Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Water Process Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jwpe

Abundance, characteristics and seasonal variation of microplastics in a

domestic sewage treatment plant in Nanjing, China
Juan Huang *, Jing Tuo , Luming Wang , Jiaming Liu
Department of Municipal Engineering, School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China

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

Keywords: Sewage treatment plants are a potential route of microplastics (MPs) into the environment, hence it's urgent to
Microplastics investigate MPs in wastewater and sludge through lengthy sampling campaigns. In this study, a sewage treatment
Sewage treatment plant plant in Nanjing, China was chosen, seasonal variation of MPs in influent was analyzed by collecting samples
Seasonal variation
during a 12-month sampling campaign (at monthly intervals over a one-year period). Abundance and charac­
Abundance
Characteristic
teristic of MPs from different treatment stages were also investigated. The results showed that there was a
seasonal variation in the amount of MPs in influent and the abundance of MPs was significantly greater in
summer than other seasons. The average MPs abundance was 41.0 items/L and 3.0 items/L in influent and
effluent, with a total 92.6 % removal rate. Overall, 125–355 μm were the main size in each treatment section,
with fibers dominant shape and transparent main color. Additionally, the primary polymer compositions of MPs
were polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) using micro-Roman spectroscopy. The daily MPs emission from
effluent and sludge was estimated to be 300 million and 1274 million items/d, demonstrating that the sewage
treatment plant is an important source of MPs into the environment despite the high removal rate of MPs.

1. Introduction
Microplastics (MPs), which are typically described as solid polymer
remnants smaller than 5 mm, become one of the new environmental
research hotspots due to their potential harm to ecosystems [1]. The
average annual increase in worldwide plastic production from 1950 to
2020 reached 1.5 million tons [2]. The wide use of plastic materials and
the inadequate management of plastic waste have led to an incremental
trend of MPs in the environment. The presence of MPs was reported in
almost all environmental worldwide according to previous in­
vestigations, such as natural water bodies, sediments, sewage treatment
plants, and aquatic organisms [3–6]. MPs spread quickly on a worldwide
scale with storms, runoff, and winds and constitute a risk of pollution
due to their great resistance to degradation, hydrophobic nature, and
light weight [7,8]. It has been reported that the MPs' abundance in
surface water of semi-enclosed bays in South Korea was up to 2 items/L
[9], and Yan et al. investigated 26 sampling points in the Pearl River and
analyzed that the average abundance of MPs ranged from 8.9 to 19.9
items/L [10]. Moreover, MPs have been found in indoor dustfall samples
from Chinese cities at mass concentrations of 1550–120,000 mg/kg, as
well as in atmospheric dustfall from Paris, Farburg and Germany
[11,12]. MPs can be easily ingested by many aquatic organism due to
small size and therefore enzymatic activity restriction, organ clogging,
endocrine disruption, oxidative stress and even mortality may be caused
[13]. Additionally, MPs have the potential to be carriers of some pol­
lutants like persistent organic pollutants (POPs), heavy metals, and toxic
substance [14], which will probably raise the risk of MPs to aquatic
creatures [15]. In recent years, it's reported that MPs can also enter the
food chain through various aquatic organism and pose potential risks to
human health such as the damage for digestion, reproduction, respira­
tory and metabolism [16,17].
Sewage treatment plants, which are designed to deal with waste­
water in physical, chemical, and biological processes, are identified as a
potential source of MPs entering the environment [18]. Although the
removal rate of MPs in most sewage treatment plants is achieved at >90
%, many MPs still enter the environment through high volume discharge
of treated sewage [19]. It has been estimated that over 9.1 × 1010 MPs
were discharged daily via domestic wastewater in China [13]. Murphy
et al. reported that around 6.5× 107 MPs per day enter the receiving
aquatic systems from a wastewater treatment plant in Scotland [20].
Moreover, the majority of MPs are retained in sewage sludge in raw
wastewater. It's estimated that over 80 % of MPs enter the sludge during

