Pharmaceutical and Microplastic Pollution in Water: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Reza Pashaei
,
Reda Dzingelevičienė
,
Aida Bradauskaitė
,
Alireza Lajevardipour
,
Malgorzata Mlynska-Szultka
,
Nerijus Dzingelevičius
,
Saulius Raugelė
,
Artūras Razbadauskas
,
Sajjad Abbasi
,
Robert M. Rees
,
Boguslaw Buszewski

Pharmaceuticals (PhACs) and microplastics (MPs) are emerging pollutants that pose serious environmental risks. PhACs have been found in low concentrations in a variety of environmental samples, including sewage treatment plant effluents, surface water, seawater, and groundwater, in a number of countries.

  • pharmaceuticals
  • microplastics
  • COVID-19

1. Introduction

The preservation of marine ecosystems has become a prominent environmental concern in the last 50 years [1], but particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The causes of water contamination can be classified as either natural or anthropogenic [2]; however, the effects of anthropogenic contamination on aquatic ecosystems are much more severe than those of natural contamination. Nevertheless, the impact of emerging pollutants resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic on the ecosystem is poorly understood [3][4]. Regarding the impact of lockdowns on river pollution, researchers must take into account the consumption of certain pharmaceuticals (PhACs) and personal care items for managing and preventing COVID-19 which spiked during the pandemic [5]. Additionally, the use of single-use plastics generated large volumes of waste, including hospital waste, post-used PPEs, confirmatory COVID-19 tests, and vaccination residues, as well as packaging in general [6]. PhACs and microplastics (MPs) are emerging pollutants that pose serious environmental risks [7][8][9]; thus, there is a challenge for scientists to identify approaches that will decrease the presence of pharmaceutical (PhAC) residues and microplastic (MP) particles in aquatic environments [10] given their hazardous impacts on aquatic ecosystems. However, their global release into aquatic ecosystems is far from understood. One of the primary reasons for this is that the MP and PhAC sources have been largely undocumented. Furthermore, it is difficult to determine the form of MP and PhAC in water. For example, MPs can be surface water pollutants, which are of concern, or they can be suspended in the water and be of less concern. However, the amount of MPs and PhACs in the water can be estimated using the volume of water that is polluted.
PhACs have been found in low concentrations in a variety of environmental samples, including sewage treatment plant effluents, surface water, seawater, and groundwater, in a number of countries [11][12]. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, antibiotics, beta-blockers (-blockers), antiepileptic drugs, blood lipid-lowering agents, antidepressants, hormones, antihistamines, and X-ray contrast media are among the PhACs that are environmentally hazardous [13][14]. The consumption of PhACs increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and a high volume of PhAC residues were released into the wastewater as well as to the sea and rivers because of hospital discharges and PhAC factories. It has been reported that the concentration of most of the PhACs used in the treatment of COVID-19 increased during the pandemic in water bodies [15]. Additionally, the PhACs from households, such as pills, capsules, and tablets, are released into wastewater. Through the wastewater, PhACs are released into natural ecosystems, such as rivers, lakes, and oceans. The PhACs from wastewater reach the environment after several transformations, from wastewater through hydrological pathways.
Plastic materials have many superior features compared to traditional materials due to their durability, malleability, low cost, versatility, and impermeability; nonetheless, their persistence in the environment has led to environmental concerns [16][17]. Plastic particles are categorized into three distinct size categories: (1) mesoplastics (500 μm–5 mm), (2) microplastics (MPs; 50–500 μm), and (3) nanoplastics (<50 μm) [10][18]. MPs are plastics with a primary diameter of less than 0.5 mm [19][20] that can be primary particulates or secondary fragments formed by weathering or degradation of primary plastics [20] and MP contamination is widespread due to the widespread use of plastics in society and industry, as well as the persistence and easy transport of sub-mm-sized primary and secondary particles [21][22][23]. The largest accumulation of plastic occurs in the ocean, which is estimated to have more than 500 million tons of plastic generally sourced from land-based emissions. These plastics have been accumulating in the ocean for decades, but the scale of plastic pollution in the ocean has only been realized in the last decade with the advent of oceanographic techniques to detect plastic, such as net tows and trawls. An estimated 80% of the world’s population lives within 100 km of the ocean, making the ocean an important source of plastic pollution for humans, wildlife, and ecosystems. For this reason, the majority of the international scientific community’s focus has thus far been on the research of plastic pollution in oceans [10]; however, the lack of information on the effects of plastic pollution on inland ecosystems is a major cause for concern [24].

