Leslie et al., 2017).
The abundance of MPs in the sludge cake is 9.5 ± 2.3 n/g, the sludge
disposal amount of WWTP is 81.5 tons/day, and the amount of MPs
accumulated in the sludge per year is calculated as 2.8 × 1011 MPs.
Disposal of the sludge in the incineration plant prevents MP release in
terrestrial environments. When sludge is applied to agricultural lands as
a biosolid fertilizer, the MP accumulates in the soil and leads to com­
bined contamination with various pollutants (e.g. POPs, heavy metals,
antibiotics), which may do more harm to the soil environment (He et al.,
2018; Wang et al., 2019). With sludge management technologies such as
incineration and pyrolysis, it may be possible to eliminate MPs (Jin
et al., 2019; Juliastuti et al., 2018).
4. Conclusions
The study investigated the abundance, characteristics, and removal
of MPs in both wastewater and sludge of urban WWTP in Bursa city for 4
months. Although the MPs removal efficiency of WWTP is 93.7%,
approximately 525 million MP is released into aquatic environments due
to the large values of treated wastewater flow rates every day. The
abundance of MPs in the sludge cake is 9.5 ± 2.3 n/g, the sludge disposal
amount of WWTP is 81.5 tons/day, and the amount of MPs accumulated
in the sludge per day is calculated as 774.25 million MPs. However, MP
is not released into the environment since the treatment sludge is
disposed of in the incineration plant. In the wastewater and sludge,
fragment MPs were the primary shape, with the largest abundance in
1000–500 μm. Black MPs in wastewater and sludge account for the
largest proportion. The main species detected in wastewater and sludge
samples are PE and PP. Industrial wastewaters (approximately 10%) did
not make a significant difference in the fate and characteristics of MPs.
WWTPs play an important role in reducing urban MPs released into
7
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
the environment. However, there are many MPs released to aquatic/
terrestrial environments with high treated wastewater flow rates and
treatment sludge applications in agricultural lands as bio-solid fertilizer.
MPs continue to be a problem for human and ecosystem health due to
the increasing use of plastics worldwide. Therefore, it is suggested that
to integrate advanced treatment processes into WWTPs and use effective
sludge disposal management practices (e.g. incineration and pyrolysis)
to reduce the amount of MP released into the aquatic/terrestrial
ecosystems.
Credit author statement
Gökhan Ekrem Üstün: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-
Reviewing and Editing. Kübra Bozdaş: Visualization, Validation,
Writing – original draft preparation. Tuğba Can: Methodology, Data
curation, Investigation, Writing – original draft preparation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
This research was conducted with the financial support of the
Research Fund of The Bursa Uludağ University (No:BAP FGA
2021–322). The authors would like to thank Bursa Water and Sewerage
Administration (BUSKİ) for their help in collecting the wastewater and
sludge samples during the experimental runs and Dr. Ahmet Aygün, and
Dr. Yunus Kaya for their help in ATR-FTIR analyses.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119890.
References
Alavian Petroody, S.S., Hashemi, S.H., van Gestel, C.A.M., 2021. Transport and
accumulation of microplastics through wastewater treatment sludge processes.
Chemosphere 278, 130471. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CHEMOSPHERE.2021.130471.
Barrows, A.P.W., Cathey, S.E., Petersen, C.W., 2018. Marine environment microfiber
contamination: global patterns and the diversity of microparticle origins. Environ.
Pollut. 237, 275–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2018.02.062.
Batel, A., Borchert, F., Reinwald, H., Erdinger, L., Braunbeck, T., 2018. Microplastic
accumulation patterns and transfer of benzo[a]pyrene to adult zebrafish (Danio
rerio) gills and zebrafish embryos. Environ. Pollut. 235, 918–930. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2018.01.028.
Bayo, J., Olmos, S., López-Castellanos, J., 2021. Assessment of microplastics in a
municipal wastewater treatment plant with tertiary treatment: removal efficiencies
and loading per day into the environment. Water 13, 1339. https://doi.org/
10.3390/W13101339. Page 1339 13, 2021.
Bayo, J., Olmos, S., López-Castellanos, J., 2020. Microplastics in an urban wastewater
treatment plant: the influence of physicochemical parameters and environmental
factors. Chemosphere 238, 124593. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CHEMOSPHERE.2019.124593.
Ben-David, E.A., Habibi, M., Haddad, E., Hasanin, M., Angel, D.L., Booth, A.M.,
Sabbah, I., 2021. Microplastic distributions in a domestic wastewater treatment
plant: removal efficiency, seasonal variation and influence of sampling technique.
Sci. Total Environ. 752, 141880 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
SCITOTENV.2020.141880.
Blair, R.M., Waldron, S., Gauchotte-Lindsay, C., 2019. Average daily flow of
microplastics through a tertiary wastewater treatment plant over a ten-month
period. Water Res. 163, 114909 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2019.114909.
Bozdaş, K., Üstün, G.E., Aygün, A., 2020. Microplastics in environment and effects on
biota. Turkish J. Water Sci. Manag. 4, 228–245. https://doi.org/10.31807/
TJWSM.660146.
G.E. Üstün et al.
Bretas Alvim, C., Bes-Piá, M.A., Mendoza-Roca, J.A., 2020. Separation and identification
of microplastics from primary and secondary effluents and activated sludge from
wastewater treatment plants. Chem. Eng. J. 402, 126293 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CEJ.2020.126293.
Browne, M.A., Crump, P., Niven, S.J., Teuten, E., Tonkin, A., Galloway, T., Thompson, R.,
2011. Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines woldwide: sources and sinks.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 45 (21), 9175–9179. https://doi.org/10.1021/es201811s.
Cai, L., Wang, J., Peng, J., Tan, Z., Zhan, Z., Tan, X., Chen, Q., 2017. Characteristic of
microplastics in the atmospheric fallout from Dongguan city, China: preliminary
research and first evidence. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24, 24928–24935. https://doi.
org/10.1007/S11356-017-0116-X/FIGURES/6.
Carr, S.A., Liu, J., Tesoro, A.G., 2016. Transport and fate of microplastic particles in
wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 91, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2016.01.002.
Chen, H., Jia, Q., Zhao, X., Li, L., Nie, Y., Liu, H., Ye, J., 2020. The occurrence of
microplastics in water bodies in urban agglomerations: impacts of drainage system
overflow in wet weather, catchment land-uses, and environmental management
practices. Water Res. 183, 116073 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2020.116073.
Conkle, J.L., Báez, C.D., Valle, D., Turner, J.W., 2018. Are we underestimating
microplastic contamination in aquatic environments? Environ. Manag. 61, 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-017-0947-8.
Crichton, E.M., Noël, M., Gies, E.A., Ross, P.S., 2017. A novel, density-independent and
FTIR-compatible approach for the rapid extraction of microplastics from aquatic
sediments. Anal. Methods 9, 1419–1428. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6AY02733D.
Crossman, J., Hurley, R.R., Futter, M., Nizzetto, L., 2020. Transfer and transport of
microplastics from biosolids to agricultural soils and the wider environment. Sci.
Total Environ. 724, 138334 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2020.138334.
Cunsolo, S., Williams, J., Hale, M., Read, D.S., Couceiro, F., 2021. Optimising sample
preparation for FTIR-based microplastic analysis in wastewater and sludge samples:
multiple digestions. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 413, 3789–3799. https://doi.org/
10.1007/S00216-021-03331-6/TABLES/2.
Dris, R., Gasperi, J., Rocher, V., Saad, M., Renault, N., Tassin, B., 2015. Microplastic
contamination in an urban area: a case study in Greater Paris. Environ. Chem.
https://doi.org/10.1071/EN14167.
Edo, C., González-Pleiter, M., Leganés, F., Fernández-Piñas, F., Rosal, R., 2020. Fate of
microplastics in wastewater treatment plants and their environmental dispersion
with effluent and sludge. Environ. Pollut. 259, 113837 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENVPOL.2019.113837.