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 101010942@seu.edu.cn (J. Huang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.104200
Received 4 June 2023; Received in revised form 17 July 2023; Accepted 21 August 2023
Available online 1 September 2023
2214-7144/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
J. Huang et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of main stages of the sewage treatment plant and sampling points: influent (W1), outlet of the grit chamber (W2), effluent (W3),
sludge (S).
wastewater treatment, which poses another potential risk [21]. Millions
or more MPs enter the terrestrial environment through the use of sludge
produced in sewage treatment plants as fertilizer in agricultural regions
[22]. Therefore, it's essential to investigate the occurrence and charac­
teristic of MPs in sewage treatment plants to fully comprehend the
possible risk they pose to our environment. However, most researchers'
findings were based on samples collected within a short period time,
which may lead to inaccurate results. Long et al. studied influents and
effluents from several sewage treatment plants in Xiamen within couple
of days [23]. Ren et al. collected samples from different treatment stages
of a wastewater treatment plant in Zhengzhou during less than a week
[24]. Zhang et al. collected water samples for MPs studies from each
stage of a sewage treatment plant in Guilin during a 3-day period [25].
Since wastewater is closely related to human activities, it has been re­
ported that the emerging contaminants (such as pharmaceuticals) con­
centration varies over time [26], thus the presence of anthropogenic
MPs in wastewater may also change with time. Meanwhile, Hajji et al.
reported that there was a significant seasonal variation in MPs abun­
dance in the influent of sewage treatment plants and the difference may
have large implication on their estimation of the monthly mass load and
actual MPs emission [27]. The MPs abundance and characteristic in
influent have an essential impact on the sources and loadings of MPs
pollution. Therefore, it's essential to accurately analyze the fluctuation
of MPs occurrence in influent of sewage treatment plants for a better
understanding of MPs load.
Studies on the presence and characteristic of MPs in sewage treat­
ment plants effluent have been largely reported. However, the seasonal
variation of MPs in influent and the occurrence of MPs among each
treatment stage are limited with few studies. Hence, a long-term (12
months), systematic and comprehensive investigation at a typical
sewage treatment plant in Nanjing, China was carried out in this
research to study the seasonal changes of MPs in influent, as well as the
distribution characteristic of MPs in different treatment stages to further
clarify the variation among the processes in the sewage treatment plant,
which can provide theoretical support for process optimization of MPs
removal in sewage treatment plants.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Study location
Nanjing is located in the east of China, downstream of the Yangtze
River, and is one of the important central cities in China. In this study,
wastewater and sludge samples were collected from a sewage treatment
plant in Nanjing (located at 45◦ 48′N and 126◦ 42′E). The projected ser­
vice area for the sewage treatment plant is around 80 km2, receiving
wastewater from over 200,000 inhabitants. The design flow was
100,000 m3/day and approximately 80 % of the wastewater coming to
the plant is domestic. Screening+cyclonic sedimentation tank is used for
the primary treatment, and Anaerobic-Anoxic-Oxic (A2O)+MBR are
used for the total secondary treatment. The sludge is dewatered by belt
type thickening, and after dewatering, the water content is brought
2
Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200
down to under 80 % before being carried outside for disposal.
2.2. Sampling method
Wastewater samples and sludge samples were taken three times each
month from October 2020 to September 2021 (April–May in Spring,
June–September in Summer, October–November in Autumn, and
December–March in Winter) at various locations shown in Fig. 1. The
sampling time was concentrated between 10:00 and 11:00 am in a single
day. Additionally, each sampling needed to be triplicate. Exact 10 L of
wastewater and 30 g of sludge were collected at sampling locations in a
stainless steel bucket. The collected samples were sealed, transferred to
the laboratory and stored at 4 ◦ C for further analysis.
2.3. Extraction of microplastics
The method for extracting MPs from collected samples was devel­
oped through the adaptation and modification of previously published
works [27,28]. In our study, the chosen stainless steel sieves sizes were
(5000 μm, 355 μm, 125 μm, 63 μm, and 38 μm). The sieves were rinsed
with deionized water for three times after sieving to ensure all residual
were transferred to a 500 mL beaker properly. The sieved samples were
placed in 90 ◦ C drying oven for at least 24 h until totally dry [23,29].
The amount of chemicals needed for the subsequent wet peroxide
oxidation (WPO) was then calculated from the weight of the dried
samples [29]. Then, 20 to 50 mL of a 30 % hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)
solution and an equal volume of a 5 mol/L ferrous sulfate (FeSO4) so­
lution were added, and the mixture was heated and stirred at 70 ◦ C for
30 min to fully react and eliminate the organic debris from samples.
Samples were let to cool down and then ZnCl2 (97 g/100 mL) was
added to facilitate density separation. Subsequently, 5–10 mL of hy­
drochloric acid solution was added to induce the dissolution of ZnCl2.
The solution was transferred to a partition funnel, left to separate for 24
h, and the supernatant was filtered using a vacuum extraction machine
(nitrocellulose membrane of 5 cm diameter and 0.45 μm pore size).
Finally, the filters were placed in a clean and dry petri dish and allowed
to dry naturally at room temperature, while being loosely covered with
aluminum foil to avoid contamination.
2.4. Examination and identification of microplastics
In this study, MPs were identified using a stereomicroscope
(PXS6555T-B5) combined with a micro-Roman spectroscopy (LabRam
HR800). According to the classification criteria of morphological char­
acteristics of MPs established in previous studies, all samples of sus­
pected MPs were detected by vertical optical microscope, and the
abundance, color, size and shape of MPs in each sample were recorded.
The suspected MPs then were examined using a micro-Roman spec­
troscopy, operating at laser wavelengths of 785 nm and 532 nm. High
resolution spectra were recorded in 400–4000 cm− 1 to identify the MPs,
compared to the spectra in the database.
J. Huang et al.
Fig. 2. Abundance of MPs in Spring (April–May), Summer (June–September),
Autumn (October–November), and Winter (December–March).
2.5. Quality assurance and quality control
At each sampling site, the sampler was cleaned three times using
distilled water before each sampling to avoid cross-contamination of
MPs. Throughout the experiment, sample contact time with air was
reduced and the use of plastic devices was avoided. A control group was
set up, performed with the same experimental methods and steps to
assess the possible MPs contamination from the surrounding environ­
ment, and no external MPs pollution was found.
Two spiking recovery tests were conducted to evaluate the depend­
ability of extraction method used in this study. 400 polystyrene (PS)
particles with diameters of 100 μm and 74 μm were added to the control
group while using the same sieving, digesting, and density separation
method as mentioned above. The detected PS particle counts were 367
and 354, respectively, with spiking recoveries of 91.75 % and 90.5 %. It
suggests that sampling-related contamination was in control and would
not interfere with experiments.
2.6. Data analysis
SPSS 26.0 software was used for all statistical analyses. Tukey's
comparison test was used to investigate the significance of differences in
the number of MPs between different seasons and treatment stages, and
the level used for statistical analysis was set at p < 0.05.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Seasonal variation of influent MPs
3.1.1. Seasonal variation of MPs abundance
Fig. 2 shows the changes in MPs concentration between the different
seasons. The mean abundance of MPs in influent was substantially
higher (p < 0.05) in summer (45.8 items/L) compared to spring and
winter (39.2 and 37.9 items/L respectively). Long et al. and Bayo et al.
Table 1
Total removal rate % (T) and MPs removal % (M) in treatment stages at different seasons.
Spring Summer
T M T M
Primary treatment 49.9 % 49.9 % 52.3 %
Secondary treatment 93.0 % 86.2 % 92.3 %
The bold figures represent the sewage treatment plant's cumulative efficiency in removing MPs after both treatment stages.
3
Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200
also found a remarkable seasonal fluctuation in MPs abundance [23,30].
There are various factors influencing the temporal distribution of MPs
abundance in influent of sewage treatment plants, such as the rainfall,
average temperature, population densities, and the area of afforested
land [31]. The possible explanation for the high levels of MPs in summer
may be higher personal care product consumption and laundry waste­
water production [32,33]. MPs like the microbeads can often be found in
cosmetics and personal care products and a single wash of clothing can
release up to megabytes of MPs per liter [34]. Other factors might
include a rise in population over the summer because Nanjing is a
popular tourist destination and attracts a lot of visitors during the
summer holiday period (about 2776 ten thousand tourists shown in SI
Table S2), as well as a potential increase in the consumption of plastic
products. Furthermore, increased solar irradiation, which facilitates
quicker water evaporation, could account for the increased concentra­
tion of MPs in wastewater during the hot period [35]. The second-
highest average concentration was found in autumn, possibly as a
result of intense rainstorm events during the rainiest time of year in our
region, which caused urban overflow of soil-retained MPs into the
sewage system [36].The lower MPs abundance in winter may reflect a
higher contribution of weather conditions, MPs become stuck in ice or
snow due to cold temperatures, making it difficult to enter sewage
treatment plants [37]. However, different results were reported by Ben-
David et al., who found higher MPs abundance in winter [38]. It may be
caused by regional disparity or climatic contrast, as China is a sub­
tropical wet monsoon climate while Israel is etesian climate. Further­
more, the methods utilized for sampling, the volume of water used, how
the water is taken, the variations in analytical techniques, and whether
the influent is domestic or industrial can all affect the discrepancy [39].
Fig. 2 also shows the MPs seasonal variation in different treatment
stages. The number of MPs after primary treatment reached 19.6 ± 3
items/L in Spring, 21.9 ± 2.6 items/L in Summer, 20.4 ± 3.5 items/L in
Autumn, and 17.2 ± 1.8 items/L in Winter. The concentrations were
further reduced after secondary treatment and the range of variation
was narrowed, varying between 2.3 and 3.5 items/L. The seasonal
variability was highly attenuated in the effluent, as the MPs total
removal rates of the plant were about 93.0 %, 92.3 %, 93.0 % and 93.8 %
in Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter shown in Table 1. The perfor­
mance of treatment stages is not significantly impacted by seasonal
changes, which indicates the plant has a buffering effect on seasonal
variations in the influent. And the removal rate of MPs in treatment
stages usually depends on the characteristics of MPs, such as physical
and chemical features [37].
3.1.2. Seasonal characteristic of MPs in influent
It is necessary to characterize the physical properties of MPs in
influent as they can imply distinct inputs and sources and may also affect
the sewage treatment plants performance. Fig. 3 depicts influent MPs
size, shape, color and type in each season to accurately estimate char­
acteristic of MPs entering to the sewage treatment plant.
In this study, the largest quantity was discovered in the size range of
125 to 355 μm in influent, which accounted for 38.0 % in Spring, 35.3 %
in Summer, 32.9 % in Autumn, and 34.2 % in Winter (Fig. 3a). The size
range between 63–125 μm and 38–63 μm formed the second largest
proportion: 28.1 % and 21.7 % in Spring, 26.5 % and 24.2 % in Summer,
29.2 % and 24.2 % in Autumn, 29.2 % and 24.8 % in Winter, respec­
tively. In the same time, only a few particles larger than 355 μm were
Autumn Winter
T M T M
52.3 % 49.8 % 49.8 % 54.6 % 54.6 %
84.0 % 93.0 % 86.3 % 93.8 % 86.6 %
J. Huang et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200