2. Distribution of Pharmaceutical Contamination in the Aquatic Environments

In recent years, PhACs and MPs have been identified in many aquatic habitats. Several types of PhACs have been detected in aquatic environments [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57]. The most common PhACs were antibiotics (included penicillin, aminoglycoside, tetracycline, and erythromycin), cardiovascular drugs (including calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and beta blockers), and psychiatric drugs (including antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, and hypnotics). Consumption of antibiotics increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, and this has been a significant influence on the release of PhACs from wastewater of hospitals to aquatic environments over the last two years.
In aquatic environments, pH, temperature, time, enzymes, ionic strength, and water depth all play crucial roles in the adsorption, degradation, and transport of PhACs [10]. For instance, ionic strength and pH can influence the adsorption and transport of two antibiotics, sulfamethoxazole and ciprofloxacin [10][58]. Water content, pH, and temperature also have an effect on the decomposition of PhACs such as aspirin [10][59]. Degradation of PhACs in the summer is higher than in winter, which has an effect on the increasing spread of PhACs in aquatic environments [10]; this is because most of the PhACs transfer to surface water, and some of them go to deeper layers of water.
The key sources of PhACs and their metabolites in the environment are the following: (1) the PhACs manufacturing sector, which includes industrial wastewater discharge and solid wastes containing PhACs, as well as stormwater runoff transporting powdered drugs [10][60]; (2) consumers/households, including PhACs excretion and inappropriate discharge to wastewater systems [10]; (3) hospitals, including the discharge of wastewater and solid wastes; and (4) agriculture and aquaculture including the using of hormones and other PhACs for poultry, livestock, shrimp, and fish [10] (Figure 1). Indeed, about half of the PhACs are excreted by humans and animals are released into the environment. One or more of these sources can be relevant to each case in this research. For instance, in India, the high density of the population corresponds with the high rate of consumption of PhACs. In Nigeria, high concentrations of PhACs were related to high consumption and the old technology used in WWTPs. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has been the main reason for the increased global consumption of PhACs.
Water 14 03082 g001
Figure 1. Sources of PhAC and MP pollution in aquatic environments.

3. Distribution of Microplastic Pollution in the Aquatic Environments

Polyethylene, polypropylene, polyethylene terephthalate, polyvinylchloride, polyester, and polystyrene are all common polymers found in aquatic environments [61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78]. These materials are primarily used for packaging, plastic bottles, and other products. They are also used for food packaging and containers. The primary concern with these materials is their impact on the aquatic environments. They are non-biodegradable, so they accumulate in the environment and have the potential to harm aquatic organisms.
The effects of MPs on the environment are mainly related to their size, shape, charge, surface coating, agglomeration rate, density, and other properties [10][79]. The results focused on the most important factors of MPs in aquatic environments, namely size, shape, color, concentration, and kind of polymer. To compare the impact of MPs in surface water before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, it is useful to look at data from Turkey (Figure 2). Here, it was found that the concentration of MPs from 2009 to 2020 increased by more than threefold in the waters of the Black Sea [72]. Indeed, in 2009 the concentration of MPs was at its lowest level (0.331 Particles/m3). Meanwhile, in the Black Sea from 2010 to 2020 the concentration of MPs increased. The highest concentration of particles (0.944 Particles/m3) was observed in 2020 [72]. In the surface water of Iran, the concentration of MPs increased during the COVID-19 pandemic (43 Particles/m3 in 2021) by comparison with that before the pandemic (0.000061 Particles/m3 in 2019) [67][80]. This was due to the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic led to an increase in the use of masks, gloves, and other disposable plastic.
Water 14 03082 g005
Figure 2. Concentrations of MP pollution in pre-COVID-19 period and during COVID-19 period in surface water.