Galafassi, S., Nizzetto, L., Volta, P., 2019. Plastic sources: a survey across scientific and
grey literature for their inventory and relative contribution to microplastics
pollution in natural environments, with an emphasis on surface water. Sci. Total
Environ. 693, 133499 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.07.305.
Geyer, R., Jambeck, J.R., Law, K.L., 2017. Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever
made. Sci. Adv. 3 https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.1700782/SUPPL_FILE/
1700782_SM.PDF.
Gies, E.A., LeNoble, J.L., Noël, M., Etemadifar, A., Bishay, F., Hall, E.R., Ross, P.S., 2018.
Retention of microplastics in a major secondary wastewater treatment plant in
Vancouver, Canada. Mar. Pollut. Bull. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2018.06.006.
Grbić, J., Helm, P., Athey, S., Rochman, C.M., 2020. Microplastics entering northwestern
Lake Ontario are diverse and linked to urban sources. Water Res. 174, 115623
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2020.115623.
He, D., Luo, Y., Lu, S., Liu, M., Song, Y., Lei, L., 2018. Microplastics in soils: analytical
methods, pollution characteristics and ecological risks. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem.
109, 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRAC.2018.10.006.
Hossain, M.B., Banik, P., Nur, A.A.U., Rahman, T., 2021. Abundance and characteristics
of microplastics in sediments from the world’s longest natural beach, Cox’s Bazar,
Bangladesh. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 163, 111956 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MARPOLBUL.2020.111956.
Jiang, J., Wang, X., Ren, H., Cao, G., Xie, G., Xing, D., Liu, B., 2020. Investigation and
fate of microplastics in wastewater and sludge filter cake from a wastewater
treatment plant in China. Sci. Total Environ. 746, 141378 https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.SCITOTENV.2020.141378.
Jin, Q., Wang, X., Li, S., Mikulčić, H., Bešenić, T., Deng, S., Vujanović, M., Tan, H.,
Kumfer, B.M., 2019. Synergistic effects during co-pyrolysis of biomass and plastic:
gas, tar, soot, char products and thermogravimetric study. J. Energy Inst. 92,
108–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOEI.2017.11.001.
Juliastuti, S.R., Hisbullah, M.I., Abdillah, M., 2018. High density Polyethylene plastic
waste treatment with microwave heating pyrolysis method using coconut-shell
activated carbon to produce alternative fuels. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 334
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/334/1/012015.
Jung, M.R., Horgen, F.D., Orski, S.V., Rodriguez, C.V., Beers, K.L., Balazs, G.H., Jones, T.
T., Work, T.M., Brignac, K.C., Royer, S.J., Hyrenbach, K.D., Jensen, B.A., Lynch, J.
M., 2018. Validation of ATR FT-IR to identify polymers of plastic marine debris,
including those ingested by marine organisms. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 127, 704–716.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2017.12.061.
Koelmans, A.A., Mohamed Nor, N.H., Hermsen, E., Kooi, M., Mintenig, S.M., De
France, J., 2019. Microplastics in freshwaters and drinking water: critical review and
assessment of data quality. Water Res. 155, 410–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2019.02.054.
Lares, M., Ncibi, M.C., Sillanpää, Markus, Sillanpää, Mika, 2018. Occurrence,
identification and removal of microplastic particles and fibers in conventional
activated sludge process and advanced MBR technology. Water Res. 133, 236–246.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.01.049.
8
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
Lebreton, L., Andrady, A., 2019. Future scenarios of global plastic waste generation and
disposal. Palgrave Commun 5, 6. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0212-7.
Leslie, H.A., Brandsma, S.H., van Velzen, M.J.M., Vethaak, A.D., 2017. Microplastics en
route: field measurements in the Dutch river delta and Amsterdam canals,
wastewater treatment plants, North Sea sediments and biota. Environ. Int. 101,
133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVINT.2017.01.018.
Li, X., Chen, L., Mei, Q., Dong, B., Dai, X., Ding, G., Zeng, E.Y., 2018. Microplastics in
sewage sludge from the wastewater treatment plants in China. Water Res. 142,
75–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2018.05.034.
Liu, F., Olesen, K.B., Borregaard, A.R., Vollertsen, J., 2019. Microplastics in urban and
highway stormwater retention ponds. Sci. Total Environ. 671, 992–1000. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.03.416.
Liu, W., Zhang, J., Liu, H., Guo, X., Zhang, X., Yao, X., Cao, Z., Zhang, T., 2021. A review
of the removal of microplastics in global wastewater treatment plants: characteristics
and mechanisms. Environ. Int. 146, 106277 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENVINT.2020.106277.
Lofty, J., Muhawenimana, V., Wilson, C.A.M.E., Ouro, P., 2022. Microplastics removal
from a primary settler tank in a wastewater treatment plant and estimations of
contamination onto European agricultural land via sewage sludge recycling.
Environ. Pollut. 304, 119198 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2022.119198.
Long, Z., Pan, Z., Wang, W., Ren, J., Yu, X., Lin, L., Lin, H., Chen, H., Jin, X., 2019.
Microplastic abundance, characteristics, and removal in wastewater treatment plants
in a coastal city of China. Water Res. 155, 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2019.02.028.
Lv, X., Dong, Q., Zuo, Z., Liu, Y., Huang, X., Wu, W.M., 2019. Microplastics in a
municipal wastewater treatment plant: fate, dynamic distribution, removal
efficiencies, and control strategies. J. Clean. Prod. 225, 579–586. https://doi.org/
10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2019.03.321.
Magni, S., Binelli, A., Pittura, L., Avio, C.G., Della Torre, C., Parenti, C.C., Gorbi, S.,
Regoli, F., 2019. The fate of microplastics in an Italian wastewater treatment plant.
Sci. Total Environ. 652, 602–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.269.
Masura, J., Baker, J., Foster, G., Arthur, C., 2015. Laboratory Methods for the Analysis of
Microplastics in Themarine Environment: Recommendations for Quantifying
Synthet- Ic Particles in Waters and Sediments. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS-
OR&R-48, vol. 29. NOAA Tech. Memo.
Mendenhall, E., 2018. Oceans of plastic: a research agenda to propel policy development.
Mar. Pol. 96, 291–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOL.2018.05.005.
Mintenig, S.M., Int-Veen, I., Löder, M.G.J., Primpke, S., Gerdts, G., 2017. Identification of
microplastic in effluents of waste water treatment plants using focal plane array-
based micro-Fourier-transform infrared imaging. Water Res. 108, 365–372. https://
doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2016.11.015.
Munno, K., Helm, P.A., Jackson, D.A., Rochman, C., Sims, A., 2018. Impacts of
temperature and selected chemical digestion methods on microplastic particles.
Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 37, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/ETC.3935.
Murphy, F., Ewins, C., Carbonnier, F., Quinn, B., 2016. Wastewater treatment works
(WwTW) as a source of microplastics in the aquatic environment. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 50, 5800–5808. https://doi.org/10.1021/ACS.EST.5B05416/SUPPL_FILE/
ES5B05416_SI_001.PDF.
Nakao, S., Akita, K., Ozaki, A., Masumoto, K., Okuda, T., 2021. Circulation of fibrous
microplastic (microfiber) in sewage and sewage sludge treatment processes. Sci.
Total Environ. 795, 148873 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2021.148873.
Okeke, E.S., Okoye, C.O., Atakpa, E.O., Ita, R.E., Nyaruaba, R., Mgbechidinma, C.L.,
Akan, O.D., 2022. Microplastics in agroecosystems-impacts on ecosystem functions
and food chain. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 177, 105961 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
RESCONREC.2021.105961.
Oßmann, B.E., Sarau, G., Holtmannspötter, H., Pischetsrieder, M., Christiansen, S.H.,
Dicke, W., 2018. Small-sized microplastics and pigmented particles in bottled
mineral water. Water Res. 141, 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2018.05.027.
