Revolutionizing Shrimp Nurseries: Biofloc Technology for Pacific Whiteleg (Penaeus vannamei) Production | InformativeBD

Christopher Marlowe A. Caipang, Kathleen Mae P. Trebol, Marian Jill S. Abeto, Relicardo M. Coloso, Rolando V. Pakingking, Jr., Adelaida T. Calpe and Joel E. Deocampo, Jr. from the different institute of Philippines. wrote a Research Article about, Revolutionizing Shrimp Nurseries: Biofloc Technology for Pacific Whiteleg (Penaeus vannamei) Production. Entitled, An innovative biofloc technology for the nursery production of Pacific whiteleg shrimp, Penaeus vannamei in tanks. This research paper published by the International Journal of Biosciences (IJB). an open access scholarly research journal on Biosciences. under the affiliation of the International Network For Natural Sciences| INNSpub. an open access multidisciplinary research journal publisher.

Abstract

Nursery production of shrimp is usually done in small ponds; however, the use of small and circular tanks with plastic liners is gaining popularity. From an industry standpoint, there is still a need to assess how nursery systems can be of benefit to the shrimp production cycle. Hence, the use of small circular tanks coupled with the incorporation of biofloc technology was assessed in terms of its viability during the nursery production of the Pacific whiteleg shrimp, Penaeus vannamei. A 450m2 plastic lined circular tank was installed and prepared for the stocking of P. vannamei postlarvae (PLs) at a density of 500 PLs per m2. Biofloc was produced and maintained throughout the nursery phase using brown sugar as carbon source at a carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio of 10. Water quality was monitored daily, while presumptive Vibrios were enumerated weekly. Sampling for growth was done at the 14th day post-stocking and weekly until harvest on the 30th day. The different water quality parameters were within optimum levels required for shrimp growth. Presumptive Vibrios were dominated by the yellow colonies. At the end of the nursery phase, there was 100% survival and the shrimp attained an average body weight of 1.26 g and a feed conversion ratio (FCR) of 0.43. Our results indicate that the use of small circular tanks with biofloc during the nursery production phase of whiteleg shrimp is feasible and can be incorporated in the grow-out culture of this shrimp species.

Read more : Macrobenthic Invertebrate Diversity in Leyte's Mangrove Ecosystem | InformativeBD

Introduction

Biofloc technology offers a viable approach towards high-density culture of shrimp because it can maintain good water quality with minimal or no water exchange through nutrient recycling (Avnimelech, 1999; Kuhn et al., 2009; Fatimah et al., 2019). In particular, nitrogenous wastes are converted into microbial biomass that can be used in situ by the cultured animals (Kumar et al., 2020). The sustainability of this system relies heavily on the growth of microorganisms in the culture medium coupled with minimum or zero water exchange. The microorganisms that are present in a biofloc system has two important roles: (1) maintenance of water quality as a result of the uptake of nitrogenous waste materials, thereby producing microbial protein “in situ”; and (2) improved nutrition efficiency through reduction of feed conversion ratio and a decreased feed costs (Emerenciano et al., 2013). Through addition of carbohydrate sources to the water and adjusting the carbon to nitrogen ratio (C/N), the heterotrophic bacteria are able to absorb nutrients and maintain the production of bioflocs (Khanjani et al., 2017), which in turn facilitate the removal of ammonia-nitrogen and nitrite (NO2-N) (Asaduzzaman et al. 2008; Gao et al. 2012). Moreover, as disease outbreaks and their impact on commercial shrimp farming operations during the past years have greatly impacted the operational management of shrimp farms, the use of biofloc technology is increasingly identified as one possible approach for disease prevention in shrimp culture (Hargreaves, 2013). Short- and long-term nursery trials in shrimp demonstrated the importance of bioflocs as a means of preventing the negative effects of ammonia in the culture system as well as a source of natural food for the shrimp post-larvae (Emerenciano et al., 2011; Correia et al., 2014; Mishra et al., 2008; Samocha et al., 2007; Suita et al., 2016; Wasielesky et al., 2013; Schveitzer et al., 2017).

The nursery system is an intermediate step between the post-larval (PL) stage and the grow-out phase in shrimp culture (Mishra et al., 2008). During this phase, shrimps PLs are reared at high densities for 15 - 60 days that involves precise technical management, feeding and water quality monitoring (Jory and Cabrera, 2012; Samocha, 2010; Schveitzer et al., 2017). Here in the Philippines, traditional shrimp farmers carry out shrimp nursery activities in small ponds; however, with issues on disease outbreaks and biosecurity issues during the grow-out phase, the use of small and circular tanks with plastic liners is gaining popularity among shrimp growers. From an industry standpoint, there is still a need to assess how nursery systems can be of benefit to the shrimp production cycle. Hence, the use of small circular tanks coupled with the incorporation of biofloc technology was assessed in terms of its viability during the nursery production of the Pacific whiteleg shrimp, Penaeus vannamei.

Reference

Aguilera‐Rivera D, Escalante‐Herrera K, Gaxiola G, Prieto‐Davó A, Rodríguez‐Fuentes G, Guerra‐Castro E, Hernández‐López J, Chávez‐Sánchez MC, Rodríguez‐Canul R. 2019. Immune response of the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei, previously reared in biofloc and after an infection assay with Vibrio harveyi. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 50, 119-136. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwas.12543.

Aguirre‐Guzmán G, Mejia Ruíz H, Ascencio F. 2004. A review of extracellular virulence product of Vibrio species important in diseases of cultivated shrimp. Aquaculture Research 35, 1395-1404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2109.2004.01165.x.

Anand PSS, Kumar S, Sundaray JK, Sinha A. 2017. Dietary biofloc supplementation in black tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon: effects on immunity, antioxidant and metabolic enzyme activities. Aquaculture Research 48, 4512–4523. https://doi.org/10.1111/are.13276.

Avnimelech Y. 1999. Carbon / nitrogen ratio as a control element in aquaculture systems. Aquaculture 176, 227–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(99)00085-X.

Asaduzzaman M, Wahab MA, Verdegem MCJ, Huque S, Salam MA, Azim ME. 2008. C/N ratio control and substrate addition for periphyton development jointly enhance freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii production in ponds. Aquaculture 280, 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2008.04.019.

Boyd CE. 2003. Bottom soil and water quality management in shrimp ponds. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 13, 11-33. https://doi.org/10.1300/J028v13n01_02.

Cardona E, Saulnier D, Lorgeoux B, Chim L, Gueguen Y. 2015. Rearing effect of biofloc on antioxidant and antimicrobial transcriptional response in Litopenaeus stylirostris shrimp facing an experimental sub-lethal hydrogen peroxide stress. Fish & Shellfish Immunology 45, 933–939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsi.2015.05.041.

Crab R, Lambert A, Defoirdt T, Bossier P, Verstraete W. 2010. The application of bioflocs technology to protect brine shrimp (Artemia franciscana) from pathogenic Vibrio harveyi. Journal of Applied Microbiology 109, 643–1649. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2010.04791.x.

Correia ES, Wilkenfeld JS, Morris TC, Wei LW, Prangnell DI, Samocha TM. 2014. Intensive nursery production of the pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei using two commercial feeds with high and low protein content in a biofloc-dominated system. Aquacultural Engineering 59, 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2014.02.002.

Emerenciano M, Ballester ELC, Cavalli RO, Wasielesky W. 2011. Effect of biofloc technology (BFT) on the early post larval stage of Pink shrimp Farfantepenaeus paulensis: growth performance, floc composition and salinity stress tolerance. Aquaculture International 19, 891–901. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-010-9408-6.

Emerenciano M, Gaxiola G, Cuzon G. 2013. Biofloc technology (BFT): a review for aquaculture application and animal food industry. In: Matovic MD, editor. Biomass Now – Cultivation and.

Fatimah N, Pande GSJA, 2019. The role of microbial quorum sensing on the characteristics and functionality of bioflocs in aquaculture systems. Aquaculture 504, 420–426.

Ferreira NC, Bonetti C, Seiffert WQ. 2011. Hydrological and water quality indices as management tools in marine shrimp culture. Aquaculture 318, 425–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2011.05.045.

Ferreira GS, Silva VF, Martins MA, da Silva ACCP, Machado C, Seiffert WQ, do Nascimento Vieira F. 2020. Strategies for ammonium and nitrite control in Litopenaeus vannamei nursery systems with bioflocs. Aquacultural  Engineering 88, 102040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2019.102040.

Gao L, Shan HW, Zhang TW, Bao WZ, Ma SJ. 2012. Effects of carbohydrate addition on Litopenaeus vannamei intensive culture in a zero-water exchange system. Aquaculture 342, 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2012.02.022.

Hargreaves JA. 2013. Biofloc production system for aquaculture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center Publication No, 4503.

Jory D, Cabrera T. 2012. Marine shrimp, in: Lucas, J.L., Southgate PC (Eds), Aquaculture – Farming Aquatic Animals and Plants, second ed. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester, 476–513 p.

Khanjani MH, Sajjadi MM, Alizadeh M, Sourinejad I. 2017. Nursery performance of Pacific white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei Boone, 1931) cultivated in a biofloc system: the effect of adding different carbon sources. Aquaculture Research 48, 1491-1501. https://doi.org/10.1111/are.12985.

Kuhn DD, Boardman GD, Lawrence AL, Marsh L, Flick GJ. 2009. Microbial floc meal as a replacement ingredient for fish meal and soybean protein in shrimp feed. Aquaculture 296, 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.07.025.

Kumar V, Wille M, Lourenço TM, Bossier P. 2020. Biofloc-based enhanced survival of Litopenaeus vannamei upon AHPND-causing Vibrio parahaemolyticus challenge is partially mediated by reduced expression of its virulence genes. Frontiers in Microbiology 11, 1270. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.01270.

Lee C, Kim S, Lim S, Lee K. 2017. Supplemental effects of biofloc powder on growth performance, innate immunity, and disease resistance of Pacific white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei. Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 20, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41240-017-0059-7.

Madigan MT, Martinko JM, Bender KS, Buckley DH, Stahl DA. 2016. Microbiologia de Brock, 14th ed. Artmed, Porto Alegre.

Mishra JK, Samocha TM, Patnaik S, Speed M, Gandy RL, Ali AB. 2008. Performance of an intensive nursery system for the Pacific white shrimp, Litopenaeus vannamei, under limited discharge condition. Aquacultural Engineering 38, 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2007.10.003

Moss SM. 2002. Dietary importance of microbes and detritus in penaeid shrimp aquaculture. In: Lee CS, O’Bryen P (eds). Microbial approaches to aquatic nutrition within environmentally sound aquaculture production systems. Baton Rouge, LA: World Aquaculture Society. 1–18 p.

Sajali USBA, Atkinson NL, Desbois AP, Little DC, Murray FJ, Shinn AP. 2019. Prophylactic properties of biofloc- or Nile tilapia-conditioned water against Vibrio parahaemolyticus infection of whiteleg shrimp (Penaeus vannamei). Aquaculture 498, 496–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2018.09.002.

Samocha TM. 2010. Use of intensive and super-intensive nursery systems. In: Alday-Sanz V. (Ed.), The Shrimp Book. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, 247–280 p.

Samocha TM, Patnaik S, Speed M, Ali A, Burger J, Almeida R, Ayub Z, Harisanto M, Horowitz A, Brock DL. 2007. Use of molasses as carbon source in limited discharge nursery and grow-out systems for Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquacultural Engineering 36, 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2006.10.004.

Schveitzer R, de Lorenzo MA, do Nascimento Vieira F, Pereira SA, Mouriño JLP, Seiffert WQ, Andreatta ER. 2017. Nursery of young Litopenaeus vannamei post-larvae reared in biofloc-and microalgae-based systems. Aquacultural Engineering  78, 140-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2017.07.001.

Serra FP, Gaona CAP, Furtado PS, Poersch LH, Wasielesky W Jr. 2015. Use of different carbon sources for the biofloc system adopted during the nursery and grow-out culture of Litopenaeus vannamei. Aquaculture International 23, 1325–1339. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-015-9887-6.

Suita SM, Braga A, Ballester E, Cardozo AP, Abreu PC, Wasielesky W. 2016. Contribution of bioflocs to the culture of Litopenaeus vannamei post-larvae determined using stable isotopes. Aquaculture International 24, 1473–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-016-0006-0

Wasielesky W, Froes C, Foes G, Krummenauer D, Lara G, Poersch L. 2013. Nursery of Litopenaeus vannamei reared in a biofloc system: the effect of stocking densities and compensatory growth. Journal of Shellfish Research 32, 799–806. https://doi.org/10.2983/035.032.0323.

Source : An innovative biofloc technology for the nursery production of Pacific whiteleg shrimp, Penaeus vannamei in tanks 

Read More

Microplastic Contamination in Chinnamuttom Coast Seawaters: An Investigative Study | InformativeBD

N. Sivalingitha, Jeni Chandar Padua, P. C. Jeba Preethi Jansi, and J. Agnel, from the different institute of India. wrote a Research Article about, Microplastic Contamination in Chinnamuttom Coast Seawaters: An Investigative Study. Entitled, Microplastic footprints in the seawaters of Chinnamuttom Coast, Kanyakumari: An investigation. This research paper published by the Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences (JBES). an open access scholarly research journal on Biodiversity. under the affiliation of the International Network For Natural Sciences| INNSpub. an open access multidisciplinary research journal publisher.

Abstract

The study examines the microplastics contamination in marine waters along the Chinnamuttom coast. Density separation, filtration and sieving methods are employed to collect microplastics. The morphology, shape and colour of the microplastics collected were determined through visual analysis using microscopic identification. Microplastics were characterized using Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and FT-Raman spectroscopic investigations. The study revealed the presence of microplastics smaller than 5 mm. Approximately 70 mg of dried microplastics were obtained per 5 liters of water. The microplastics primarily consisted of fibers, pellets, and fragments, exhibiting a range of colours including orange pellets, black filaments and fibers in blue, pink, white and purple hues. Particles as small as 20 µm in diameter were detected using scanning electron microscopy, while Raman spectroscopy identified polymers such as polystyrene and nylon through their distinctive vibrational peaks, confirming the presence of bonds like C-H, aldehyde and C=C. The extensive pollution underscores critical ecological issues facing the Chinnamuttom coastal environment, potentially intensified by nearby fishing and tourism practices. The results emphasize the critical necessity for approaches aimed at reducing microplastic contamination in these aquatic environments to safeguard marine biodiversity and the overall health of ecosystems.

Read more : Effect of Ginger Rhizome Sett Size on Plantlet Production for Planting Materials | InformativeBD

Introduction

Microplastics are defined as plastic fragments or particles that measure less than 5 mm in diameter, resulting from the breakdown of larger plastic materials (Pellini et al., 2018). 

Microplastics are widespread in the environment, particularly in marine settings, as a result of hydrodynamic processes and transportation via wind and ocean currents. Large ocean gyres such as the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian Oceans, along with polar regions and the equator, host them, stretching from coastal areas to the open seas (Galgani et al., 2013). Microplastics are characterized by a variety of morphologies, including foils, foams, fibers, granules, fragments, and microbeads (Klein et al., 2018).

Microplastics can be classified into two categories based on their original dimensions. Municipal effluent could directly introduce industrially produced particulates and powders, originally designed as plastic microbeads, into the ocean as primary microplastics (Cole et al., 2011). Various physical, biological, and chemical processes fragment and degrade substantial plastic pieces, resulting in smaller particles known as secondary microplastics that may enter marine ecosystems (Arias-Villamizar et al., 2018).

Secondary microplastics refer to the fragmentation of larger plastic materials resulting from various forms of degradation, including biological processes involving microbial species, photodegradation caused by solar ultraviolet radiation, and mechanical abrasion due to wave action. Mechanical damage, photodegradation, and oxidative degradation are all mechanisms that degrade fragile polymers into microplastics in the ocean (Wagner et al., 2014).

A diverse array of sources contributes to microplastic pollution in the marine environment, broadly classified as inland-based, sea-based, and air-based (Andrady, 2011; Browne et al., 2011). According to Lebreton et al. (2017), rivers are the most critical conduits for the transportation of microplastics from inland regions to the ocean. The terrestrial environment is the source of approximately 80% of the plastic debris in the ocean (Andrady, 2011; Mani et al., 2015). Rivers transport plastic debris from urban drainage systems and sewage effluents to the sea, while coastal tourists immediately dispose of their plastic garbage in the environment (Andrady, 2011). Marine sources come from fisheries, maritime transport, and offshore industry (Bell et al., 2017). Plastic debris may end up in the waterways due to broken or lost fishing or aquaculture gear (Law and Thompson, 2014). 

Due to their increased bioavailability and potential negative effects on marine ecosystems over the long term, microplastics are expected to garner significant public attention in the next few years (Velzeboer et al., 2014). Although the exact nature of microplastics (MPs) and the harm they do to marine life is still largely unknown, there is mounting evidence that these contaminants pose a serious threat to marine ecosystems (Chen et al., 2017). Measures and initiatives are necessary to address the issues arising from microplastics and enhance plastic waste management. Hence, the present study aims to classify the microplastics based on their shape, size, colour and to evaluate the chemical composition of microplastics found in the seawater of the Chinnamuttom coast.

Reference

Andrady AL. 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Marine Pollution Bulletin 62, 1596–1605.

Araujo CF, Nolasco MM, Ribeiro AM, Ribeiro-Claro PJ. 2018. Identification of microplastics using Raman spectroscopy: Latest developments and future prospects. Water Research 142, 426–440.

Arias AH, Ronda AC, Oliva AL, Marcovecchio JE. 2019. Evidence of microplastic ingestion by fish from the Bahía Blanca estuary in Argentina, South America. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 102, 750–756.

Arias-Villamizar CA, Vázquez-Morillas A. 2018. Degradation of conventional and oxodegradable high-density polyethylene in tropical aqueous and outdoor environments. Revista Internacional de Contaminación Ambiental 34, 137–147.

Becucci M, Mancini M, Campo R, Paris E. 2022. Microplastics in the Florence wastewater treatment plant studied by a continuous sampling method and Raman spectroscopy: A preliminary investigation. Science of The Total Environment 808, 152025.

Bell JD, Watson RA, Ye Y. 2017. Global fishing capacity and fishing effort from 1950 to 2012. Fish and Fisheries 18, 489–505.

Bobori DC, Dimitriadi A, Feidantsis K, Samiotaki A, Fafouti D, Sampsonidis I, Kalogiannis S, Kastrinaki G, Lambropoulou DA, Kyzas GZ, Koumoundouros G. 2022. Differentiation in the expression of toxic effects of polyethylene microplastics on two freshwater fish species: Size matters. Science of the Total Environment 830, 154603.

Browne MA, Crump P, Niven SJ, Teuten E, Tonkin A, Galloway T, Thompson R. 2011. Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: sources and sinks. Environmental Science & Technology 45, 9175–9179.

Chen Q, Yin D, Jia Y, Schiwy S, Legradi J, Yang S, Hollert H. 2017. Enhanced uptake of BPA in the presence of nanoplastics can lead to neurotoxic effects in adult zebrafish. Science of the Total Environment 609, 1312–1321.

Cole M, Lindeque P, Halsband C, Galloway TS. 2011. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: a review. Marine Pollution Bulletin 62, 2588–2597.

Ding J, Jiang F, Li J, Wang Z, Sun C, Wang Z, Fu L, Ding NX, He C. 2019. Microplastics in the coral reef systems from Xisha Islands of South China Sea. Environmental Science & Technology 53, 8036–8046.

Galgani F, Hanke G, Werner SDVL, De Vrees L. 2013. Marine litter within the European marine strategy framework directive. ICES Journal of Marine Science 70, 1055–1064.

Gardon T, Paul-Pont I, Le Moullac G, Soyez C, Lagarde F, Huvet A. 2022. Cryogrinding and sieving techniques as challenges towards producing controlled size range microplastics for relevant ecotoxicological tests. Environmental Pollution (Barking, Essex: 1987), 315, 120383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.120383.

Hamed M, Martyniuk CJ, Lee JS, Shi H, Sayed AEDH. 2023. Distribution, abundance, and composition of microplastics in market fishes from the Red and Mediterranean seas in Egypt. Journal of Sea Research 194, 102407.

Klein S, Worch E, Knepper TP. 2015. Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in river shore sediments of the Rhine-Main area in Germany. Environmental Science & Technology 49, 6070–6076.

Kooi M, Reisser J, Slat B, Ferrari FF, Schmid MS, Cunsolo S, Brambini R, Noble K, Sirks LA, Linders TE, Schoeneich-Argent RI. 2016. The effect of particle properties on the depth profile of buoyant plastics in the ocean. Scientific Reports 6, 33882.

Koongolla JB, Andrady AL, Kumara PTP, Gangabadage CS. 2018. Evidence of microplastics pollution in coastal beaches and waters in southern Sri Lanka. Marine Pollution Bulletin 137, 277–284.

Law KL, Thompson RC. 2014. Microplastics in the seas. Science 345, 144–145.

Lebreton LC, Van Der Zwet J, Damsteeg JW, Slat B, Andrady A, Reisser J. 2017. River plastic emissions to the world’s oceans. Nature Communications 8, 15611.

Li D. 2019. Research advance and countermeasures on marine microplastic pollution. Research of Environmental Sciences 32, 197–202.

Liu J, Zhang X, Du Z. 2020. Application of confocal laser Raman spectroscopy on marine sediment microplastics. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology 38, 1502–1516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00343-020-0129-z.

Liu S, Jian M, Zhou L, Li W. 2019. Distribution and characteristics of microplastics in the sediments of Poyang Lake, China. Water Science and Technology 79, 1868–1877.

Mani T, Hauk A, Walter U, Burkhardt-Holm P. 2015. Microplastics profile along the Rhine River. Scientific Reports 5, 17988.

Melo-Agustín P, Kozak ER, de Jesús Perea-Flores M, Mendoza-Pérez JA. 2022. Identification of microplastics and associated contaminants using ultra high resolution microscopic and spectroscopic techniques. Science of the Total Environment 828, 154434.

Novotna K, Cermakova L, Pivokonska L, Cajthaml T, Pivokonsky M. 2019. Microplastics in drinking water treatment–current knowledge and research needs. Science of the Total Environment 667, 730–740.

Pellini G, Gomiero A, Fortibuoni T, Ferrà C, Grati F, Tassetti AN, Polidori P, Fabi G, Scarcella G. 2018. Characterization of microplastic litter in the gastrointestinal tract of Solea solea from the Adriatic Sea. Environmental Pollution 234, 943–952.

Razeghi N, Hamidian AH, Wu C. 2021. Microplastic sampling techniques in freshwaters and sediments: a review. Environmental Chemistry Letters 19, 4225–4252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-021-01227-6.

Sul JAI, Costa MF. 2014. The present and future of microplastic pollution in the marine environment. Environmental Pollution 185, 352–364.

Velzeboer I, Kwadijk CJAF, Koelmans AA. 2014. Strong sorption of PCBs to nanoplastics, microplastics, carbon nanotubes, and fullerenes. Environmental Science & Technology 48, 4869–4876.

Wagner M, Scherer C, Alvarez-Muñoz D, Brennholt N, Bourrain X, Buchinger S, Fries E, Grosbois C, Klasmeier J, Marti T, Rodriguez-Mozaz S. 2014. Microplastics in freshwater ecosystems: what we know and what we need to know. Environmental Sciences Europe 26, 1–9.

Wright SL, Kelly FJ. 2017. Plastic and human health: A micro issue. Environmental Science & Technology 51, 6634–6647.

Source : Microplastic footprints in the seawaters of Chinnamuttom Coast, Kanyakumari: An investigation  

Read More