4. Pharmaceutical and Microplastic Pollution before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

4.1. Concentrations of Pharmaceutical Contamination before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Concentrations of PhAC contamination during the COVID-19 pandemic have increased in comparison with before the pandemic in aquatic environments (Figure 3). For instance, the concentration of diclofenac in Ghana’s surface water in 2019 was 30 ng/L, but in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic, the concentration increased to 100.91 ng/L [52][55]. On the other hand, 90 ng/L of ketoprofen were found in the influent of water in Italy in 2013; however, the ketoprofen rate in 2020 was 5.84 ng/L which shows a remarkable decrease [43][81]. In China surface water data before and during the pandemic showed differences. Indeed, the number of PhACs before the pandemic was higher than that during the pandemic, but the PhACs concentrations before the pandemic were lower than during the pandemic. The concentrations of tetracycline (5.27 ng/L in 2019 and 1.52 ng/L in 2020), sulfamerazine (0.79 ng/L in 2019 and 0.06 ng/L in 2020), doxycycline (9.44 ng/L in 2019 and 0 in 2020), ciprofloxacin (14.0 ng/L in 2019 and 0 in 2020), and ofloxacin (2.12 ng/L in 2019 and 0 in 2020) before the pandemic were higher than during the pandemic. Conversely, the concentration of azithromycin in 2020 was 0.16, which was higher than 0 in 2019 [82]. Meanwhile, the concentrations of fluoxetine in influent and effluent before the pandemic were 2.6 ng/L and 1.4 ng/L, and during the pandemic, they were 4.25 ng/L and 1.05 ng/L, respectively [83][84]. Additionally, in groundwater in China, results in 2019 and 2020 showed differences before and during the pandemic. The concentration of tetracycline (2.63 ng/L in 2019 and 2.11 ng/L in 2020), doxycycline (5.73 ng/L in 2019 and 4.35 ng/L in 2020), ciprofloxacin (14.83 ng/L in 2019 and 1.84 ng/L in 2020), and ofloxacin (7.56 ng/L in 2019 and 3.06 ng/L in 2020) before the pandemic were higher than during the pandemic. Conversely, the concentration of sulfamethazine and azithromycin in 2020 were 0.02 ng/L and 0.10 ng/L, which shows a gain in comparison with 2019 [82].
Water 14 03082 g006
Figure 3. Concentrations of PhAC contamination in pre-COVID-19 period and during COVID-19 period.

4.2. Concentrations of MP Pollution before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Concentrations of MP pollution before and during the COVID-19 pandemic show that the quantity of MPs increased during the pandemic compared with the pre-COVID-19 period in surface water (Figure 2). For example, the concentration of MPs in the surface water in Turkey and Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic was higher than that pre-COVID-19 period. The concentration of MPs in Iran’s surface water in 2016 was 0.000042 Particles/m3, in 2019, 0.000061 Particles/m3, but in 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic, this rate increased to 0.246 Particles/m3 [67][85]. Moreover, [80] detected 43 Particles/m3 of MPs in Iran’s surface water. In fact, the concentration of MPs in the surface water of Iran is increasing due to the presence of different types of plastics. Additionally, 0.750 Particles/m3 of MPs were found in the surface water of Turkey in 2019; however, the MPs concentration in 2020 was 0.944 Particles/m3 which shows an increase [72] (Figure 2).

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/w14193082

References

  1. Pashaei, R.; Gholizadeh, M.; Iran, K.J.; Hanifi, A. The Effects of Oil Spills on Ecosystem at the Persian Gulf. Int. J. Rev. Life Sci. 2015, 5, 82–89.
  2. Abbasi, S.; Ashayeri, S.Y.; Jafarzadeh, N.; Sheikh Fakhradini, S.; Alirezazadeh, M.; Ebrahimi, P.; Peely, A.B.; Rezaei, N.; Mokhtarzadeh, Z.; Naraki, H.; et al. Hydrological and hydrogeological characteristics and environmental assessment of Hashilan Wetland, a national heritage in NW Iran. Ecohydrol. Hydrobiol. 2022, 22, 141–154.
  3. Bandala, E.R.; Kruger, B.R.; Cesarino, I.; Leao, A.L.; Wijesiri, B.; Goonetilleke, A. Impacts of COVID-19 pandemic on the wastewater pathway into surface water: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 774, 145586.
  4. Zambrano-Monserrate, M.A.; Ruano, M.A.; Sanchez-Alcalde, L. Indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 728, 138813.
