Affiliation:
1. Department of Biology, Hampden-Sydney College, Hampden-Sydney, VA 23943, USA
2. Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92831, USA
3. Department of Physics, WATER Institute, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO 63103, USA
4. Department of Oceans, Hopkins Marine Station, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA 93950, USA
Abstract
Baleen whales are ecosystem sentinels of microplastic pollution. Research indicates that they likely ingest millions of anthropogenic microparticles per day when feeding. Their immense prey consumption and filter-feeding behavior put them at risk. However, the role of baleen, the oral filtering structure of mysticete whales, in this process has not been adequately addressed. Using actual baleen tissue from four whale species (fin, humpback, minke, and North Atlantic right) in flow tank experiments, we tested the capture rate of plastics of varying size, shape, and polymer type, as well as chemical residues leached by degraded plastics, all of which accumulated in the baleen filter. Expanded polystyrene foam was the most readily captured type of plastic, followed by fragments, fibers, nurdles, and spherical microbeads. Nurdle and microbead pellets were captured most readily by right whale baleen, and fragments were captured by humpback baleen. Although not all differences between polymer types were statistically significant, buoyant polymers were most often trapped by baleen. Plastics were captured by baleen sections from all regions of a full baleen rack, but were more readily captured by baleen from dorsal and posterior regions. Baleen–plastic interactions underlie various risks to whales, including filter clogging and damage, which may impede feeding. We posit that plastics pose a higher risk to some whale species due to a combination of factors, including filter porosity, diet, habitat and geographic distribution, and foraging ecology and behavior. Certain whale species in specific marine regions are of the greatest concern due to plastic abundance. It is not feasible to remove all plastic from the sea; most of what is there will continue to break into ever-smaller pieces. We suggest that higher priorities be accorded to lessening humans’ dependence on plastics, restricting entry points of plastics into the ocean, and developing biodegradable alternatives.
Funder
National Science Foundation
National Geographic Society
Reference112 articles.
1. Marine litter plastics and microplastics and their toxic chemicals components: The need for urgent preventive measures;Gallo;Environ. Sci. Eur.,2018
2. The potential for a plastic recycling facility to release microplastic pollution and possible filtration remediation effectiveness;Brown;J. Hazard. Mater. Adv.,2023
3. Kershaw, P.J., Turra, A., and Galgani, F. (2019). GESAMP Reports & Studies Series, GESAMP.
4. What is known and unknown about the effects of plastic pollution: A meta-analysis and systematic review;Bucci;Ecol. Appl.,2020
5. Cetacean presence and distribution in the central Mediterranean Sea and potential risks deriving from plastic pollution;Gregorietti;Mar. Pollut. Bull.,2021
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献