Patchaiyappan, A., Ahmed, S.Z., Dowarah, K., Jayakumar, S., Devipriya, S.P., 2020.
Occurrence, distribution and composition of microplastics in the sediments of South
Andaman beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 156, 111227 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MARPOLBUL.2020.111227.
Piñon-Colin, T. de J., Rodriguez-Jimenez, R., Rogel-Hernandez, E., Alvarez-Andrade, A.,
Wakida, F.T., 2020. Microplastics in stormwater runoff in a semiarid region, Tijuana,
Mexico. Sci. Total Environ. 704, 135411 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
SCITOTENV.2019.135411.
Prata, J.C., da Costa, J.P., Duarte, A.C., Rocha-Santos, T., 2019. Methods for sampling
and detection of microplastics in water and sediment: a critical review. TrAC, Trends
Anal. Chem. 110, 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRAC.2018.10.029.
Radityaningrum, A.D., Trihadiningrum, Y., Mar’atusholihah, Soedjono, E.S.,
Herumurti, W., 2021. Microplastic contamination in water supply and the removal
efficiencies of the treatment plants: a case of Surabaya City, Indonesia. J. Water Proc.
Eng. 43, 102195 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JWPE.2021.102195.
Raju, S., Carbery, M., Kuttykattil, A., Senthirajah, K., Lundmark, A., Rogers, Z., Scb, S.,
Evans, G., Palanisami, T., 2020. Improved methodology to determine the fate and
transport of microplastics in a secondary wastewater treatment plant. Water Res.
173, 115549 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2020.115549.
Ren, P.J., Dou, M., Wang, C., Li, G.Q., Jia, R., 2020. Abundance and removal
characteristics of microplastics at a wastewater treatment plant in Zhengzhou.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27, 36295–36305. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-
09611-5/FIGURES/4.
Rochman, C.M., Hentschel, B.T., The, S.J., 2014. Long-term sorption of metals is similar
among plastic types: implications for plastic debris in aquatic environments. PLoS
One 9, e85433. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0085433.
G.E. Üstün et al.
Salmi, P., Ryymin, K., Karjalainen, A.K., Mikola, A., Uurasjärvi, E., Talvitie, J., 2021.
Particle balance and return loops for microplastics in a tertiary-level wastewater
treatment plant. Water Sci. Technol. 84, 89–100. https://doi.org/10.2166/
WST.2021.209.
Su, Y., Zhang, K., Zhou, Z., Wang, J., Yang, X., Tang, J., Li, H., Lin, S., 2020. Microplastic
exposure represses the growth of endosymbiotic dinoflagellate Cladocopium goreaui
in culture through affecting its apoptosis and metabolism. Chemosphere 244,
125485. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CHEMOSPHERE.2019.125485.
Sun, J., Dai, X., Wang, Q., van Loosdrecht, M.C.M., Ni, B.J., 2019. Microplastics in
wastewater treatment plants: detection, occurrence and removal. Water Res. 152,
21–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2018.12.050.
Tadsuwan, K., Babel, S., 2022. Microplastic abundance and removal via an ultrafiltration
system coupled to a conventional municipal wastewater treatment plant in Thailand.
J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10, 107142 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JECE.2022.107142.
Talvitie, J., Mikola, A., Koistinen, A., 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, N., Liu, X., Xing, W., 2020. Microplastics in wastewater treatment plants of Wuhan,
Central China: abundance, removal, and potential source in household wastewater.
Sci. Total Environ. 745, 141026 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
SCITOTENV.2020.141026.
Thompson, R.C., 2015. Microplastics in the marine environment: sources, consequences
and solutions. Mar. Anthropog. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_7/
FIGURES/6. Litter 185–200.
Üstün, G.E., 2009. Occurrence and removal of metals in urban wastewater treatment
plants. J. Hazard Mater. 172, 833–838. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JHAZMAT.2009.07.073.
Vardar, S., Onay, T.T., Demirel, B., Kideys, A.E., 2021. Evaluation of microplastics
removal efficiency at a wastewater treatment plant discharging to the Sea of
Marmara. Environ. Pollut. 289, 117862 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENVPOL.2021.117862.
Vianello, A., Boldrin, A., Guerriero, P., Moschino, V., Rella, R., Sturaro, A., Da Ros, L.,
2013. Microplastic particles in sediments of Lagoon of Venice, Italy: first
observations on occurrence, spatial patterns and identification. Estuar. Coast Shelf
Sci. 130, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECSS.2013.03.022.
Wang, J., Liu, X., Li, Y., Powell, T., Wang, X., Wang, G., Zhang, P., 2019. Microplastics as
contaminants in the soil environment: a mini-review. Sci. Total Environ. 691,
848–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.07.209.
Wang, W., Wang, J., 2018. Comparative evaluation of sorption kinetics and isotherms of
pyrene onto microplastics. Chemosphere 193, 567–573. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CHEMOSPHERE.2017.11.078.
Environmental Pollution 310 (2022) 119890
Wei, S., Luo, H., Zou, J., Chen, J., Pan, X., Rousseau, D.P.L., Li, J., 2020. Characteristics
and removal of microplastics in rural domestic wastewater treatment facilities of
China. Sci. Total Environ. 739, 139935 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
SCITOTENV.2020.139935.
Xu, X., Zhang, L., Jian, Y., Xue, Y., Gao, Y., Peng, M., Jiang, S., Zhang, Q., 2021. Influence
of wastewater treatment process on pollution characteristics and fate of
microplastics. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 169, 112448 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
MARPOLBUL.2021.112448.
Yang, L., Li, K., Cui, S., Kang, Y., An, L., Lei, K., 2019. Removal of microplastics in
municipal sewage from China’s largest water reclamation plant. Water Res. 155,
175–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2019.02.046.
Yang, Z., Li, S., Ma, S., Liu, P., Peng, D., Ouyang, Z., Guo, X., 2021. Characteristics and
removal efficiency of microplastics in sewage treatment plant of Xi’an City,
northwest China. Sci. Total Environ. 771, 145377 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
SCITOTENV.2021.145377.
Yaseen, A., Assad, I., Sofi, M.S., Hashmi, M.Z., Bhat, S.U., 2022. A global review of
microplastics in wastewater treatment plants: understanding their occurrence, fate
and impact. Environ. Res. 212, 113258 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
ENVRES.2022.113258.
Zaki, M.R.M., Ying, P.X., Zainuddin, A.H., Razak, M.R., Aris, A.Z., 2021. Occurrence,
abundance, and distribution of microplastics pollution: an evidence in surface
tropical water of Klang River estuary, Malaysia. Environ. Geochem. Health 43,
3733–3748. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10653-021-00872-8/FIGURES/5.
Zhang, L., Liu, J., Xie, Y., Zhong, S., Gao, P., 2021. Occurrence and removal of
microplastics from wastewater treatment plants in a typical tourist city in China.
J. Clean. Prod. 291, 125968 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2021.125968.
Zhang, W., Zhang, S., Wang, J., Wang, Y., Mu, J., Wang, P., Lin, X., Ma, D., 2017.
Microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Bohai Sea, China. Environ. Pollut.
231, 541–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2017.08.058.
Zhou, D., Chen, J., Wu, J., Yang, J., Wang, H., 2021. Biodegradation and catalytic-
chemical degradation strategies to mitigate microplastic pollution. Sustain. Mater.
Technol. 28, e00251 https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SUSMAT.2021.E00251.
Ziajahromi, S., Neale, P.A., Rintoul, L., Leusch, F.D.L., 2017. Wastewater treatment
plants as a pathway for microplastics: development of a new approach to sample
wastewater-based microplastics. Water Res. 112, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
WATRES.2017.01.042.
Ziajahromi, S., Neale, P.A., Telles Silveira, I., Chua, A., Leusch, F.D.L., 2021. An audit of
microplastic abundance throughout three Australian wastewater treatment plants.
Chemosphere 263, 128294. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
CHEMOSPHERE.2020.128294.