Fig. 3. Seasonal Characteristic of MPs in influent: size (a), shape (b), color (c), type (d). Ring from inner to outer indicates Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter,
respectively.

4
J. Huang et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200

Fig. 4. (a) MPs abundance in wastewater and sludge samples (W1–3 was collected from influent, primary effluent, and secondary effluent, respectively, S was
collected from sludge). (b) Correlation between MPs and TSS (Data from W1, W2 and W3).

found: 4.5–7.5 items/L in samples. The higher proportion of small MPs
in influent may be caused by the fact that MPs with larger particle sizes
gradually break down into smaller MPs during migration [40]. The re­
sults imply that MPs entering the sewage treatment plant tend to be
relatively small in each season.
Fibers were the predominant type of MPs in every season, repre­
senting over 43.8 % in all samples and fragment formed the second
largest proportion, while film and granular formed the lowest (Fig. 3b).
The prevalence of fibers may be related to the discharge of fiber particles
from textile products after washing [41]. According to recent estimates,

Fig. 5. The relative percentage (%) of MPs during treatment stages: size (a), shape (b), color (c), type (d).

5
J. Huang et al.
Fig. 6. The removal rate (%) of MPs during treatment stages: size (a), shape (b), color (c), type (d).
about 18,000,000 synthetic fibers were discharged into the washing
water when 6 kg of synthetic product was washed in a washing machine
[42]. Additionally, MPs utilized in personal care items including facial
cleansing gels, toothpaste, masks, and soaps are most likely the source of
the granular [43]. And films are usually come from packaging, including
those of ready-made goods and shopping bags [44].
The percentage color distribution of MPs is shown in Fig. 3c.
Transparent and blue were the main colors, their proportions for Spring,
Summer, Autumn, and Winter were 32.9 % and 24.6 %, 34.4 % and 24.2
%, 38.9 % and 24.2 %, 34.5 % and 23.0 %, respectively. The next were
white and black, while green accounted for the least in each season. The
results were caused by large amount of PE in influent in each season
(Fig. 3d) since primary PE was predominantly transparent in color. The
variety of colors showed the complexity of the sources of MPs. Plastic
bottles, bags, cups, packaging bags and cling film utilized on a daily
basis could be the source of transparent and black MPs. Furthermore,
due to the leaching, oxidation, and aging of dyes brought on by
weathering and ultraviolet exposure in aquatic environment, the orig­
inal brilliant color of MPs may turn black or transparent [45]. Dyed MPs
may include hazardous substances like heavy metals, pathogens, and
persistent organic pollutants [46,47].
MPs with the type of PE and PP were dominant in each season, fol­
lowed by PET and PS (Fig. 3d). And the least proportion was observed in
PES type class: 0.5–0.8 items/L from Spring to Winter (Fig. 3d). The
results can be closely related to domestic wastewater taking up mostly
proportion of influent in the studied sewage treatment plant as most of
the plastic derivatives identified are used in household products. For
6
Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200
example, PE is widely used in packaging, personal care product and food
containers, and PP is often used in water bottles [48]. Other studies have
also found PP, PE, PS, and PET were dominant in influent of a rural
domestic sewage treatment plant [49].
3.2. MPs abundance and related results in treatment stages
The distribution of MPs in each treatment stage was reflected in
wastewater samples W1, W2, and W3. The number of MPs at these three
points was 41.0 ± 8.3, 21.6 ± 5.1, and 3.0 ± 1.3 items/L, respectively
(Fig. 4a). It was noticed that the abundance of MPs in sludge was 18.2 ±
9.3 items/g (Fig. 4a). A sizable proportion of MPs were remained in
sludge. The Tukey test revealed that there was a significant difference in
MPs abundance between W1 and W3 (p < 0.05), with a total MPs
removal rate of 92.6 %.
The number of MPs removed by different stages in wastewater
treatment varied. MPs removed by primary treatment ranged from 40.0
% to 55.0 %, while secondary treatment can remove up to 86.0 % MPs.
Large and suspended particles can be effective intercepted by grid and
grit chamber, and MPs tend to adhere to solid particles, which allows
them to be retained by the primary treatment process [50]. The larger
removal rate in secondary treatment may be related to adequate contact
time between MPs and wastewater to help them sink to the bottom in the
biochemical tank. According to Carr et al., longer contact time facili­
tated the formation of biofilm on the surface of MPs [32]. And biofilm
can be used as a substance to change the surface characteristics or
density of MPs, which was conducive to their settlement [51].
J. Huang et al.
Meanwhile, sludge flocs or bacterial extracellular polymers can facilitate
the aggregation of plastic particles during the biochemical reaction,
which in turn led to the deposition of MPs [52].
However, the study of MPs pollution remains as academic research.
It is not currently become a regular pollution monitoring indicator like
COD, organic carbon and other pollutants. Previous studies have tried to
find a correlation between TSS and MPs and hence TSS might be used as
an indicator of MPs [53]. In this study, a strong linear correlation be­
tween MPs and TSS (rPearson = 0.98, p < 0.01) has been found (Fig. 4b),
which give an indication of the possibility that MPs abundance could be
estimated by SS content.
3.3. Characteristics of MPs in treatment stages
3.3.1. Size
The size distributions of MPs of wastewater and sludge samples taken
in various stages of the sewage treatment plant are presented in Fig. 5a.
38–355 μm were the common size of MPs, while 355–5000 μm
accounted for the least proportion. This was similar to the study by
Conley et al. on the size of MPs in different stages of sewage treatment
plants [54]. 38–63 μm (39.4 %) accounted for the dominant size range in
effluent (W3) as large MPs could become smaller due to abrasion and
breakage and therefore small MPs can be observed in high concentration
in sewage treatment plants effluent [55]. In sludge samples, the size
distribution was observed as 355–5000 μm (31.6 %), 125–355 μm (28.2
%), 63–125 μm (21.1 %) and 38–63 μm (19.1 %). Larger particle size
was the dominant in sludge. The size of MPs in sludge was bigger than
that in wastewater, according to Sherri et al., smaller MPs might stay
afloat in the water column, whereas larger ones were more likely to sink
to the bottom [56].
The size disparity caused a significant variation in removal rate be­
tween sewage treatment facilities. The primary treatment was more
effective in removing large-sized MPs with removal rates of 63.6 ± 5.8
% and 55.2 ± 3.3 % for 355–5000 μm and 125–355 μm, respectively (p
< 0.05), and lower for 63–125 μm and 38–63 μm with 25.5 ± 5.0 % and
32.4 ± 3.7 %, respectively (p > 0.05) (Fig. 6a). 63–125 μm and 125–355
μm MPs can be effectively removed by secondary treatment (p < 0.05),
with removal rate of 91.9 ± 6.2 % and 92.9 ± 4.2 % (Fig. 6a). The
difference in removal rate of MPs between primary and secondary
treatment may be due to the water inlet mode. In the grit chamber, the
inlet flow rate was relatively high, making it challenging to create an
effective flocculation and clarifying impact. While in secondary treat­
ment process, the low flow velocity was more conducive for suspending
smaller MPs. And activated sludge had a better precipitation and
adsorption rate on MPs in wastewater at low flow rates. Thus, the sec­
ondary treatment had the capacity to remove small and low-density MPs
that the primary treatment was unable to remove. The same results were
also obtained by Ren et al., who found primary treatment had a higher
removal rate for large-sized MPs, and secondary treatment had a higher
removal rate for small-sized MPs [24].
3.3.2. Shape
Four types of MPs (granular, film, fiber, fragment) were observed in
W1, W2, W3 and S (Fig. 5b). Fiber and fragment accounted for a sizeable
percentage (46–56 % and 31–38 %, respectively) in all wastewater
samples, while a relative small percentage (7–16 % and 4–7 %,
respectively) was taken up by film and granular. Proportions of fiber and
fragment increased from 46 % and 31 % in influent to 56 % and 33 % in
effluent, respectively. Fiber and fragment were also the dominant MPs
shape in sludge samples (Fig. 5b). Previous studies also suggested the
dominance of fiber and fragment in wastewater and sludge samples
[57]. The slender and long shape of fibers made it difficult to be removed
by process. Furthermore it has been noted that fibers can be released
throughout the treatment stages to the environment because of their
small size and form [21].
Fig. 6b shows the removal rate of each shape of MPs in different
7
Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200
stage. Different shape showed different removal characteristics in pri­
mary treatment. The removal effectiveness of granular and fragment
was limited in primary treatment, only accounting for 31.0 % and 36.2
%. However, primary stage had better removal rate on fiber and film (p
< 0.05), with removal rates of 55.3 % and 53.1 %, respectively (Fig. 6b).
It has also been demonstrated by other studies that primary treatment
can effectively remove fibers [58]. The removal rate of all shape of MPs
by secondary treatment was significant (p < 0.05), while the removal of
fibers was relatively low (Fig. 6b). On the one hand, the surface of fiber
is typically smooth, while the rough and irregular surfaces of fragment,
film, and granular make them simple to remove by settling with the solid
particles [23]. On the other hand, the irregular and complex surface is
more likely to support microbes, which further accelerates its
degradation.
3.3.3. Color
Seven different colors including red, blue, yellow, transparent,
white, black and green were observed in this study (Fig. 5c). MPs of
transparent color were the most common in all samples, accounting for
38.0 % (W1), 31.0 % (W2), 36.0 % (W3), and 24.9 % (S), respectively.
And the next is blue, black and white. In many researches, transparent,
white, blue and black colors dominate [23]. Lares et al. also found
transparent colors predominate in effluent of China's largest sewage
treatment plant [29]. Vardar et al. suggested transparent and blue colors
to be the dominant in wastewater and sludge [59]. The average removal
rate of red and blue MPs in primary treatment stage was low, which was
27.5 % and 14.6 % respectively (Fig. 6c), but the average removal rates
of other colors were >40.0 %, with green removal rate reaching 100 %.
It's possible that the blue and red colors in influent were mostly small
fragments or granular. Secondary treatment is effective in removing all
colors MPs, especially for yellow colors MPs (93.8 %).
Colors can also reveal the presence of chemical additions and the
possible environmental risk. For example, azo colorants, which give
transparent plastics their vivid clear color, are soluble and rapidly
migrate [60]. And brightly colored plastics are often created using heavy
metals like chromium, cobalt, copper, selenium, cadmium and lead
[61]. Furthermore, a variety of aquatic species could selectively
consume MPs of different colors, according to earlier investigations. For
instance, in Tokyo Bay [62], the majority of MPs in the digestive tracts of
Japanese anchovies were white or transparent (71 %). And Planktivo­
rous palm ruff juveniles prefer to catch black MPs over blue or yellow
MPs according to the study conducted by Ory et al. [63]. Therefore, the
large amount of white, blue and black MPs in the sewage treatment plant
may be a potential source of pollution to aquatic environment and raise
the risk to aquatic creatures.
3.3.4. Type
Six types of MPs were identified in W1, W2, W3, and S as shown in
Fig. 5d. PE and PP were the most common in all samples, making up
32.6 % and 28.2 % in W1, 36.0 % and 28.0 % in W2, 20.0 % and 26.0 %
in W3, 23.4 % and 22.6 % in S, respectively. PE (23.4 %), PP (22.6 %),
PS (14.9 %), PET (16.7 %), PA (15.9 %), PES (2.6 %) were identified in
sludge samples, which is similar to the composition of MPs in influent.
Similarly, the most common species in sewage treatment plants influent
and effluent were determined to be PP and PE [64]. Yang et al. studied
the component in a sewage treatment plant in China, the study found
that PP (33 %), PE (23 %), and PS (18 %) were dominant in water
samples [65]. Additionally, 121 sewage treatment plants from 17
different countries were analyzed, and it was discovered that PE (22 %),
PS (21 %), and PP (13 %) were the most prevalent MP types in waste­
water [66]. The most popular types of polymer consumed in China are
PE, PP, and PS. As a result, the structure of plastic polymer consumption
in China may mirror the polymer type in sewage treatment plants.
The removal rate of PP and PE was limited in primary treatment,
only accounting for 39 % and 47 % (Fig. 6d). However, pretreatment
stage had better removal effect on PET, PA and PES, ranging from 50 %
J. Huang et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200

Table 2
MPs abundance, removal, and release in sewage treatment plants.
Location Water Sludge Ref.

Influent Effluent Removal MPs released MPs released

(items/L) (items/L) (%) (million items/day) (million items/day)

India 1860.0 ± 265.0 148.0 ± 51.0 92.0 30,000 – [69]

Xian, China 288.5 22.9 92.1 3400 – [41]
Thailand 77.0 ± 7.2 2.3 ± 1.5 97.0 280 ± 183 – [70]
Ningbo, China 78.0 ± 2.9 6.0 ± 2.8 92.3 140–230 1300 [71]
Madrid, Spain 171.0 ± 42.0 12.8 ± 6.3 92.5 300 2191 [22]
Zhengzhou, China 16.0 2.9 81.9 870 315 [24]
Australia 92.0 0.2 99.8 1020 4100 [72]
Xiamen, China 13.7 1.7 87.4 650 – [23]
Nanjing, China 41.0 ± 8.3 3.0 ± 1.3 92.6 300 1274 This study

to 60 % (Fig. 6d). Roberto et al. reported that the removal effect of MPs
was positively correlated to its density, which played an important role
in its rise and fall in environment [67]. The densities of PE, PP, PET, PA
and PES are 0.91–0.97, 0.91, 1.38, 1.15, and 1.37 g/cm3, respectively.
MP polymers denser than sewage are more easily removed by physical
precipitation, whereas smaller or medium density polymers float in the
middle and upper layers of wastewater and are difficult to remove with
other solids [23]. The average removal rate of secondary treatment for
PA was relatively low (76 %), while for other components exceeded 80
%. Overall, the sewage treatment plant had a good interception and
removal effect on all components of MPs, with an average removal rate
of >85 %.
3.4. The fate of MPs in the sewage treatment plant
The MPs balance analysis in treatment stages would help to under­
stand the fate of MPs. The detailed calculation of MPs count balance can
be found in SI Text S1 and Table S1. It's observed that the removed MPs
between W2 and W3 were 1417 million items/day, while the MPs in
sludge were 1274 million items/day. The missing 10.1 % of the MPs
count balance are expected to arise from MPs loss in the process of
sludge treatment, as MPs can either be biological degradation or broken
down to particles below the size detection limit [68]. Also, fluctuation of
daily flow and sludge disposal would lead to the discrepancies, as well as
the sampling and measuring uncertainties.
The potential MPs release to environment can be calculated based on
the count balance. About 300 million items MPs were released into
environment per day based on average flow rate of the sewage treatment
plant. And the daily MPs emission in other sewage treatment plants was
also as high as 300–30,000 million items as shown in Table 2. Patil et al.
stated that roughly 30,000 million items MPs were released into aquatic
environment per day on average at a treatment plant in India [69],
which was around 100 times the emission of this study. Another study
also reported that approximately 3400 million items MPs were dis­
charged to environment daily from a sewage treatment in Xian, China
[41]. Another potential route for the release of MPs to environment is
the use of sewage sludge on agricultural fields. Based on the count
balance established in this study, a daily discharge of 1274 million items
MPs could be released to the terrestrial environment. The daily MPs
emission from sludge phase in other sewage treatment plants was also
about 315–4100 million items based on the recent studies. Li et al.
studied the total sludge production in China and estimated that the daily
average amount of sludge-based MPs entering to environment can reach
to 427 billion items [31]. All of these results show that large amounts of
MPs were released from sewage treatment facilities to environment,
despite having a relatively high removal rate.
4. Conclusion
treatment stages was discussed in a domestic sewage treatment plant in
Nanjing, China. The 12-month sampling campaign revealed that MPs
abundance in influent fluctuated with seasons and summer had a larger
number of MPs entering the sewage treatment plant. Additionally,
125–355 μm accounted for a substantial part of size range in each
treatment stage. Fiber was the major shape with transparent main color
in wastewater and sludge samples. And PE and PP were the main
composition of MPs. However, although there was 92.6 % reduction in
MPs in the sewage treatment plant, about 300 million items MPs per day
are still released to aquatic environment from treated wastewater and
1274 million items MPs are released to terrestrial habitats per day due to
treated sludge applications in agricultural lands as bio-solid fertilizer.
Therefore, it's suggested to pay attention to enhancing techniques in
sewage treatment plants to lessen the MPs abundance discharged into
environment. For example, tertiary treatment may be used for further
MPs reduction, and sludge disposal must be taken seriously to reduce
MPs pollution in soil. In addition, sewage treatment plants should
employ different treatment techniques due to the different MPs inputs
into wastewater over the month in order to efficiently eliminate con­
taminants from wastewater.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Juan Huang: Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition,
Methodology, Project administration. Jing Tuo: Investigation, Data
curation, Writing – original draft. Luming Wang: Investigation, Soft­
ware, Methodology. Jiaming Liu: Methodology, Investigation.
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
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grants from the Jiangsu Provincial key
Research and Development Program (Grant No.BE2022831).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.104200.

In this study, the seasonal variations of MPs in influent were

analyzed, and occurrence as well as characteristics of MPs in different

8
J. Huang et al. Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200

References Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 27 (2020) 36295–36305, https://doi.org/10.1007/

s11356-020-09611-5.
[25] L.S. Zhang, J.Y. Liu, Y.S. Xie, S. Zhong, P. Gao, Occurrence and removal of
[1] R.C. Thompson, Y. Olsen, R.P. Mitchell, A. Davis, S.J. Rowland, A.W.J. John,
microplastics from wastewater treatment plants in a typical tourist city in China,
D. McGonigle, A.E. Russell, Lost at sea: where is all the plastic, Science. 304 (5672)
J. Clean. Prod. 291 (2021), 125968, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
(2004) 838, https://doi.org/10.1126/science1094559.
jclepro.2021.125968.
[2] Association of Plastic Manufacturers, Plastics–The Facts 2020, Plastic Europe,
[26] B. Petrie, R. Barden, B. Kasprzyk-Hordern, A review on emerging contaminants in
2020, pp. 1–64.
wastewaters and the environment: current knowledge, understudied areas and
[3] I.D. da Costa, L.L. Costa, A. da Silva Oliveira, C.E.V. de Carvalho, I.R. Zalmon,
recommendations for future monitoring, Water Res. 72 (2015) 3–27, https://doi.
Microplastics in fishes in amazon riverine beaches: influence of feeding mode and
org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.08.053.
distance to urban settlements, Sci. Total Environ. 863 (2023), 160934, https://doi.
[27] S. Hajji, M. Ben-Haddad, M.R. Abelouah, G.E. De-la-Torre, A.A. Alla, Occurrence,
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160934.
characteristics, and removal of microplastics in wastewater treatment plants
[4] S.H. Nam, S.A. Kim, T.Y. Lee, Y.J. An, Understanding hazardous concentrations of
located on the Moroccan Atlantic: the case of Agadir metropolis, Sci. Total Environ.
microplastics in fresh water using non-traditional toxicity data, J. Hazard. Mater.
(2023) 862, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160815.
445 (2023), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130532.
[28] B. Maurizio, M. Micro, C. Riccardo, P. Enio, Microplastics in the Florence
[5] X.L. Zhao, Z.H. Liu, L. Cai, J.Q. Han, Occurrence and distribution of microplastics
wastewater treatment plant studied by a continuous sampling method and Raman
in surface sediments of a typical river with a highly eroded catchment, a case of the
spectroscopy: a preliminary investigation, Sci. Total Environ. (2022) 808, https://
Yan River, a tributary of the Yellow River, Sci. Total Environ. 863 (2023), https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152025.
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160932.
[29] M. Lares, M. Ncibi, M. Sillanpaa, M. Sillanpaa, Occurrence, identification and
[6] A. Sharma, P.P. Pandit, R.L. Chopade, V. Nagar, V. Aseri, A. Singh, K.K. Awasthi,
removal of microplastic particles and fibers in conventional activated sludge
G. Awasthi, M.S. Sankhla, Eradication of microplastics in wastewater treatment:
process and advanced MBR technology, Water Res. 133 (2018) 236–246, https://
overview, Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 13 (2023) 3, https://doi.org/10.33263/
doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.01.049.
BRIAC133.223.
[30] J. Bayo, S. Olmos, J. López-Castellanos, Microplastics in an urban wastewater
[7] D. Zhou, J. Chen, J. Wu, J. Yang, H. Wang, Biodegradation and catalytic-chemical
treatment plant: the influence of physicochemical parameters and environmental
degradation strategies to mitigate microplastic pollution, Sustain. Mater. Technol.
factors, Chemosphere. 124593 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
28 (2021), e00251, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2021.e00251.
chemosphere.2019.124593.
[8] M.R.M. Zaki, R.X. Ying, A.H. Zainuddin, M.R. Razak, A.Z. Aris, Occurrence,
[31] X.W. Li, L.B. Chen, Q.Q. Mei, B. Dong, X.H. Dai, G.J. Ding, E.Y. Zeng, Microplastics
abundance, and distribution of microplastics pollution: an evidence in surface
in sewage sludge from the wastewater treatment plants in China, Water Res. 142
tropical water of Klang River estuary, Malaysia, Environ. Geochem. Health 43
(2018) 75–85, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.05.034.
(2021) 3733–3748, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-021-00872-8.
[32] S.A. Carr, J. Liu, A.G. Tesoro, Transport and fate of microplastic particles in
[9] Y.K. Song, S.H. Hong, S. Eo, M. Jang, G.M. Han, A. Isobe, W.J. Shim, Horizontal
wastewater treatment plants, Water Res. 91 (2016), 174e182, https://doi.org/
and vertical distribution of microplastics in Korean coastal waters, Environ. Sci.
10.1016/j.watres.2016.01.002.
Technol. 52 (2018) 12188–12197, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b04032.
[33] S. Ziajahromi, P.A. Neale, F.D. Leusch, Wastewater treatment plant effluent as a
[10] M.T. Yan, H.Y. Nie, K.H. Xu, Y.H. He, Y.T. Hu, Y.M. Huang, J. Wang, Microplastic
source of microplastics: review of the fate, chemical interactions and potential risks
abundance, distribution and composition in the Pearl River along Guangzhou city
to aquatic organisms, Water Sci. Technol. 74 (2016), 2253e2269, https://doi.org/
and Pearl River estuary, China, Chemosphere. 217 (2019) 879–886, https://doi.
10.2166/wst.2016.414.
org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.11.093.
[34] U. Pirc, M. Vidmar, A. Mozer, A. Krzan, Emissions of microplastic fibers from
[11] C.G. Liu, J. Li, Y.L. Zhang, L. Wang, J. Deng, Y. Gao, L. Yu, J.J. Zhang, H.W. Sun,
microfiber fleece during domestic washing, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23 (2016)
Widespread distribution of PET and PC microplastics in dust in urban China and
22206–22211, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-016-7703-0.
their estimated human exposure, Environ. Int. 128 (2019) 116–124, https://doi.
[35] J. Bayo, J. Lopez-Castellanos, Principal factor and hierarchical cluster analyses for
org/10.1016/j.envint.2019.04.024.
the performance assessment of an urban wastewater treatment plant in the
[12] M. Klein, E.K. Fischer, Microplastic abundance in atmospheric deposition within
Southeast of Spain, Chemosphere. 155 (2016) 152e162, https://doi.org/10.1016/
the Metropolitan area of Hamburg, Germany, Sci. Total Environ. 685 (2019)
j.chemosphere.2016.04.038.
96–103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.405.
[36] G. Wong, L. Löwemark, A. Kunz, Microplastic pollution of the Tamsui River and its
[13] Y.Q. Tang, Y.G. Liu, Y. Chen, W. Zhang, J.M. Zhao, S.Y. He, C.P. Yang, T. Zhang, C.
tributaries in northern Taiwan: spatial heterogeneity and correlation with
F. Tang, C. Zhang, A review: research progress on microplastic pollutants in aquatic
precipitation, Environ. Pollut. 260 (2020), 113935, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
environments, Sci. Total Environ. 766 (2021), 142572, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2020.113935.
scitotenv.2020.142572.
[37] I. Uoginte, S. Pleskyte, J. Pauraite, G. Lujaniene, Seasonal variation and complex
[14] I. Grgic, K.A. Cetinic, Z. Karacic, A. Previsic, M. Rozman, Fate and effects of
analysis of microplastic distribution in different WWTP treatment stages in
microplastics in combination with pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruptors in
Lithuania, Environ. Monit. Assess. 194 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-
freshwaters: insights from a microcosm experiment, Sci. Total Environ. 859 (2023),
022-10478-x.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.160387.
[38] E.A. Ben-David, M. Habibi, E. Haddad, M. Hasanin, D.L. Angel, A.M. Booth,
[15] L.Y. Meng, H.T. Tian, J.T. Lv, Y.W. Wang, G.B. Jiang, Influence of microplastics on
I. Sabbah, Microplastic distributions in a domestic wastewater treatment plant:
the photodegradation of perfluorooctane sulfonamide (FOSA), J. Environ. Sci. 127
removal efficiency, seasonal variation and influence of sampling technique, Sci.
(2023) 791–798, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2022.07.004.
Total Environ. 752 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141880.
[16] Y. Zhang, S. Kang, S. Allen, D. Allen, T. Gao, M. Sillanpää, Atmospheric
[39] H. Altug, S. Erdogan, Wastewater treatment plants as a point source of plastic
microplastics: a review on current status and perspectives, Earth Sci. Rev. 203
pollution, Water Air Soil Pollut. 233 (2022) 12, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-
(2020), 103118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2020.103118.
022-05962-6.
[17] P. Bhatt, V.M. Pathak, A.R. Bagheri, M. Bilal, Microplastic contaminants in the
[40] X.N. Liu, W.K. Yuan, M.X. Di, Z. Li, J. Wang, Transfer and fate of microplastics
aqueous environment, fate, toxicity consequences, and remediation strategies,
during the conventional activated sludge process in one wastewater treatment
Environ. Res. 200 (2021), 111762, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
plant of China, Chem. Eng. J. 362 (2019) 176–182, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2021.111762.
cej.2019.01.033.
[18] S.S. Alavian Petroody, S.H. Hashemi, C.A.M. van Gestel, Factors affecting
[41] Z. Yang, S. Li, S. Ma, P. Liu, D. Peng, Z. Ouyang, X. Guo, Characteristics and
microplastic retention and emission by a wastewater treatment plant on the
removal efficiency of microplastics in sewage treatment plant of Xi’an City,
southern coast of Caspian Sea, Chemosphere 261 (2020) 128179, https://doi.org/
northwest China, Sci. Total Environ. 771 (2021), 145377, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128179.
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145377.
[19] R. Ramasamy, T.A. Aragaw, R.B. Subramanian, Wastewater treatment plant
[42] A. Galvão, M. Aleixo, H. De Pablo, C. Lopes, J. Raimundo, Microplastics in
effluent and microfiber pollution: focus on industry-specific wastewater, Environ.
wastewater: microfber emissions from common household laundry, Environ. Sci.
Sci. Pollut. Res. 29 (34) (2022) 51211–51233, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-
Pollut. Res. 27 (2020) 26643–26649, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08765-
022-20930-7.
6.
[20] F. Murphy, C. Ewins, F. Carbonnier, B. Quinn, Wastewater treatment works
[43] W. Liu, J. Zhang, H. Liu, X. Guo, X. Zhang, X. Yao, Z. Cao, T. Zhang, A review of the
(WWTW) as a source of microplastics in the aquatic environment, Environ. Sci.
removal of microplastics in global wastewater treatment plants: characteristics and
Technol. 50 (11) (2016) 5800–5808, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.5b05416.
mechanisms, Environ. Int. 146 (2021), 106277, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[21] J. Talvitie, A. Mikola, A. Koistinen, O. Setala, Solutions to microplastic pollution -
envint.2020.106277.
removal of microplastics from wastewater effluent with advanced wastewater
[44] L. Yin, X. Wen, C. Du, J. Jiang, L. Wu, Y. Zhang, Z. Hu, S. Hu, Z. Feng, Z. Zhou,
treatment technologies, Water Res. 123 (2017), 401e407, https://doi.org/
Y. Long, Q. Gu, Comparison of the abundance of microplastics between rural and
10.1016/j.watres.2017.07.005.
urban areas: a case study from East Dongting Lake, Chemosphere. 244 (2020),
[22] C. Edo, M. Gonzalez-Pleiter, F. Leganes, F. Fernandez-Pinas, R. Rosal, Fate of
125486, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.125486.
microplastics in wastewater treatment plants and their environmental dispersion
[45] F. Wang, B. Wang, L. Duan, Y.Z. Zhang, Y.T. Zhou, Q. Sui, D.J. Xu, H. Qu, G. Yu,
with effluent and sludge, Environ. Pollut. 259 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in domestic, industrial, agricultural
envpol.2019.113837.
and aquacultural wastewater sources: a case study in Changzhou, China, Water
[23] Z.X. Long, Z. Pan, W.W.L. Wang, J.Y. Ren, X.G. Yu, L.Y. Lin, H. Lin, H.Z. Chen, X.
Res. 182 (2020), 115956, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.115956.
L. Jin, Microplastic abundance, characteristics, and removal in wastewater
[46] B.E. Ossmann, G. Sarau, H. Holtmannspotter, M. Pischetsrieder, S.H. Christiansen,
treatment plants in a coastal city of China, Water Res. 155 (2019) 255–265,
W. Dicke, Small-sized microplastics and pigmented particles in bottled mineral
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.02.028.
water, Water Res. 141 (2018) 307–316, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[24] P.J. Ren, M. Dou, C. Wang, G.Q. Li, R.P. Jia, Abundance and removal
watres.2018.05.027.
characteristics of microplastics at a wastewater treatment plant in Zhengzhou,

9
J. Huang et al.
[47] W. Wang, J. Wang, Comparative evaluation of sorption kinetics and isotherms of
pyrene onto microplastics, Chemosphere. 193 (2018) 567–573, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.11.078.
[48] L. Li, S. Geng, C. Wu, K. Song, F. Sun, C. Visvanathan, F. Xie, Q. Wang,
Microplastics contamination in different trophic state lakes along the middle and
lower reaches of Yangtze River Basin, Environ. Pollut. 254 (2019), 112951,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.07.119.
[49] S. Wei, H. Luo, J. Zou, J. Chen, X. Pan, D.P.L. Rousseau, J. Li, Characteristics and
removal of microplastics in rural domestic wastewater treatment facilities of China,
Sci. Total Environ. 739 (2020), 139935, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.139935.
[50] F. Liu, K.B. Olesen, A.R. Borregaard, J. Vollertsen, Microplastics in urban and
highway stormwater retention ponds, Sci. Total Environ. 671 (2019) 992–1000,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.416.
[51] C.D. Rummel, A. Jahnke, E. Gorokhova, D. Kuhnel, M. Schmitt-Jansen, Impacts of
biofilm formation on the fate and potential effects of microplastic in the aquatic
environment, Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4 (2017) 258–267, https://doi.org/
10.1021/acs.estlett.7b00164.
[52] S. Freeman, A.M. Booth, I. Sabbah, R. Tiller, J. Dierking, K. Klun, A. Rotter,
E. BenDavid, J. Javidpour, D.L. Angel, Between source and sea: the role of
wastewater treatment in reducing marine microplastics, J. Environ. Manag. 266
(2020), 110642, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110642.
[53] D.C. Cabrera, Q. Wang, M. Martín, N.O. Rajadel, D.P.L. Rousseau, C. Hernández-
Crespo, Microplastics occurrence and fate in full-scale treatment wetlands, Water
Res. 240 (2023), 120106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2023.120106.
[54] K. Conley, A. Clum, J. Deepe, Wastewater treatment plants as a source of
microplastics to an urban estuary: removal efficiencies and loading per capita over
one year, Water Res. X 3 (2019), 100030, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wroa.2019.100030.
[55] J. Jiang, X. Wang, H. Ren, G. Cao, G. Xie, D. Xing, Investigation and fate of
microplastics in wastewater and sludge filter cake from a wastewater treatment
plant in China, Sci. Total Environ. 746 (2020), 141378, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2020.141378.
[56] A.M. Sherri, G. Danielle, S. Rebecca, C. Yvonne, E. Karyn, B. Jason, F. Parker,
P. Daniel, L.R. Darrin, Microplastic pollution is widely detected in US municipal
wastewater treatment plant effluent, Environ. Pollut. 218 (2016) 1045–1054,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.08.056.
[57] E.A. Gies, J.L. LeNoble, M. Noël, A. Etemadifar, F. Bishay, E.R. Hall, P.S. Ross,
Retention of microplastics in a major secondary wastewater treatment plant in
Vancouver, Canada, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133 (2018) 553–561, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.06.006.
[58] J. Sun, X.H. Dai, Q.L. Wang, M.C.M. van Loosdrecht, B.J. Ni, Microplastics in
wastewater treatment plants: detection, occurrence and removal, Water Res. 152
(2019) 21–37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2018.12.050.
[59] S. Vardar, T.T. Onay, B. Demirel, A.E. Kideys, Evaluation of microplastics removal
efficiency at a wastewater treatment plant discharging to the Sea of Marmara,
Environ. Pollut. 289 (2021), 117862, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2021.117862.
10
Journal of Water Process Engineering 55 (2023) 104200
[60] J.N. Hahladakis, C.A. Velis, R. Weber, An overview of chemical additives present in
plastics: migration, release, fate and environmental impact during their use,
disposal and recycling, J. Hazard. Mater. 344 (2018) 179–199, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jhazmat.2017.10.014.
[61] R. Verma, K.S. Vinoda, M. Papireddy, Toxic pollutants from plastic waste - a
review, Procedia Environ. Sci. 35 (2016) 701–708, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proenv.2016.07.069.
[62] K. Tanaka, H. Takada, Microplastic fragments and microbeads in digestive tracts of
planktivorous fish from urban coastal waters, Sci. Rep. 6 (2016) 34351, https://
doi.org/10.1038/srep34351.
[63] N.C. Ory, C. Gallardo, M. Lenz, M. Thiel, Capture, swallowing, and egestion of
microplastics by a planktivorous juvenile fish, Environ. Pollut. 240 (2018)
566–573, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.04.093.
[64] S. Magni, A. Binelli, L. Pittura, C.G. Avio, C. Della Torre, C.C. Parenti, S. Gorbi,
F. Regoli, The fate of microplastics in an Italian wastewater treatment plant, Sci.
Total Environ. 652 (2019) 602–610, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2018.10.269.
[65] L. Yang, Y. Zhang, S. Kang, Z. Wang, C. Wu, Microplastics in freshwater sediment: a
review on methods, occurrence, and sources, Sci. Total Environ. 754 (2021),
141948, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141948.
[66] A. Yaseen, I. Assad, M.S. Sofi, M.Z. Hashmi, S.U. Bhat, A global review of
microplastics in wastewater treatment plants: understanding their occurrence, fate
and impact, Environ. Res. 212 (2022), 113258, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2022.113258.
[67] S.J. Roberto, L.P. Juan, S.C. María, M.L. Jose, M. Ana, BaP (PAH) air quality
modelling exercise over Zaragoza (Spain) using an adapted version of WRF-CMAQ
model, Environ. Pollut. 183 (2013) 7–957, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2013.02.025.
[68] L.A. Rasmussen, L. Iordachescu, S. Tumlin, J. Vollertsen, A complete mass balance
for plastics in a wastewater treatment plant - macroplastics contributes more than
microplastics, Water Res. 201 (2021), 117307, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
watres.2021.117307.
[69] S. Patil, P. Kamdi, S. Chakraborty, S. Das, A. Bafana, K. Krishnamurthi,
S. Sivanesan, Characterization and removal of microplastics in a sewage treatment
plant from urban Nagpur, India, Environ. Monit. Assess. 195 (2023) 1, https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10661-022-10680-x.
[70] K. Tadsuwan, S. Babel, Microplastic abundance and removal via an ultrafiltration
system coupled to a conventional municipal wastewater treatment plant in
Thailand, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 10 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jece.2022.107142.
[71] L. Jiang, M.L. Chen, Y. Huang, J.P. Peng, J.L. Zhao, F. Chan, X.B. Yu, Effects of
different treatment processes in four municipal wastewater treatment plants on the
transport and fate of microplastics, Sci. Total Environ. 831 (2022), https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154946.
[72] S. Ziajahromi, P.A. Neale, I.T. Silveira, A. Chua, F.D.L. Leusch, An audit of
microplastic abundance throughout three Australian wastewater treatment plants,
Chemosphere (2020) 263, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128294.