  5. Chen, X.; Lei, L.; Liu, S.; Han, J.; Li, R.; Men, J.; Li, L.; Wei, L.; Sheng, Y.; Yang, L.; et al. Occurrence and risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) against COVID-19 in lakes and WWTP-river-estuary system in Wuhan, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 792, 148352.
  6. De Sousa, F.D.B. Plastic and its consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 46067–46078.
  7. Ebrahimi, P.; Abbasi, S.; Pashaei, R.; Bogusz, A.; Oleszczuk, P. Investigating impact of physicochemical properties of microplastics on human health: A short bibliometric analysis and review. Chemosphere 2022, 289, 133146.
  8. Pashaei, R.; Zahedipour-Sheshglani, P.; Dzingelevičienė, R.; Abbasi, S.; Rees, R.M. Effects of pharmaceuticals on the nitrogen cycle in water and soil: A review. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 105.
  9. Pashaei, R.; Dzingelevičienė, R.; Abbasi, S.; Szultka-Młyńska, M.; Buszewski, B. Determination of 15 human pharmaceutical residues in fish and shrimp tissues by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 325.
  10. Pashaei, R.; Dzingelevičienė, R.; Abbasi, S.; Szultka-Młyńska, M.; Buszewski, B. Determination of the pharmaceuticals–nano/microplastics in aquatic systems by analytical and instrumental methods. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 194, 93.
  11. Nikolaou, A.; Meric, S.; Fatta, D. Occurrence patterns of pharmaceuticals in water and wastewater environments. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2007, 387, 1225–1234.
  12. Halling-Sørensen, B.N.N.S.; Nielsen, S.N.; Lanzky, P.F.; Ingerslev, F.; Lützhøft, H.H.; Jørgensen, S.E. Occurrence, fate and effects of pharmaceutical substances in the environment-A review. Chemosphere 1998, 36, 357–393.
  13. Khetan, S.K.; Collins, T.J. Human pharmaceuticals in the aquatic environment: A challenge to green chemisty. Chem. Rev. 2007, 107, 2319–2364.
  14. Kanakaraju, D.; Glass, B.D.; Oelgemöller, M. Advanced oxidation process-mediated removal of pharmaceuticals from water: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2018, 219, 189–207.
  15. Morales-Paredes, C.A.; Rodríguez-Díaz, J.M.; Boluda-Botella, N. Pharmaceutical compounds used in the COVID-19 pandemic: A review of their presence in water and treatment techniques for their elimination. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 2021, 152691.
  16. Galgani, L.; Loiselle, S.A. Plastic pollution impacts on marine carbon biogeochemistry. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 268, 115598.
  17. Hale, R.C.; Seeley, M.E.; La Guardia, M.J.; Mai, L.; Zeng, E.Y. A Global Perspective on Microplastics. J. Geophys. Rese. Oceans 2020, 125, e2018JC014719.
  18. Andrady, A.L. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 1596–1605.
  19. Arthur, C.; Baker, J.; Bamford, H. Proceedings of the International Research Workshop on the Occurrence, Effects, and Fate of Microplastic Marine Debris; University of Washington: Tacoma, WA, USA, 2009.
  20. Abbasi, S.; Keshavarzi, B.; Moore, F.; Turner, A.; Kelly, F.J.; Dominguez, A.O.; Jaafarzadeh, N. Distribution and potential health impacts of microplastics and microrubbers in air and street dusts from Asaluyeh County, Iran. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 244, 153–164.
  21. Abbasi, S.; Turner, A. Human exposure to microplastics: A study in Iran. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 403, 123799.
  22. Rezaei, M.; Riksen, M.J.P.M.; Sirjani, E.; Sameni, A.; Geissen, V. Wind erosion as a driver for transport of light density microplastics. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 669, 273–281.
  23. Waldschläger, K.; Lechthaler, S.; Stauch, G.; Schüttrumpf, H. The way of microplastic through the environment—Application of the source-pathway-receptor model (review). Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 713, 136584.
  24. Wagner, M.; Holzschuh, S.; Traeger, A.; Fahr, A.; Schubert, U.S. Asymmetric flow field-flow fractionation in the field of nanomedicine. Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 5201–5210.
  25. Fram, M.S.; Belitz, K. Occurrence and concentrations of pharmaceutical compounds in groundwater used for public drinking-water supply in California. Sc. Total Environ. 2011, 409, 3409–3417.
  26. Matongo, S.; Birungi, G.; Moodley, B.; Ndungu, P. Pharmaceutical residues in water and sediment of Msunduzi River, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Chemosphere 2015, 134, 133–140.
  27. Wu, C.; Witter, J.D.; Spongberg, A.L.; Czajkowski, K.P. Occurrence of selected pharmaceuticals in an agricultural landscape, western Lake Erie basin. Water Res. 2009, 43, 3407–3416.
  28. Kot-Wasik, A.; Jakimska, A.; Śliwka-Kaszyńska, M. Occurrence and seasonal variations of 25 pharmaceutical residues in wastewater and drinking water treatment plants. Environ. Monitor. Assess. 2016, 2016, 188.
  29. Fick, J.; Söderström, H.; Lindberg, R.H.; Phan, C.; Tysklind, M.; Larsson, D.G.J. Contamination of surface, ground, and drinking water from pharmaceutical production. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2009, 28, 2522–2527.
  30. Praveena, S.M.; Shaifuddin, S.N.M.; Sukiman, S.; Nasir, F.A.M.; Hanafi, Z.; Kamarudin, N.; Ismail, T.H.T.; Aris, A.Z. Pharmaceuticals residues in selected tropical surface water bodies from Selangor (Malaysia): Occurrence and potential risk assessments. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 642, 230–240.
  31. Mokh, S.; El Khatib, M.; Koubar, M.; Daher, Z.; Al Iskandarani, M. Innovative SPE-LC-MS/MS technique for the assessment of 63 pharmaceuticals and the detection of antibiotic-resistant-bacteria: A case study natural water sources in Lebanon. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 609, 830–841.
  32. Dehkordi, S.K.; Paknejad, H.; Blaha, L.; Svecova, H.; Grabic, R.; Simek, Z.; Otoupalikova, A.; Bittner, M. Instrumental and bioanalytical assessment of pharmaceuticals and hormone-like compounds in a major drinking water source—wastewater receiving Zayandeh Rood river, Iran. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 9023–9037.
  33. Nantaba, F.; Wasswa, J.; Kylin, H.; Palm, W.U.; Bouwman, H.; Kümmerer, K. Occurrence, distribution, and ecotoxicological risk assessment of selected pharmaceutical compounds in water from Lake Victoria, Uganda. Chemosphere 2020, 239, 124642.
  34. Muriuki, C.W.; Home, P.G.; Raude, J.M.; Ngumba, E.K.; Munala, G.K.; Kairigo, P.K.; Gachanja, A.N.; Tuhkanen, T.A. Occurrence, distribution, and risk assessment of pharmerciuticals in wastewater and open surface drains of peri-urban areas: Case study of Juja town, Kenya. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 267, 115503.
  35. Ogunbanwo, O.M.; Kay, P.; Boxall, A.B.; Wilkinson, J.; Sinclair, C.J.; Shabi, R.A.; Fasasi, A.E.; Lewis, G.A.; Amoda, O.A.; Brown, L.E. High Concentrations of Pharmaceuticals in a Nigerian River Catchment. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2020, 41, 551–558.
  36. Hossain, A.; Nakamichi, S.; Habibullah-Al-Mamun, M.; Tani, K.; Masunaga, S.; Matsuda, H. Occurrence and ecological risk of pharmaceuticals in river surface water of Bangladesh. Environ. Res. 2018, 165, 258–266.
  37. Botero-Coy, A.M.; Martínez-Pachón, D.; Boix, C.; Rincón, R.J.; Castillo, N.; Arias-Marín, L.P.; Manrique-Losada, L.; Torres-Palma, R.; Moncayo-Lasso, A.; Hernández, F. An investigation into the occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals in Colombian wastewater. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 642, 842–853.
  38. González-Alonso, S.; Merino, L.M.; Esteban, S.; López de Alda, M.; Barceló, D.; Durán, J.J.; López-Martínez, J.; Aceña, J.; Pérez, S.; Mastroianni, N.; et al. Occurrence of pharmaceutical, recreational and psychotropic drug residues in surface water on the northern Antarctic Peninsula region. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 229, 241–254.
  39. Ashfaq, M.; Li, Y.; Rehman, M.S.U.; Zubair, M.; Mustafa, G.; Nazar, M.F.; Yu, C.P.; Sun, Q. Occurrence, spatial variation and risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and personal care products in urban wastewater, canal surface water, and their sediments: A case study of Lahore, Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 688, 653–663.
  40. Guruge, K.S.; Goswami, P.; Tanoue, R.; Nomiyama, K.; Wijesekara, R.G.S.; Dharmaratne, T.S. First nationwide investigation and environmental risk assessment of 72 pharmaceuticals and personal care products from Sri Lankan surface waterways. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 690, 683–695.
  41. Letsinger, S.; Kay, P.; Rodríguez-Mozaz, S.; Villagrassa, M.; Barceló, D.; Rotchell, J.M. Spatial and temporal occurrence of pharmaceuticals in UK estuaries. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 678, 74–84.
  42. Reis-Santos, P.; Pais, M.; Duarte, B.; Caçador, I.; Freitas, A.; Vila Pouca, A.S.; Barbosa, J.; Leston, S.; Rosa, J.; Ramos, F.; et al. Screening of human and veterinary pharmaceuticals in estuarine waters: A baseline assessment for the Tejo estuary. Marine Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 1079–1084.
  43. Papagiannaki, D.; Morgillo, S.; Bocina, G.; Calza, P.; Binetti, R. Occurrence and human health risk assessment of pharmaceuticals and hormones in drinking water sources in the metropolitan area of turin in Italy. Toxics 2021, 9, 88.
  44. Branchet, P.; Ariza Castro, N.; Fenet, H.; Gomez, E.; Courant, F.; Sebag, D.; Gardon, J.; Jourdan, C.; Ngounou Ngatcha, B.; Kengne, I.; et al. Anthropic impacts on Sub-Saharan urban water resources through their pharmaceutical contamination (Yaoundé Center Region, Cameroon). Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 660, 886–898.
  45. Stasinakis, A.S.; Mermigka, S.; Samaras, V.G.; Farmaki, E.; Thomaidis, N.S. Occurrence of endocrine disrupters and selected pharmaceuticals in Aisonas River (Greece) and environmental risk assessment using hazard indexes. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2012, 19, 1574–1583.
  46. Daneshvar, A.; Svanfelt, J.; Kronberg, L.; Prévost, M.; Weyhenmeyer, G.A. Seasonal variations in the occurrence and fate of basic and neutral pharmaceuticals in a Swedish river–lake system. Chemosphere 2010, 80, 301–309.
  47. Komori, K.; Suzuki, Y.; Minamiyama, M.; Harada, A. Occurrence of selected pharmaceuticals in river water in Japan and assessment of their environmental risk. Environ. Monitor. Assess. 2013, 185, 4529–4536.
  48. Na, T.W.; Kang, T.W.; Lee, K.H.; Hwang, S.H.; Jung, H.J.; Kim, K. Distribution and ecological risk of pharmaceuticals in surface water of the Yeongsan river, Republic of Korea. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety 2019, 181, 180–186.
  49. Zhou, H.; Ying, T.; Wang, X.; Liu, J. Occurrence and preliminarily environmental risk assessment of selected pharmaceuticals in the urban rivers, China. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 16–18.
  50. Al-Mashaqbeh, O.; Alsafadi, D.; Dalahmeh, S.; Bartelt-Hunt, S.; Snow, D. Removal of selected pharmaceuticals and personal care products in wastewater treatment plant in Jordan. Water 2019, 11, 2004.
  51. Thiebault, T.; Boussafir, M.; Le Milbeau, C. Occurrence and removal efficiency of pharmaceuticals in an urban wastewater treatment plant: Mass balance, fate and consumption assessment. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 2894–2902.
  52. Asare, E.A. Status of pharmaceuticals in the Korle Lagoon and their toxicity to non-target organisms. Ecotoxicology 2022, 31, 299–311.
  53. Kermia, A.E.B.; Fouial-Djebbar, D.; Trari, M. Occurrence, fate and removal efficiencies of pharmaceuticals in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) discharging in the coastal environment of Algiers. Comptes Rendus Chim. 2016, 19, 963–970.
  54. Phonsiri, V.; Choi, S.; Nguyen, C.; Tsai, Y.L.; Coss, R.; Kurwadkar, S. Monitoring occurrence and removal of selected pharmaceuticals in two different wastewater treatment plants. SN Appl. Sci. 2019, 1, 789.
  55. Azanu, D.; Adu-Poku, D.; Saah, S.A.; Appaw, W.O. Prevalence of Pharmaceuticals in Surface Water Samples in Ghana. J. Chem. 2021, 2021, 477.
  56. Abdallah, M.A.E.; Nguyen, K.H.; Ebele, A.J.; Atia, N.N.; Ali, H.R.H.; Harrad, S. A single run, rapid polarity switching method for determination of 30 pharmaceuticals and personal care products in waste water using Q-Exactive Orbitrap high resolution accurate mass spectrometry. J. Chromatogr. A. 2019, 1588, 68–76.
  57. Mhuka, V.; Dube, S.; Nindi, M.M. Occurrence of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) in wastewater and receiving waters in South Africa using LC-OrbitrapTM MS. Emerg. Contam. 2020, 6, 250–258.
  58. Chen, H.; Gao, B.; Li, H.; Ma, L.Q. Effects of pH and ionic strength on sulfamethoxazole and ciprofloxacin transport in saturated porous media. J. Contam. Hydrol. 2011, 126, 29–36.
  59. Kornblum, S.S.; Zoglio, M.A. Pharmaceutical heterogeneous systems I. Hydrolysis of aspirin in combination with tablet lubricants in an aqueous suspension. J. Pharm. Sci. 1967, 56, 1569–1575.
  60. Gadipelly, C.; Pérez-González, A.; Yadav, G.D.; Ortiz, I.; Ibáñez, R.; Rathod, V.K.; Marathe, K.V. Pharmaceutical industry wastewater: Review of the technologies for water treatment and reuse. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2014, 53, 11571–11592.
  61. Wakkaf, T.; El Zrelli, R.; Kedzierski, M.; Balti, R.; Shaiek, M.; Mansour, L.; Tlig-Zouari, S.; Bruzaud, S.; Rabaoui, L. Characterization of microplastics in the surface waters of an urban lagoon (Bizerte lagoon, Southern Mediterranean Sea): Composition, density, distribution, and influence of environmental factors. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 160, 111625.
  62. Zhao, S.; Zhu, L.; Li, D. Microplastic in three urban estuaries, China. Environ. Pollut. 2015, 206, 597–604.
  63. Lestari, P.; Trihadiningrum, Y.; Wijaya, B.A.; Yunus, K.A.; Firdaus, M. Distribution of microplastics in Surabaya River, Indonesia. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 726, 138560.
  64. Eo, S.; Hong, S.H.; Song, Y.K.; Han, G.M.; Shim, W.J. Spatiotemporal distribution and annual load of microplastics in the Nakdong River, South Korea. Water Res. 2019, 160, 228–237.
  65. Han, M.; Niu, X.; Tang, M.; Zhang, B.T.; Wang, G.; Yue, W.; Kong, X.; Zhu, J. Distribution of microplastics in surface water of the lower Yellow River near estuary. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 707, 135601.
  66. Huang, D.; Li, X.; Ouyang, Z.; Zhao, X.; Wu, R.; Zhang, C.; Lin, C.; Li, Y.; Guo, X. The occurrence and abundance of microplastics in surface water and sediment of the West River downstream, in the south of China. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 756, 143857.
  67. Pashaei, R.; Loiselle, S.A.; Leone, G.; Tamasi, G.; Dzingelevičienė, R.; Kowalkowski, T.; Gholizadeh, M.; Consumi, M.; Abbasi, S. Determination of nano and microplastic particles in hypersaline lakes by multiple methods. Environ. Monit. Assesst. 2021, 193, 668.
  68. Napper, I.E.; Baroth, A.; Barrett, A.C.; Bhola, S.; Chowdhury, G.W.; Davies, B.F.R.; Duncan, E.M.; Kumar, S.; Nelms, S.E.; Hasan Niloy, M.N.; et al. The abundance and characteristics of microplastics in surface water in the transboundary Ganges River. Environ. Pollut 2021, 274, 116348.
  69. Park, T.J.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, M.S.; Lee, J.K.; Lee, S.H.; Zoh, K.D. Occurrence of microplastics in the Han River and riverine fish in South Korea. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 708, 134535.
  70. Rodrigues, M.O.; Abrantes, N.; Gonçalves, F.J.M.; Nogueira, H.; Marques, J.C.; Gonçalves, A.M.M. Spatial and temporal distribution of microplastics in water and sediments of a freshwater system (Antuã River, Portugal). Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 633, 1549–1559.
  71. Jiang, C.; Yin, L.; Li, Z.; Wen, X.; Luo, X.; Hu, S.; Yang, H.; Long, Y.; Deng, B.; Huang, L.; et al. Microplastic pollution in the rivers of the Tibet Plateau. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 249, 91–98.
  72. Eryaşar, A.R.; Gedik, K.; Şahin, A.; Öztürk, R.Ç.; Yılmaz, F. Characteristics and temporal trends of microplastics in the coastal area in the Southern Black Sea over the past decade. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 173, 112993.
  73. Zeri, C.; Adamopoulou, A.; Koi, A.; Koutsikos, N.; Lytras, E.; Dimitriou, E. Rivers and wastewater-treatment plants as microplastic pathways to eastern mediterranean waters: First records for the aegean sea, Greece. Sustainability 2021, 13, 328.
  74. Campanale, C.; Stock, F.; Massarelli, C.; Kochleus, C.; Bagnuolo, G.; Reifferscheid, G.; Uricchio, V.F. Microplastics and their possible sources: The example of Ofanto river in southeast Italy. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 258, 113284.
  75. Bikker, J.; Lawson, J.; Wilson, S.; Rochman, C.M. Microplastics and other anthropogenic particles in the surface waters of the Chesapeake Bay. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 156, 111257.
  76. Aigars, J.; Barone, M.; Suhareva, N.; Putna-Nimane, I.; Deimantovica-Dimante, I. Occurrence and spatial distribution of microplastics in the surface waters of the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Riga. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 172, 112860.
  77. Jiang, Y.; Yang, F.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, J. Greenland Sea Gyre increases microplastic pollution in the surface waters of the Nordic Seas. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 712, 136484.
  78. Lenaker, P.L.; Baldwin, A.K.; Corsi, S.R.; Mason, S.A.; Reneau, P.C.; Scott, J.W. Vertical Distribution of Microplastics in the Water Column and Surficial Sediment from the Milwaukee River Basin to Lake Michigan. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 12227–12237.
  79. Awet, T.T.; Kohl, Y.; Meier, F.; Straskraba, S.; Grün, A.L.; Ruf, T.; Jost, C.; Drexel, R.; Tunc, E.; Emmerling, C. Effects of polystyrene nanoparticles on the microbiota and functional diversity of enzymes in soil. Environ. Sci. Europe 2018, 30.
  80. Vayghan, A.H.; Rasta, M.; Zakeri, M.; Kelly, F.J. Spatial distribution of microplastics pollution in sediments and surface waters of the Aras River and reservoir: An international river in Northwestern Iran. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 843, 156894.
  81. Patrolecco, L.; Capri, S.; Ademollo, N. Occurrence of selected pharmaceuticals in the principal sewage treatment plants in Rome (Italy) and in the receiving surface waters. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2015, 22, 5864–5876.
  82. Ma, N.; Tong, L.; Li, Y.; Yang, C.; Tan, Q.; He, J. Distribution of antibiotics in lake water-groundwater-Sediment system in Chenhu Lake area. Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 112343.
  83. Chen, Y.; Wang, J.; Xu, P.; Xiang, J.; Xu, D.; Cheng, P.; Wang, X.; Wu, L.; Zhang, N.; Chen, Z. Antidepressants as emerging contaminants: Occurrence in wastewater treatment plants and surface waters in Hangzhou, China. Front. Public Health. 2022, 2022, 10.
  84. Wu, M.; Xiang, J.; Que, C.; Chen, F.; Xu, G. Occurrence and fate of psychiatric pharmaceuticals in the urban water system of Shanghai, China. Chemosphere 2015, 138, 486–493.
  85. Manbohi, A.; Mehdinia, A.; Rahnama, R.; Dehbandi, R. Microplastic pollution in inshore and offshore surface waters of the southern Caspian Sea. Chemosphere 2021, 281, 130896.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback