Next Article in Journal
Effects of Co-Fermented Feed Using Lactobacillus acidophilus, Limosilactobacillus reuteri and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum on Growth, Antioxidant Capacity, Fatty Acids and Gut Microbiota of Largemouth Bass (Micropterus salmoides)
Previous Article in Journal
Effects of High Dietary Carbohydrate Levels on Growth Performance, Enzyme Activities, Expression of Genes Related to Liver Glucose Metabolism, and the Intestinal Microbiota of Lateolabrax maculatus Juveniles
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Fishes
Volume 8
Issue 9
10.3390/fishes8090432
fishes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Assessment of Microplastic Contamination in a Commercially Important Marine Fish, Harpadon nehereus (Hamilton, 1822)

by
Kalpana Prusty
1,
Vasantkumar Rabari
1,
Krupal Patel
2,
Daoud Ali
3,
Saud Alarifi
3,
Virendra Kumar Yadav
4,
Dipak Kumar Sahoo
5,*,
Ashish Patel
4,* and
Jigneshkumar Trivedi
1,*
1
Animal Taxonomy and Ecology Laboratory, Department of Life Sciences, Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University, Patan 384265, Gujarat, India
2
Marine Biodiversity and Ecology Laboratory, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara 390002, Gujarat, India
3
Department of Zoology, College of Science, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2455, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
4
Department of Life Sciences, Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University, Patan 384265, Gujarat, India
5
Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fishes 2023, 8(9), 432; https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090432
Submission received: 25 July 2023 / Revised: 17 August 2023 / Accepted: 18 August 2023 / Published: 23 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue The Effect of Nano and Micro-Plastic on Fish)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Microplastic (MP) pollution is a prevalent and global threat to fish. MP contamination was investigated in Harpadon nehereus collected from the principal fishing harbors of India’s northwest coast. A total of 213 specimens were collected from the major fishing harbors of Gujarat state (Jakhau, Okha, and Jaffrabad) and Maharashtra state (Mumbai). In the laboratory, the morphometric parameters of the specimens, such as total length and body weight, were measured. The collected specimens were analyzed for MP isolation using the previously documented protocol. MPs were quantified under a stereomicroscope, and physical parameters were recorded. All the examined specimens were found to be contaminated with MPs, with an abundance of 6.98 ± 6.73 MPs/g. The maximum contamination of MPs was recorded at the study site in Jaffrabad, followed by Jakhau, Mumbai, and Okha. Morphometric analysis of MPs revealed threads to be the most dominant shape. Black and blue MPs with a 1–2 mm size were the predominant recorded types. The chemical composition of extracted MPs revealed polyethylene (PE), polystyrene (PS), and polyurethane (PU) as polymer compositions. Conclusively, the findings highlighted a greater menace to seafood safety due to trophic transfer, which causes a hazardous effect on human health.
Keywords:
ATR-FTIR; Indo-Pacific region; marine environment; microplastic contamination; seafood safety
Key Contribution: The findings of the study have shown MP contamination in a commercially important fish, Harpadon nehereus, highlighting a greater menace to seafood safety that causes hazardous effects on human health.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Over the past few decades, plastic manufacturing and usage have drastically expanded due to its low cost, light weight, moisture resistance, tensile strength, and longer durability [1]. According to Plastic Europe (2022), the global annual production of plastic was reported to be 390.7 million metric tons in 2021 [2]. Due to the inappropriate management of plastic trash, it has reached the oceanic environment in numerous ways, including fishing activities, wastewater discharge, atmospheric transport, and tourism [3]. Annually, there is a discharge of about 0.24 million metric tons (MMTs) of plastic garbage into the sea [4]. This plastic debris undergoes physical and chemical alteration, resulting in different sizes, i.e., macroplastics (>2.5 cm), mesoplastics (0.5–2.5 cm), MPs (>1 μm~<5 mm), and nanoplastics (1–1000 nm) [3,4,5]. MPs can float in surface water due to their reduced size and higher buoyancy, and they are ultimately carried by wind and water currents over further distances in the ocean [1,6]. MP pollution has been identified as a significant ecotoxicological hazard for marine life. Based on the sources, MP particles can be categorized into two classes: primary MPs and secondary MPs [6,7]. Primary MPs are produced intentionally as microbeads for their application in cosmetics, drug carriers, and industrial abrasives [8,9]. While the formation of secondary MPs takes place due to the deterioration and breakage of large-sized plastics under various environmental physical and chemical factors like ultraviolet radiation, photodegradation, and oxidation [5,8]. The different shapes of MPs include pellets, granules, spherical beads, filaments, films, fragments, and foams [7,10].
To date, MP contamination has been recorded in marine fauna, including amphipods [11], coral [12], sea cucumber [13], mussels [14], shrimp [15], crab [16], and fish [17]. Previously, MPs were recognized as pollutants, but recently they have garnered significant attention as a seafood contaminant. Globally, MP ingestion has been recorded in commercially important fish such as Boops boops [18], Chaeturichthys stigmatias [19], H. nehereus [20], Eleutheronema tridactylum and Clarias gariepinus [21], Basilichthys australis [22], Mugil cephalus [22], and Trichiurus lepturus [23]. Similarly, MP accumulation has been investigated in commercially important fish such as Rastrilleger kanagurta and Epinephalus merra [24], Sardinella longiceps [25], Coilia dussumieri [26], Cyanoglossus macrostomus [27], Decapterus russelli [28], R. kanagurta [29], and Selaroides leptolepis [30] inhabiting marine areas of India.
The gastrointestinal tract (GT) of H. nehereus exhibited a preponderance of small fish and prawns [31]. Various pieces of literature have revealed that several small fish and prawns in India have been contaminated with MPs [32,33]. The transfer of MPs from small fish and prawns to H. nehereus can occur through trophic transfer within the food chain. Therefore, it was quite imperative to assess the presence of MP contamination in the GT of H. nehereus. It was found that false ingestion of MPs can reduce the fitness of organisms due to starvation, inflammation of the GT, growth inhibition, oxidative stress, and lower fertility [34,35]. The high volume-to-surface ratio of MPs makes them able to absorb hazardous chemicals [36]. Moreover, long-term exposure to these pollutants has been proven to pass into fish tissue [37]. Consequently, accumulated MPs can be transferred to higher taxa due to bioaccumulation [38]. In addition to this, during the consumption of fish contaminated with MPs by humans, there is a possibility of the transfer of these particles from the fish’s tissues to human bodies [39].
India’s coastline is 8000 km long and includes more than 60 districts spread over nine coastal states, where one-third of the country’s population resides [40]. The annual fish landing in India is estimated to be 3.49 million tons (MTs) in 2022, an increase of 14.53% from 2021’s landings [41]. Gujarat state covers the longest coastline in India, with 16 coastal districts [5]. The estimated fish landing in Gujarat state was 5.03 lac tons in 2022 [41], while the neighboring state of Maharashtra has a 720 km long coastline and an annual fish landing of about 1.70 lac tons in 2022 [41]. H. nehereus, commonly known as Bombay duck, belongs to the family Scopelidae and is the only species with a significant fishery in the states of Gujarat and Maharashtra in India. The annual landing of H. nehereus in India was reported to be 55,342 tons in 2022 [41], where the Gujarat and Maharashtra states alone account for 70% of H. nehereus landings in India. Recently, MP contamination has been recorded in the marine environments of Gujarat [3,7] and Maharashtra [42], possibly due to improper plastic waste disposal management, fishing activities, and tourism. Despite knowing the facts of MP prevalence and accumulation in the marine environment of Gujarat and Maharashtra, it was quite imperative to assess the MP contamination in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus, of Gujarat and Maharashtra states, India.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Specimen Collection

The Gujarat and Maharashtra states cover 29% of the Indian coastline, which supports rich biodiversity and diverse habitats, including rocky shores, mud flats, sandy shores, mangroves, coral reefs, and estuaries [35,38]. Fishing activities, industries, urbanization, and tourism are the dominant human activities prevalent in coastal areas of both states. The fish specimens were collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India: Jakhau, Okha, Jaffrabad, and Mumbai (Figure 1). Jakhau (23°11′14″ N, 68°38′23″ E) is located in the northwestern part of the Gulf of Kachchh, Gujarat state. It is the oldest port in the Kachchh district and provides export facilities [43,44] Okha (22°28′35″ N, 69°04′11″ E) is a well-known pilgrimage site and plays a significant role in fish export. Salt pan industries and fishing activities dominate this area and release effluents into the sea [45]. Jaffrabad (20°86′67″ N, 71°36′67″ E) is a town in the Amreli district of Gujarat state. Local fishing activities, salt pans, and cement factories provide livelihoods to people [46]. Mumbai (19°02′22″ N, 72°49′55″ E) is a well-known metropolitan city in northwest India. The coastal region of Mumbai is dominated by fishing activities, the fertilizer industry, thermal power plants, cargo handling activities, and the oil and pharmaceutical industries [35,40]. A total of 213 fish specimens (study site Okha, n = 50; study site Jakhau, n = 75; study site Jaffrabad, n = 38; and study site Mumbai, n = 50) of H. nehereus were collected from December 2022 to January 2023 from the major fishing harbors on the north-west coast of India. The specimens were immediately placed in ice boxes and transported to the laboratory.

2.2. MPs Extraction

The specimens were pre-washed with Milli-Q water to eliminate surface adhesive contamination. Morphometric parameters such as the total length (cm) and weight (g) of each fish were recorded. Each fish was dissected in a metal tray, and the GT was isolated to check for contamination with MPs. The weight of the GT of each fish was recorded. The GT of each fish was placed in a beaker, and 10% potassium hydroxide was added to digest organic tissue [25]. Later, it was placed in a hot air oven at 60 °C until complete digestion of organic tissue was achieved [47]. A supersaturated NaCl aqueous solution (1.2 g/mL) was added to float the MPs as per the density gradient [3,5,48], which was followed by the continuous stirring of the solution with a glass rod, after which it was kept at room temperature for 24 h [26]. The supernatant containing floated MPs was filtered through ash-less Whatman filter paper (Grade No. 41, pore size: 20 µm).

2.3. Identification and Categorization of MPs

Each filter paper was observed under a stereomicroscope (Metlab PST 901) for identification and quantification of MPs. MPs were visually identified and classified as per their physical characterization, such as shapes (thread, film, foam, and fragment), colors, and size classes (1–2 mm, 2–3 mm, 3–4 mm, and 4–5 mm) [49]. The identification of functional groups and chemicals in the MPs was analyzed using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). The FTIR measurement was done in the range of 599 to 4000 cm−1 at a resolution of 1 nm using the Nicolet Model (USA). The spectra were matched with known plastic libraries (FLOPP and FLOPP-e, n = 762 spectra) [50]. Matches with over 70% spectral similarity were considered MPs. Biofouling, oxidation, and fragmentation of MPs can limit the degree of spectral match.

2.4. Contamination Control

The glassware and stainless-steel utensils were prewashed with Milli-Q water in order to eliminate potential contamination. Nitrile gloves and clean cotton lab coats were used during the analysis. To avoid airborne plastic contamination, specimens were covered with aluminum foil. Moreover, blank replicates with the salt solution were used to detect contamination. No contamination was found after visual observation of blank filter papers under a stereomicroscope.

2.5. Data Analysis

To understand the MP contamination in H. nehereus, an abundance and standard deviation were calculated. A Shapiro-Wilk test was incorporated to check the homogeneity of the data. Since the data were not following a normal distribution, a non-parametric test was performed (Figure S1, see “Supplementary Material”, p < 0.001). A Kruskal-Wallis test was performed to check the variation of MP contamination between study sites. Moreover, a pairwise Wilcox post-hoc test was incorporated to understand the variation of MP contamination within the group (significant level = 0.05). The percentage composition of MP shape, color, and size was calculated. The statistical analysis was carried out using R Studio (version 4.2.3) and MS Excel.

3. Results

3.1. Abundance of MPs

In the present study, MP contamination was assessed in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus, where a total of 213 fish were examined for MPs, and all 213 specimens had contamination with MPs. A total of 3409 MP particles were obtained from the GT of the fish. The highest number of MPs was recorded at study site Jakhau (n = 1382), followed by Okha (n = 943), Jaffrabad (n = 614), and Mumbai (n = 468). The abundance of MP contamination was recorded as 6.98 ± 6.73 MPs/g. The highest amount of MP contamination was recorded in Jaffrabad (8.85 ± 7.51 MPs/g), followed by Jakhau (8.76 ± 8.20 MPs/g), Mumbai (5.54 ± 5.56 MPs/g), and Okha (4.32 ± 1.83 MPs/g) (Figure 2). The abundance of MP contamination in H. nehereus varied significantly between study sites (H (χ2) = 77.88, df = 212, p < 0.01). A pairwise Wilcox post-hoc analysis revealed that the abundance of MP contamination in H. nehereus varied significantly between study sites Jaffrabad and Mumbai (p < 0.01), between study sites Jaffrabad and Okha (p < 0.01), between study sites Jakhau and Mumbai (p < 0.001), and between study sites Jakhau and Okha (p < 0.001) (Table 1). However, the abundance of MP contamination did not vary significantly between study sites Jaffrabad and Jakhau (p = 0.85) and between study sites Mumbai and Okha (p = 0.85) (Table 1). A negative correlation was observed between fish length and an abundance of MPs (R2 = 0.05; df = 212; F = 11.33; p < 0.001) (Figure 3).

3.2. Physical and Chemical Characterization of MPs

The shape classification of MPs revealed the dominance of thread-shaped MPs in all the study sites, followed by fragments, film, and foam (Figure 4). A photograph of each representative shape of MPs was captured under a stereomicroscope (Figure 5). In terms of the color classification of MPs, black, blue, and red MPs were the most prevalent (Figure 6). Size classification of MPs revealed that the 1–2 mm size class was dominant in all the study sites, followed by 2–3 mm, 3–4 mm, and 4–5 mm (Figure 7). The prevalence of MPs in different study sites varied significantly between size classes of MPs (H (χ2) = 230.01, df = 212, p < 0.001). Attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) analysis of extracted MPs revealed PE, PS, and PU as polymer compositions of MPs (Figure 8).

4. Discussion

4.1. Abundance of MPs in H. nehereus

The present study investigated MP contamination in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus, collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India. The study revealed 100% contamination with MPs in the collected specimens. Similarly, in another study, MP contamination was recorded in all the specimens, including in Hyporhamphus intermedius, Liza haematocheila, Coilia ectenes, Lateolabrax japonicus, and Sillago sihama collected from Shanghai market, China [51], and Luciopimelodus pati, Pseudoplatystoma corruscans, Oligosarcus oligolepis, Parapimelodus valenciennes, and Odontesthes bonariensis collected from Rio de la Plata estuary, Argentina [52]. However, less contamination of MPs than what was seen in the present study was recorded in Solea solea collected from the Adriatic Sea, Italy (95% of collected specimens) [53], Engraulis japonicus collected from Tokyo Bay, Japan (77% of collected specimens) [54], Argyrosomus regius, Caranx crysos, and Dentex dentex collected from the Mediterranean Sea, Turkey (57.8% of collected specimens) [55], Etmopterus spinax, Raja clavate, Scyliorhinus canicular, and Galeus melastomus collected from the southern Tyrrhenian Sea, Italy (21% of collected specimens) [56], and Nemichthys scolopaceus, Arctozenus risso, and Xenodermichthys copei collected from the North Atlantic Ocean (11% of collected specimens) [57].
The abundance of MP contamination in H. nehereus was recorded as 6.98 ± 6.73 MPs/g. In another study, the abundance of MP contamination recorded in T. lepturus (34.17 ± 3.32 MPs/g) [23], Lutjanus gibbus (39.3 ± 4.8 MPs/g), and M. cephalus (24.8 ± 7.7 MPs/g) [58] was higher than in the present study. In contrast, less MP contamination was recorded in A. regius (0.80 ± 0.8 MPs/g), Merluccius merluccius (0.40 ± 0.89 MPs/g), Scomber japonicus (0.57 ± 1.04 MPs/g), Trigla lyra (0.26 ± 0.57 MPs/g), and B. boops (0.09 ± 0.3 MPs/g) [18] than in the present study. The comparison of MP contamination between different species of fish is provided in Table 2. It was found that MP contamination varies between species, possibly due to variations in feeding habits, digestive physiology, position at the trophic level, and size of the organism [49,50]. In the case of intraspecific comparison, the abundance of MPs in H. nehereus was higher in the present study than the MP contamination recorded in H. nehereus collected from the Northern Bay of Bengal, Bangladesh (0.37 ± 0.10 MPs/g) [20] and Tuticorin, India (0.2 ± 0.03 MPs/g) [30]. According to Bom and Sá F and a team led by Daniel, MP ingestion by the same species can vary with the age of the organism and the geographical location of the study area [33,59].
The possible pathways for MP ingestion by H. nehereus are water and food. Filter feeding allows large amounts of water containing planktonic prey to enter the mouth and be released by the gills. As a result of this event, small food particles containing MPs can be retained by gill rakers and eventually transferred to the GT [25,33,60]. Such passive feeding habits by filter feeding make them more susceptible to contamination with MPs, which might be the possible reason for higher MP contamination in filter-feeding fish. In addition to this selective feeding behavior of H. nehereus, trophic transfer plays a significant role in MP ingestion. The dietary composition of H. nehereus includes fin fish (unicorn cod, sciaenids, gold-spotted anchovy, and juvenile Bombay duck) and shellfish (non-penaeid prawns and penaeid prawns) [31]. Small fish and prawns are more likely to feed on phytoplankton and zooplankton [61], which makes them more prone to ingesting MPs. This event revealed the transportation of MPs in the food web from lower organisms to higher taxa.
Table 2. Comparison of MP contamination in different fish species around the world.
Table 2. Comparison of MP contamination in different fish species around the world.
No.LocationSpeciesHabitatFeeding StrategyMPs in Fish (MPs/g)Dominant MP TypeReferences
1Northwest coast of IndiaH. nehereusPelagicCarnivore6.98 ± 6.7398% FibersPresent study
2Portuguese coastA. regiusBenthopelagicCarnivore0.80 ± 0.8 65.8% Fibers[18]
M. merlucciusBathydemersalCarnivore0.40 ± 0.89
S. japonicusPelagic–neriticOmnivorous0.57 ± 1.04
T. lyraBenthopelagicCarnivore0.26 ± 0.57
B. boopsDemersalOmnivorous0.09 ± 0.3
3Australia and FijiPlectropomus leopardusReef-associatedCarnivore45.1 ± 5.182.4% Fibers[58]
Upeneichthys lineatusDemersalCarnivore2.7 ± 0.24
L. gibbusBenthopelagicCarnivore39.3 ± 4.8
M. cephalusBenthopelagicCarnivore, Detrivore24.8 ± 7.7
4Bangladesh coast Northern Bay of BengalH. translucensDemersalCarnivore,1.10 ± 0.30 50–55% Fibers[20]
Scorpaenopsis gibbosePelagicPlanktivore1.55 ± 0.48
H. nehereusPelagicCarnivore0.37 ± 0.10
5Haizhou Bay, ChinaThryssa kammalensisPelagicCarnivore11.19 ± 1.2885.7% Fragments[19,62,63]
C. stigmatiasPelagicPredatory1.61 ± 0.56
6Northeast Atlantic OceanDicentrarchus labraxDemersalCarnivore0.054 ± 0.09954% Fibers[64]
Trachurus trachurusBenthopelagicCarnivore
Scomber coliasPelagicCarnivore
7Kerala coast of IndiaS. longicepsPelagicPlanktivores0.054 ± 0.09855.6% Filaments[25]
8Northeast coast, Arabian SeaC. dussumieriPelagicPlanktivores28.84 ± 10.1354.73% Fibers[26]
9Southeast coast of IndiaIstiphorus platypterusEpipelagicCarnivores0.0002 ± 0.000160% Fibers[30]
Sardinella albellaReef-associatedHerbivores0.75 ± 0.01
H. nehereusPelagicCarnivores0.2 ± 0.03
Katsuwonus pelamisPelagicCarnivores0.001 ± 0.0005
Chirocentrus dorabReef-associatedCarnivores0.08 ± 0.04
R. kanagurtaPelagicPlanktivores0.13 ± 0.05
The study site of Jaffrabad has shown a higher abundance of MP contamination than Jakhau and Okha. Moreover, significant contamination was recorded between the study sites. Similarly, the occurrence of MP particles in marine fish varied significantly between study sites in Pantai Remis and Mersing, Malaysia [65]. The abundance of MP contamination in marine organisms can be influenced by region-specific plastic pollution [51]. The high abundance of MP contamination in the study sites of Jaffrabad and Jakhau is possibly due to extensive fishing activities at both study sites. Moreover, recreational activities and urbanization increase the concentration of plastic trash in the ocean through tidal and wind currents. Regression analysis between fish length and MP abundance revealed a significant negative relationship. In contrast, no relation was recorded between fish length and MP abundance in fish collected from the south coast of India [29,66]. However, apart from this, the level of MP contamination can be influenced by the age and feeding pattern of fish, as well as the level of MP contamination in their living environment.

4.2. Physical Characterization of MPs

Regarding the shape classification of MPs, threads were found to be the dominant shape, followed by fragments, film, and foam. Similarly, threads were the dominant shape in C. dussumieri [26], T. lepturus [23], and H. translucens [20]. In contrast, fragments were recorded as the dominant shape in R. kanagurta [21], Chelon subviridis, Johnius belangerii, R. kanagurta, and Stolephorus waitei [67], M. cephalus, Liza macrolepis, S. sihama, and Gerres filamentosus [48], E. japonicus [54], and S. longiceps, S. gibbosa, Stolephorus indicus, R. kanagurta, and C. macrostomus [27]. The prevalence of thread-shaped MPs is closely linked to the dominance of fisheries activities, laundry, textile industries, and wastewater discharge in the study area [55,56,57].
In the case of the color classification of MPs, black and blue MPs were the dominant colors found in the GT of H. nehereus. Similarly, in another study, black and blue MPs were the dominant colors recorded in other fish [33,59,60,64]. It was observed that blue and black trawling nets and ropes are extensively used in fishing activities [29]. The appearance of MPs might trick marine organisms into viewing them as food due to their similar appearance [68]. In the case of size classification of MPs, 1–2 mm-sized MPs were the dominant size, followed by 2–3 mm, 3–4 mm, and 4–5 mm. Similarly, various-sized MPs were found in the GT of fish [24,49,61]. Smaller-sized MPs in the GT of fish may be due to a breakdown of larger debris into smaller-sized particles [66,69]. Moreover, it was found that MPs can act as carriers for other harmful pollutants, such as toxic chemicals (polychlorinated biphenyls, plasticizers, and polybrominated diphenyl ether) and heavy metals, which can attach to the surface of the particles [65,70].

4.3. Chemical Composition of MPs

The chemical composition of polymers in the present study was confirmed as PE, PS, and PU. Similarly, PE and PS were recorded as polymer compositions of MPs in commercially important marine fish collected from Malaysia [65]. The chemical composition of extracted MPs is useful for predicting the source of MPs in marine environments [71]. PE is used in toys, cable insulation, grocery bags, housewares, squeeze bottles, packaging film, etc. [72,73]. PS is commonly used in plastic modeling, ionic membranes, disposable cutlery, fishing equipment, etc. [74]. Possible sources of PU include fishing equipment, adhesives, and sealants [75,76]. The present study has highlighted MP contamination in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus. It is important to note that the ingestion of MPs by fish can have detrimental effects on their health. MPs can cause physical harm, alter feeding behavior, disrupt digestion, potentially transfer harmful chemicals, and ultimately cause mortality [55].

5. Conclusions

The study aimed to assess MP contamination in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus. The abundance of MP contamination was found to be 6.98 ± 6.73 MPs/g. Jaffrabad was found to have the highest MP contamination, followed by Jakhau, Mumbai, and Okha. In terms of shape classification, threads were recorded as the dominant shape. Black and blue MPs with a 1–2 mm size were found to be dominant in all the study sites. ATR-FTIR analysis of extorted MPs revealed PE, PS, and PU as polymer compositions of MPs. Based on the identified polymer composition, fishing activities, plastic trash, sealants, and marine equipment can be possible sources of MPs in the ocean. The present study has only assessed MP contamination in commercially important fish. However, more robust information on MP contamination in prey and water may provide a possible pathway for MP transfer. Moreover, the low density of the NaCl solution limits the flotation of high-density plastic polymers. Seasonal variation of MP contamination needs to be assessed to understand the effect of the monsoon on agglomeration and prevalence of MPs. However, the findings of the study highlighted the MP contamination in a commercially important fish, H. nehereus, which can be biomagnified in higher taxa and humans as well. Moreover, the study gave insight into the further investigation of the effects of MPs on the physio-behavioral aspects of species. Therefore, efforts to reduce plastic pollution and MP input into the marine environment are crucial to safeguarding marine life and the health of our oceans. The study proposes the implementation of robust collaborative efforts with tourist departments, industries, fishermen, and academic institutions as a means to enhance the efficacy of plastic waste management within the marine ecosystem.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/fishes8090432/s1, Figure S1: Abundance of microplastic contamination in the GT of H. nehereus collected from three major fishing harbors of north-west coast of India, showing not a normal distribution (Shapiro-Wilk test, W = 0.73, p < 0.001).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.T., A.P. and D.K.S.; methodology, K.P. (Krupal Patel); software, D.A.; validation, D.A., S.A. and V.K.Y.; formal analysis, V.R.; investigation, A.P.; resources and data curation, D.K.S.; writing—original draft preparation, K.P. (Kalpana Prusty) and V.R.; writing—review and editing, J.T., A.P. and D.K.S.; visualization, V.K.Y.; supervision and project administration, J.T., A.P. and D.K.S.; funding acquisition, D.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The species does not fall under any schedule of the Indian Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, so ethical approval is not needed for this manuscript.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP2023R27), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The authors are thankful to the Department of Life Sciences for providing laboratory facilities and infrastructure. The authors would like to thank Heris Patel and Dimple Thacker for their technical support during study periods.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Barnes, D.K.A.; Galgani, F.; Thompson, R.C.; Barlaz, M. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364, 1985–1998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Europe, P. Plastics—The Facts 2022. 2022. Available online: https://plasticseurope.org/knowledge-hub/plastics-the-facts-2022/ (accessed on 17 August 2023).
  3. Rabari, V.; Patel, H.; Patel, K.; Patel, A.; Bagtharia, S.; Trivedi, J. Quantitative assessment of microplastic contamination in muddy shores of Gulf of Khambhat, India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2023, 192, 115131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Jambeck, J.R.; Geyer, R.; Wilcox, C.; Siegler, T.R.; Perryman, M.; Andrady, A.; Narayan, R.; Law, K.L. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 2015, 347, 768–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Rabari, V.; Patel, K.; Patel, H.; Trivedi, J. Quantitative assessment of microplastic in sandy beaches of Gujarat state, India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022, 181, 113925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Yuan, L.; Wu, X.; He, W.; Degefu, D.M.; Kong, Y.; Yang, Y.; Xu, S.; Ramsey, T.S. Utilizing the strategic concession behavior in a bargaining game for optimal allocation of water in a transboundary river basin during water bankruptcy. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2023, 102, 107162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Lippiatt, S.; Sarah, O.; Courtney, A. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) Marine Debris Monitoring and Assessment: Recommendations for Monitoring Debris Trends in the Marine Environment; NOAA: Washington, DC, USA, 2013; pp. 1–88.
  8. Wu, B.; Quan, Q.; Yang, S.; Dong, Y. A social-ecological coupling model for evaluating the human-water relationship in basins within the Budyko framework. J. Hydrol. 2023, 619, 129361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Andrady, A.L. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 1596–1605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Cole, M.; Lindeque, P.; Halsband, C.; Galloway, T.S. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 2588–2597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Iannilli, V.; Pasquali, V.; Setini, A.; Corami, F. First evidence of microplastics ingestion in benthic amphipods from Svalbard. Environ. Res. 2019, 179 Pt A, 108811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Patterson, J.; Jeyasanta, K.I.; Sathish, N.; Edward, J.K.P.; Booth, A.M. Microplastic and heavy metal distributions in an Indian coral reef ecosystem. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 744, 140706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mohsen, M.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, L.; Sun, L.; Lin, C.; Yang, H. Microplastic ingestion by the farmed sea cucumber Apostichopus japonicus in China. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 245, 1071–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Hariharan, G.; Purvaja, R.; Anandavelu, I.; Robin, R.S.; Ramesh, R. Accumulation and ecotoxicological risk of weathered polyethylene (wPE) microplastics on green mussel (Perna viridis). Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 208, 111765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Daniel, D.B.; Ashraf, P.M.; Thomas, S.N.; Thomson, K.T. Microplastics in the edible tissues of shellfishes sold for human consumption. Chemosphere 2021, 264, 128554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Waddell, E.N.; Lascelles, N.; Conkle, J.L. Microplastic contamination in Corpus Christi Bay blue crabs, Callinectes sapidus. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 2020, 5, 92–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Munno, K.; Helm, P.A.; Rochman, C.; George, T.; Jackson, D.A. Microplastic contamination in Great Lakes fish. Conserv. Biol. 2022, 36, 13794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Neves, D.; Sobral, P.; Ferreira, J.L.; Pereira, T. Ingestion of microplastics by commercial fish off the Portuguese coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 101, 119–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Feng, Z.; Zhang, T.; Li, Y.; He, X.; Wang, R.; Xu, J.; Gao, G. The accumulation of microplastics in fish from an important fish farm and mariculture area, Haizhou Bay, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 696, 133948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hossain, M.S.; Sobhan, F.; Uddin, M.N.; Sharifuzzaman, S.M.; Chowdhury, S.R.; Sarker, S.; Chowdhury, M.S.N. Microplastics in fishes from the Northern Bay of Bengal. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 690, 821–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. KKarbalaei, S.; Golieskardi, A.; Hamzah, H.B.; Abdulwahid, S.; Hanachi, P.; Walker, T.R.; Karami, A. Abundance and characteristics of microplastics in commercial marine fish from Malaysia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 148, 5–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Pozo, K.; Gomez, V.; Torres, M.; Vera, L.; Nuñez, D.; Oyarzún, P.; Mendoza, G.; Clarke, B.; Fossi, M.C.; Baini, M.; et al. Presence and characterization of microplastics in fish of commercial importance from the Biobío region in central Chile. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 140, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Hasan, J.; Islam, S.M.M.; Alam, M.S.; Johnson, D.; Belton, B.; Hossain, M.A.R.; Shahjahan, M. Presence of microplastics in two common dried marine fish species from Bangladesh. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022, 176, 113430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kumar, V.E.; Ravikumar, G.; Jeyasanta, K.I. Occurrence of microplastics in fishes from two landing sites in Tuticorin, South east coast of India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 889–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Daniel, D.B.; Ashraf, P.M.; Thomas, S.N. Microplastics in the edible and inedible tissues of pelagic fishes sold for human consumption in Kerala, India. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 266, 115365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gurjar, U.R.; Xavier, K.A.M.; Shukla, S.P.; Deshmukhe, G.; Jaiswar, A.K.; Nayak, B.B. Incidence of microplastics in gastrointestinal tract of golden anchovy (Coilia dussumieri) from north east coast of Arabian Sea: The ecological perspective. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 169, 112518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. James, K.; Vasant, K.; Padua, S.; Gopinath, V.; Abilash, K.S.; Jeyabaskaran, R.; Babu, A.; John, S. An assessment of microplastics in the ecosystem and selected commercially important fishes off Kochi, south eastern Arabian Sea, India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 154, 111027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Karuppasamy, P.K.; Ravi, A.; Vasudevan, L.; Elangovan, M.P.; Dyana Mary, P.; Vincent, S.G.T.; Palanisami, T. Baseline survey of micro and mesoplastics in the gastro-intestinal tract of commercial fish from Southeast coast of the Bay of Bengal. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 153, 110974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sathish, M.N.; Jeyasanta, I.; Patterson, J. Occurrence of microplastics in epipelagic and mesopelagic fishes from Tuticorin, Southeast coast of India. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. James, K.; Vasant, K.; Sikkander Batcha, S.M.; Padua, S.; Jeyabaskaran, R.; Thirumalaiselvan, S.; Vineetha, G.; Benjamin, L.V. Seasonal variability in the distribution of microplastics in the coastal ecosystems and in some commercially important fishes of the Gulf of Mannar and Palk Bay, Southeast coast of India. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 2021, 41, 101558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ghosh, S. Fishery, reproductive biology and diet characteristics of Bombay duck Harpadon nehereus from the Saurashtra coast. Indian J. Mar. Sci. 2014, 43, 418–426. [Google Scholar]
  32. Piyawardhana, N.; Weerathunga, V.; Chen, H.-S.; Guo, L.; Huang, P.-J.; Ranatunga, R.R.M.K.P.; Hung, C.C. Occurrence of microplastics in commercial marine dried fish in Asian countries. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 423, 127093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Daniel, D.B.; Ashraf, P.M.; Thomas, S.N. Abundance, characteristics and seasonal variation of microplastics in Indian white shrimps (Fenneropenaeus indicus) from coastal waters off Cochin, Kerala, India. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 737, 139839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Nadal, M.A.; Alomar, C.; Deudero, S. High levels of microplastic ingestion by the semipelagic fish bogue Boops boops (L.) around the Balearic Islands. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 214, 517–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Xiong, L.; Bai, X.; Zhao, C.; Li, Y.; Tan, Q.; Luo, G.; Wu, L.; Chen, F.; Li, C.; Ran, C.; et al. High-Resolution Data Sets for Global Carbonate and Silicate Rock Weathering Carbon Sinks and Their Change Trends. Earths Future 2022, 10, e2022EF002746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hirai, H.; Takada, H.; Ogata, Y.; Yamashita, R.; Mizukawa, K.; Saha, M.; Kwan, C.; Moore, C.; Gray, H.; Laursen, D.; et al. Organic micropollutants in marine plastics debris from the open ocean and remote and urban beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2011, 62, 1683–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Wardrop, P.; Shimeta, J.; Nugegoda, D.; Morrison, P.D.; Miranda, A.; Tang, M.; Clarke, B.O. Chemical Pollutants Sorbed to Ingested Microbeads from Personal Care Products Accumulate in Fish. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 4037–4044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lin, X.; Lu, K.; Hardison, A.K.; Liu, Z.; Xu, X.; Gao, D.; Gong, J.; Gardner, W.S. Membrane inlet mass spectrometry method (REOX/MIMS) to measure 15N-nitrate in isotope-enrichment experiments. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 126, 107639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Rochman, C.M.; Tahir, A.; Williams, S.L.; Baxa, D.V.; Lam, R.; Miller, J.T.; Teh, F.-C.; Werorilangi, S.; Teh, S.J. Anthropogenic debris in seafood: Plastic debris and fibers from textiles in fish and bivalves sold for human consumption. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 14340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Senapati, S.; Gupta, V. Climate change and coastal ecosystem in India: Issues in perspectives. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 2014, 5, 530–543. [Google Scholar]
  41. CMFRI. Marine Fish Landings in India-2022; CMFRI: Kochi, India, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kumkar, P.; Verma, C.R.; Hýsek, Š.; Pise, M.; Źółtowska, S.; Gosavi, S.M.; Mercl, F.; Božik, M.; Praus, L.; Hanková, K.; et al. Contaminants and their ecological risk assessment in beach sediments and water along the Maharashtra coast of India: A comprehensive approach using microplastics, heavy metal(loid)s, pharmaceuticals, personal care products and plasticisers. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 892, 164712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Trivedi, D.J.; Soni, J.N.; Vachhrajani, B.D.A. Crustacean fauna of Gujarat state of India: A review. Electron. J. Environ. Sci. 2015, 8, 23–31. [Google Scholar]
  44. Radhakrishnan, E.V.; Kizhakudan, J.K.; Saleela, A.; Dineshbabu, A.P.; Lakshmi Pillai, S. Lobster fisheries and management in India and Indian ocean rim countries. In Lobsters: Biology, Fisheries and Aquaculture; Springer: Singapore, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sukumaran, S.; Vijapure, T.; Mulik, J.; ARokade, M.; Gajbhiye, S.N. Macrobenthos in anthropogenically influenced zones of a coralline marine protected area in the Gulf of Kachchh, India. J. Sea Res. 2013, 76, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Stanley, O.D. Wetland Ecosystems and Coastal Habitat Diversity in Gujarat, India. J. Coast. Dev. 2004, 7, 49–64. [Google Scholar]
  47. Karami, A.; Golieskardi, A.; Choo, C.K.; Romano, N.; Ho, Y.B.; Salamatinia, B. A high-performance protocol for extraction of microplastics in fish. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 578, 485–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Robin, R.S.; Karthik, R.; Purvaja, R.; Ganguly, D.; Anandavelu, I.; Mugilarasan, M.; Ramesh, R. Holistic assessment of microplastics in various coastal environmental matrices, southwest coast of India. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 703, 134947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Li, J.; Yang, D.; Li, L.; Jabeen, K.; Shi, H. Microplastics in commercial bivalves from China. Environ. Pollut. 2015, 207, 190–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. De Frond, H.; Rubinovitz, R.; Rochman, C.M. μATR-FTIR Spectral Libraries of Plastic Particles (FLOPP and FLOPP-e) for the Analysis of Microplastics. Anal. Chem. 2021, 93, 15878–15885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Jabeen, K.; Su, L.; Li, J.; Yang, D.; Tong, C.; Mu, J.; Shi, H. Microplastics and mesoplastics in fish from coastal and fresh waters of China. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 221, 141–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Pazos, R.S.; Maiztegui, T.; Colautti, D.C.; Paracampo, A.H.; Gómez, N. Microplastics in gut contents of coastal freshwater fish from Río de la Plata estuary. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 122, 85–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Pellini, G.; Gomiero, A.; Fortibuoni, T.; Ferrà, C.; Grati, F.; Tassetti, A.N.; Polidori, P.; Fabi, G.; Scarcella, G. Characterization of microplastic litter in the gastrointestinal tract of Solea solea from the Adriatic Sea. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 234, 943–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Tanaka, K.; Takada, H. Microplastic fragments and microbeads in digestive tracts of planktivorous fish from urban coastal waters. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 34351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Güven, O.; Gökdağ, K.; Jovanović, B.; Kıdeyş, A.E. Microplastic litter composition of the Turkish territorial waters of the Mediterranean Sea, and its occurrence in the gastrointestinal tract of fish. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 223, 286–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Pedà, C.; Battaglia, P.; D’Alessandro, M.; Laface, F.; Malara, D.; Consoli, P.; Vicchio, T.M.; Longo, F.; Andaloro, F.; Baini, M.; et al. Coupling Gastro-Intestinal Tract Analysis with an Airborne Contamination Control Method to Estimate Litter Ingestion in Demersal Elasmobranchs. Front. Environ. Sci. 2020, 8, 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Lusher, A.L.; O’Donnell, C.; Officer, R.; O’Connor, I. Microplastic interactions with North Atlantic mesopelagic fish. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2016, 73, 1214–1225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Wootton, N.; Ferreira, M.; Reis-Santos, P.; Gillanders, B.M. A Comparison of Microplastic in Fish from Australia and Fiji. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8, 690991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bom, F.C.; Sá, F. Concentration of microplastics in bivalves of the environment: A systematic review. Environ. Monit. Assess 2021, 193, 846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Ningrum, E.W.; Patria, M.P. Ingestion of microplastics by anchovies from east Lombok Harbour, Lombok Island, Indonesia. AIP Conf. Proc. 2019, 2120, 040002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Newell, R.I.E.; Marshall, N.; Sasekumar, A.; Chong, V.C. Relative importance of benthic microalgae, phytoplankton, and mangroves as sources of nutrition for penaeid prawns and other coastal invertebrates from Malaysia. Mar. Biol. 1995, 123, 595–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gao, C.; Wang, Z.; Ji, X.; Wang, W.; Wang, Q.; Qing, D. Coupled improvements on hydrodynamics and water quality by flowing water in towns with lakes. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 46813–46825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ding, M.-Q.; Yang, S.-S.; Ding, J.; Zhang, Z.-R.; Zhao, Y.-L.; Dai, W.; Sun, H.J.; Zhao, L.; Xing, D.; Ren, N.; et al. Gut Microbiome Associating with Carbon and Nitrogen Metabolism during Biodegradation of Polyethene in Tenebrio larvae with Crop Residues as Co-Diets. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023, 57, 3031–3041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Barboza, L.G.A.; Lopes, C.; Oliveira, P.; Bessa, F.; Otero, V.; Henriques, B.; Raimundo, J.; Caetano, M.; Vale, C.; Guilhermino, L.; et al. Microplastics in wild fish from North East Atlantic Ocean and its potential for causing neurotoxic effects, lipid oxidative damage, and human health risks associated with ingestion exposure. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 717, 134625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Jaafar, N.; Azfaralariff, A.; Musa, S.M.; Mohamed, M.; Yusoff, A.H.; Lazim, A.M. Occurrence, distribution and characteristics of microplastics in gastrointestinal tract and gills of commercial marine fish from Malaysia. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 799, 149457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Devi, S.S.; Sreedevi, A.V.; Kumar, A.B. First report of microplastic ingestion by the alien fish Pirapitinga (Piaractus brachypomus) in the Ramsar site Vembanad Lake, south India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 160, 111637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Karami, A.; Golieskardi, A.; Ho YBin Larat, V.; Salamatinia, B. Microplastics in eviscerated flesh and excised organs of dried fish. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Ory, N.C.; Sobral, P.; Ferreira, J.L.; Thiel, M. Amberstripe scad Decapterus muroadsi (Carangidae) fish ingest blue microplastics resembling their copepod prey along the coast of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) in the South Pacific subtropical gyre. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 586, 430–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. White, E.M.; Clark, S.; Manire, C.A.; Crawford, B.; Wang, S.; Locklin, J.; Ritchie, B.W. Ingested Micronizing Plastic Particle Compositions and Size Distributions within Stranded Post-Hatchling Sea Turtles. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 10307–10316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Browne, M.A.; Crump, P.; Niven, S.J.; Teuten, E.; Tonkin, A.; Galloway, T.; Thompson, R. Accumulation of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: Sources and sinks. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 9175–9179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Abayomi, O.A.; Range, P.; Al-Ghouti, M.A.; Obbard, J.P.; Almeer, S.H.; Ben-Hamadou, R. Microplastics in coastal environments of the Arabian Gulf. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 124, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Yeung, C.W.S.; Teo, J.Y.Q.; Loh, X.J.; Lim, J.Y.C. Polyolefins and Polystyrene as Chemical Resources for a Sustainable Future: Challenges, Advances, and Prospects. ACS Mater. Lett. 2021, 3, 1660–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Mintenig, S.M.; Int-Veen, I.; Löder, M.G.J.; Primpke, S.; Gerdts, G. Identification of microplastic in effluents of waste water treatment plants using focal plane array-based micro-Fourier-transform infrared imaging. Water Res. 2017, 108, 365–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Giani, D.; Baini, M.; Galli, M.; Casini, S.; Fossi, M.C. Microplastics occurrence in edible fish species (Mullus barbatus and Merluccius merluccius) collected in three different geographical sub-areas of the Mediterranean Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 140, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Zia, K.M.; Bhatti, H.N.; Ahmad Bhatti, I. Methods for polyurethane and polyurethane composites, recycling and recovery: A review. React. Funct. Polym. 2007, 67, 675–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Capillo, G.; Savoca, S.; Panarello, G.; Mancuso, M.; Branca, C.; Romano, V.; D’Angelo, G.; Bottari, T.; Spanò, N. Quali-quantitative analysis of plastics and synthetic microfibers found in demersal species from Southern Tyrrhenian Sea (Central Mediterranean). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2020, 150, 110596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fishes 08 00432 g001
Figure 1. Geographic map showing sampling locations: 1—Jakhau, 2—Okha, 3—Jaffrabad, and 4—Mumbai.
Figure 1. Geographic map showing sampling locations: 1—Jakhau, 2—Okha, 3—Jaffrabad, and 4—Mumbai.
Fishes 08 00432 g001
Fishes 08 00432 g002
Figure 2. An abundance of MP contamination in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India (** p < 0.01).
Figure 2. An abundance of MP contamination in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India (** p < 0.01).
Fishes 08 00432 g002
Fishes 08 00432 g003
Figure 3. Regression analysis between H. nehereus body length and MP contamination (p < 0.001).
Figure 3. Regression analysis between H. nehereus body length and MP contamination (p < 0.001).
Fishes 08 00432 g003
Fishes 08 00432 g004
Figure 4. Percentage composition of shapes of MPs found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India.
Figure 4. Percentage composition of shapes of MPs found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India.
Fishes 08 00432 g004
Fishes 08 00432 g005
Figure 5. Representative photographs of MP shapes found in H. nehereus using a stereomicroscope: (A) thread; (B) foam; (C) film; and (D) fragment.
Figure 5. Representative photographs of MP shapes found in H. nehereus using a stereomicroscope: (A) thread; (B) foam; (C) film; and (D) fragment.
Fishes 08 00432 g005
Fishes 08 00432 g006
Figure 6. Percentage composition of MP colors found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India.
Figure 6. Percentage composition of MP colors found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India.
Fishes 08 00432 g006
Fishes 08 00432 g007
Figure 7. Percentage composition of MP sizes found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India (p < 0.001).
Figure 7. Percentage composition of MP sizes found in H. nehereus collected from major fishing harbors on the northwest coast of India (p < 0.001).
Fishes 08 00432 g007
Fishes 08 00432 g008
Figure 8. ATR-FTIR spectrum of extracted MPs: (A) PE; (B) PS; and (C) PU.
Figure 8. ATR-FTIR spectrum of extracted MPs: (A) PE; (B) PS; and (C) PU.
Fishes 08 00432 g008
Table 1. Results of a post-hoc test showing the variation of MP contamination in H. nehereus between study sites.
Table 1. Results of a post-hoc test showing the variation of MP contamination in H. nehereus between study sites.
JaffrabadJakhauMumbai
Jakhau0.85179--
Mumbai0.001720.00025-
Okha0.001720.000150.85179
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Prusty, K.; Rabari, V.; Patel, K.; Ali, D.; Alarifi, S.; Yadav, V.K.; Sahoo, D.K.; Patel, A.; Trivedi, J. An Assessment of Microplastic Contamination in a Commercially Important Marine Fish, Harpadon nehereus (Hamilton, 1822). Fishes 2023, 8, 432. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090432

AMA Style

Prusty K, Rabari V, Patel K, Ali D, Alarifi S, Yadav VK, Sahoo DK, Patel A, Trivedi J. An Assessment of Microplastic Contamination in a Commercially Important Marine Fish, Harpadon nehereus (Hamilton, 1822). Fishes. 2023; 8(9):432. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090432

Chicago/Turabian Style

Prusty, Kalpana, Vasantkumar Rabari, Krupal Patel, Daoud Ali, Saud Alarifi, Virendra Kumar Yadav, Dipak Kumar Sahoo, Ashish Patel, and Jigneshkumar Trivedi. 2023. "An Assessment of Microplastic Contamination in a Commercially Important Marine Fish, Harpadon nehereus (Hamilton, 1822)" Fishes 8, no. 9: 432. https://doi.org/10.3390/fishes8090432

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop