From Fabric to Fallout: A Systematic Review of the Impact of Textile Parameters on Fibre Fragment Release

Abstract

With an expanding global clothing and textile industry that shows no signs of slowing, concerns over its environmental impacts follow. Fibre fragments (FFs)—short pieces of textiles that have separated from a textile construction—are a growing area of concern due to increasing evidence of their accumulation in the environment. Most of the existing research on this topic focuses on the role of consumer behaviour rather than the textiles themselves. A systematic literature review is used here to explore the key textile parameters that influence FF release. A search of articles published between 2011 and June 2024 was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. Three databases (Scopus, Web of Science, and EBSCO) were used, and articles were screened to ensure that a minimum of one textile parameter was manipulated in the study. A total of 52 articles were selected and where appropriate, comparisons between samples used and key findings were made. The textile parameters that were found to reduce FF release include fibres of a longer length and higher tenacity, as well as filament yarns with low hairiness and higher twists. At the fabric level, tight fabric structures and high abrasion resistance show lower FF shedding. Mechanical finishes that reduce the number of protruding fibre ends or chemical finishes that increase abrasion resistance also prove to be beneficial. Lastly, sewing and cutting methods that enclose or seal the textile edge can reduce FF release. While optimal parameters have been identified, they are not applicable to all textile end-uses. Rather, these factors can serve as a guide during future production and be applied where possible to limit FF release.

1. Introduction

The global clothing and textile industry in 2022 was valued at $575.06 billion USD and it is projected to continue to grow [1]. The average production rate per year is over 100 billion items of clothing [2]. As the global industry grows, so do concerns for the environment.

One of the major reasons that the clothing and textile industry has become an environmental concern is the rise and dominance of fast fashion [3]. Fast fashion is a business model that prioritizes producing clothing at a low cost and fast rate; this in turn encourages customers to continually consume new articles of clothing. The resulting industry is one that exploits its workers and the environment to maintain production levels [4]. Not only does the industry produce tonnes of textile waste, but it is also well documented that the massive level of production releases toxic chemicals and pollutants into the water and air [5].

Even during consumer use, there is potential for environmental harm—for example, the release of fibre fragments. Fibre fragments (FF) are defined as “a short piece (typically < 5 mm long) of textile fibre, broken away (or separated) from a textile construction” [6]. In existing environmental science literature, FFs are often termed as microfibres (e.g., [7]). However, it is important to distinguish that the two are not synonymous terms. The current ambiguity surrounding microfibres and FFs ushers in the assumption that microfibres are inevitably pollutants. In the textiles industry, microfibres simply refer to “a fibre with a linear density less than 1 denier or 1 decitex” [6], and when utilized in their filament form may not be major contributors to FF pollution.

Recent studies have concluded that for every kilogram of laundry, an estimated three million FFs may be released into the waterways [8]. Further, FFs may also be released into the atmosphere during wear. Eventually, these fragments settle both on land and in bodies of water [9]. Release of all fibre types stabilizes over time, but shedding continues through the entire lifetime of a textile [10,11,12,13].

Several examples of the environmental distribution and source of FFs have been demonstrated. Athey et al. [14] concluded that up to 90% of anthropogenic particles in the sediments of the Canadian Arctic, Great Lakes, and Southern Ontario suburban lakes were FFs. Following further analysis, many of these FFs were identified as anthropogenically modified cellulose containing indigo denim dye. A similar study by Adams et al. [15] found that 51% of FFs analysed in marine sediments were anthropogenic cellulose. The most likely source of these blue cotton FFs is blue jeans. Taking into account that cotton is the second most used fibre type in the clothing and textile industry, it is not a surprise that an accumulation of cotton FFs is being found in the environment [14,16].

FF release and accumulation are a point of concern for both synthetic and natural fibres. While natural fibres, such as cotton, may be environmentally benign in their original form, the chemical additives (e.g., finishes, dyes) that occur during textile production can alter the polymeric structure of these fibres [17]. This results in natural fibres with reduced rates of biodegradation. Nonetheless, synthetic fibres have frequently become the centre of the discussion due to their inability to biodegrade [18]. Over the years, the consumer market has become dominated by textiles made from synthetic fibres. In 2022, polyester made up 54% of the fibre production in the clothing and textile industry [16]. While synthetic fibres like polyester offer manufacturers and consumers many benefits, an increasing amount of evidence draws concerns to their environmental impacts [19,20]. Due to the frequent use of synthetic materials, FFs released from many textiles are microplastics [21]. The clothing and textile industry has become a major source of microplastic pollution.

It has been found that the proportions of polyester fibres found in sewage discharge and sewage effluent correspond to the proportions found in clothing [22]. Furthermore, exponentially increasing amounts of polyester FFs are being found in the environment [23]. A study by Royer et al. [19] demonstrated that lyocell, a regenerated cellulosic fibre, degraded completely after 60 days in seawater. In contrast, the polyester fibres tested remained intact even after 200 days in seawater. An additional paper by Zambrano et al. [24] outlines the continued consumption of oxygen by cellulosic fibres after 243 days, while synthetic fibres were shown to plateau. These synthetic fibres accumulate in the environment and eventually find their way into the food chain where they have been shown to lead to various health complications [25]. Preliminary evidence has shown cotton fibres can impact the growth of marine wildlife, although synthetic fibres may be more toxic [26]. More comprehensive discussions of the environmental and health impacts of FFs in the environment can be found in reviews by Liu et al. [27] and Periyasamy [28].

The issue of FF release and its subsequent environmental consequences are highly linked to the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These goals aim to ensure a sustainable future for all people without compromising the planet’s natural resources and ecosystems [29]. Improvements to the industry that can reduce FF release would directly support these goals. More specifically, actions such as developing textiles that release fewer FFs and encouraging consumer behaviours that reduce shedding contribute to SDG 12, which emphasizes responsible consumption and production. Additionally, reducing the number of FFs that enter our water systems would mitigate potential harm to marine environments—addressing SDG 14 which seeks to preserve life below water [29]. Lastly, SDG 15, which focuses on life on land, is also relevant to the current discussion [29]. FFs may remain in the atmosphere where they are easily inhaled, leading to possible consequences for the human respiratory system [27]. These FFs may also settle into soil where they can negatively impact soil organisms and enter the terrestrial food chain [30]. Therefore, a reduction in FF release would be well-aligned with SDG 15. It is well-known that many changes and improvements need to be made to the clothing and textile industry if we want to safeguard a sustainable future. Working to reduce FF release would be one way to take a step forward toward this vision.

The current body of research places emphasis on changes that consumers can adopt to help reduce their emissions. Many studies highlight different washing parameters (e.g., wash cycle, temperature, load size, type of detergent) as well as the effectivity of microfibre filters. However, the average consumer lacks general knowledge about FF release as well as methods to properly combat the problem [31]. Additionally, work of this nature implies that much of the responsibility to reduce FF release rests on consumers. This fails to acknowledge that many effective measures can be implemented at earlier points in the textile production chain. That is not to minimize the role of the consumer, however, consumers are limited in their abilities if the textiles available to purchase are produced and structured in ways that promote shedding. Moreover, early literature fails to acknowledge the role that textile properties play in FF release. The lack of adequate understanding of textile properties has led to various confounding variables.

The focus of this review is to examine FF release with an emphasis on textile properties rather than detergency and washing parameters. The specific research question that was posed was: What are the key textile characteristics that contribute to an increased likelihood of FF release during laundering? Since much of the earlier work conducted that characterized FF release via laundering exhibited confounding fibre/yarn/fabric and/or finishing treatments, it has been difficult to untangle the key parameters influencing release. The discussion will look at the fibre, yarn, fabric, finishes/treatments, and garment construction and explore how FF release is influenced at each of these levels. Understanding the contributing characteristics may serve as a long-term solution. Future application of this research at the level of production can support the manufacture of textiles that meet end-use goals without compromising the future of the environment.

2. Methods

A systematic search and review of the published literature pertaining to FF release was conducted using the framework outlined by Grant and Booth [32] and the methodology outlined by PRISMA [33]. Using the search terms for the topics of the following: (microfib* or fragment or microplast*) AND (yarn* or fib* or fabric* or textile*) AND (laund* or wash*) using three databases, Scopus, Web of Science, and EBSCO’s Academic Search Complete. The full search strategies used for each database are presented in Supplementary Table S2. The protocol for this review was not registered.

The initial search was conducted in June of 2024 and returned 521 results from the Scopus database, 472 from Web of Science, and 169 from EBSCO. Once duplicates were removed, the total articles identified came to 625. Articles then underwent two stages of screening, which was completed independently by two of the authors (i.e., J.H. and R.H.M.). The first screening stage assessed article titles and abstracts to ensure that the articles were empirical research studies that explored the topic of FF release from textiles during laundering processes. This screening also verified that at least one textile parameter was manipulated in the study to allow for comparison of matching and/or similar textile properties. The full inclusion and exclusion criteria used are shown in

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for review.

Inclusion Criteria	Exclusion Criteria
Empirical research study	Textile parameters included in the study are confounding
Article explores the topic of FF release from textiles via laundering	Conference proceedings, reviews, working papers, commentaries
One or more textile parameter has been manipulated in the study	Articles that could not be accessed in full
Published in a peer-reviewed journal
Publication is in English
Published between 2011 and June 2024

.

A total of 80 articles remained after the first screening stage. These 80 articles then underwent a second screening where a full content review took place. As a result, 52 articles were selected for this review. A visualization of the selection steps is outlined in Figure 1.

Using the final selection of articles, results from each study were compiled and compared where appropriate. The main data extracted from each article were the samples tested, textile properties studied, and key findings. Instances where articles made explicit mention of holding confounding factors constant were also noted.

The present search is limited to three databases and was restricted to the English language. While most of the articles found on this topic were in English, further research can be expanded to include additional languages.

From the collected data, the general trends and influence of textile parameters on FF release during laundering become apparent. These are discussed in further detail in the following sections.

3. Results

From the 52 selected articles, 28 examined textile parameters varying in fibre content (e.g., [10,21,34,35,36,37,38]), 24 dealt with variations in yarn properties (e.g., [36,39,40,41,42,43,44,45]), 34 considered different fabric structures (e.g., [21,35,36,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53]), and 21 focused on reducing FF release through the manipulation of finishing treatments (e.g., [52,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63]). Lastly, five articles studied the influence of garment construction on FF release (e.g., [39,50,64,65,66]). The majority (37) of the articles had samples that varied more than one textile parameter.

Table 2 shows an overview of the articles that met the inclusion criteria in chronological order. The publication dates range from 2011 to 2024. For each article, the samples used, textile parameter(s) studied, and findings are highlighted.

Polyester was the most common fibre included in the samples, followed by cotton. This focus on polyester and cotton is likely due to the prominence of these fibres in the consumer market [16]. Nylon, acrylic, and wool are included in some studies but were less common. Seven articles included samples with recycled fibre content—all of which mainly focused on recycled polyester fibres (e.g., [37,41,44,50,67,68,69]). Two of the seven articles, Vassilenko et al. [67] and Frost et al. [69], included samples of recycled nylon and cotton, respectively. The only studies that did not include polyester were Lahiri et al. [59,60] and Zambrano et al. [54]. These articles were centred on specific fabric finishes—with Lahiri et al. [59,60] studying finishes for nylon and Zambrano et al. focused on finishes for cotton.

A range of yarn properties were studied in the articles, with many comparing staple and filament yarns. Others looked at the influence of properties like yarn thickness, strength, twist, hairiness, and/or production methods (e.g., [9,10,40,41,42,43,45,54,68,70]). Articles that studied yarn properties in more depth, such as Cai et al. [39], and Pinlova et al. [71], tested samples at various points in the yarn production process.

Fabric structures can play a key role in FF release at the fabric level. Therefore, studies compared knit and woven structures or variations within the knit or woven categories. Typically, the fabric construction influences FF release due to differing levels of fibre and yarn freedom [40,48]. Additional factors that have been studied for their impact on FF release include fabric weight, thickness, and abrasion resistance (e.g., [24,34,46,51,55]).

Finishes are often added as a final step in fabric production, and these can play a role in subsequent FF releases. The articles selected study various mechanical and chemical finishes and treatments. Examples include brushing, singeing, enzymatic treatments, and abrasion or low-friction coatings (e.g., [55,57,58,59,60]). Most studies that included manipulations to finishes/treatments heavily focused on polyester and nylon (e.g., [37,55,57,58,59,60,63]). Zambrano et al. [54] is the only article that studied finishes without polyester or nylon samples and exclusively looked at cotton.

Lastly, five articles investigated the relationship between garment construction and FF release. All articles solely used polyester textiles. Four of the articles dealt with various fabric cutting methods (i.e., laser, ultrasonic, and scissor cutting) and their influence on FF release (i.e., [39,50,64,66]). The sewing method is the other garment construction property that was studied in two articles (i.e., [65,66]).

Of the 52 articles, 21 had one or more textile parameters that were studied with all possible influencing factors held constant. A Y* entry in Table 2 indicates that the article made explicit mention of holding confounding factors constant, which often meant that the study produced their own textile samples rather than utilizing commercially available ones.

Table 2. Summary of textile parameters findings.

Ref.	Year	Samples Tested	Textile Parameter Studied					Findings
			Fibre	Yarn	Fabric	Finish	Garment
[38]	2016	100% polyester 100% acrylic 65% polyester/35% cotton	Y	-	-	-	-	Polyester-cotton blend shed fewer FFs than other fabric types regardless of temperature, detergent presence/type, and conditioning presence Highest release from acrylic sample
[72]	2017	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ With 2% spandex plating, single jersey knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	No significant difference in shedding found between jersey and interlock knit constructions Toughness and stability of polyester makes shedding less likely Stress and FFs produced during the production of yarns and fabric can be stored within the textile and subsequently released Fibre shedding predominantly due to fibre slippage, coating point rupture, and/or fibre breakage
[12]	2017	100% polyester ○ anti-pill fleece ○ fleece 96% polyester/4% elastane, softshell 100% polyester 100% cotton	Y	-	Y	-	-	Highest number of fibres released from the softshell sample, followed by 100% cotton FF release decreases and stabilizes over sequential washes
[21]	2018	100% polyester ○ Knit, filament ○ Knit, staple ○ Microfleece, filament ○ Fleece, filament 100% acrylic (polyacrylic) knit, staple 100% nylon (polyamide) knit, filament	Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Fleece and microfleece fabrics release more FFs than knit fabrics Looser fabric structures are associated with higher shedding Materials containing yarns that are made from a greater number of exposed filaments per area shed more fibres Tighter yarn structures are associated with lower shedding
[62]	2018	Raw 100% polyamide-6,6, woven	-	-	-	Y*	-	Pectin treatment reduced the number of FFs released by approximately 90%
[50]	2018	100% mechanically recycled polyester, tricot ○ Ultrasonic cut ○ Scissor cut 100% virgin polyester ○ Tricot, ultrasonic cut ○ Fleece, ultrasonic cut 100% recycled polyester, fleece, ultrasonic cut	Y*	-	Y*	-	Y*	No significant difference found between virgin and recycled fibre content No significant difference found between knit and fleece constructions Large difference in shedding seen between ultrasonic and scissor-cut fabrics; higher shedding seen with the scissor-cut textiles
[34]	2019	100% polyester ○ “Fluffy”, woven ○ “Fluffy”, knit ○ Knit ○ Woven 80% polyester/20% elastane, knit 70% acrylic/30% polyamide, knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Acrylic/polyamide shed the highest number of FFs per unit weight and area Garment weight of “fluffy” garments were positively correlated with FF release FF release rate positively correlated with superficial density (g/cm2)
[63]	2019	Raw 100% polyamide-6,6, woven	-	-	-	Y*	-	PLA and PBSA coasting applied to polyamide fabrics resulted in over 80% reduction in FF shedding
[41]	2019	100% polyester, ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ Warp knit, filament 25% virgin/65% recycled polyester, satin weave, filament Double structure garment: front—100% polyester, satin weave, filament; back—50% cotton/50% modal, rib knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest FF release from the polyester/cotton/modal blend; majority of these fibres were cellulosic Filament, low hairiness, and high twist in yarns are associated with lower FF release Woven structures shed less than knit structures
[45]	2019	100% polyester, plain weave 100% polyamide, plain weave 100% acetate, satin weave	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest number and mass of FFs released from polyamide A higher yarn count is associated with increased FF release Higher number of yarns per unit length (tighter structure) is associated with decreased FF release
[24]	2019	100% cotton, interlock knit, staple 100% polyester, interlock knit, staple 100% rayon, interlock knit, staple 50% polyester/50% cotton, interlock knit, staple	Y	Y	-	-	-	High breaking load of yarns and abrasion resistance of fabrics are associated with decreased FF release Rayon, cotton, and polyester/cotton all released higher number of FFs than polyester
[39]	2020	100% polyester ○ Sliver ○ Yarn, filament ○ Yarn, staple—ring-spun ○ Yarn, staple—air-jet-spun ○ Yarn, staple—rotor-spun ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Terry knit, staple ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain brushed woven, filament ○ Microfibre woven, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	Y*	Between yarns and the sliver, the lowest number of fibres were released from the filament yarn; highest from rotor-spun yarn Significantly higher number of FFs extracted from textiles with processed surfaces (fleece and plain brushed) Highest shedding found with the microfibre textile; lowest with the filament twill weave No significant relationship found between fibre release and yarn type or fabric structure Positive correlation between edge length and FFs extracted for scissor-cut samples
[64]	2020	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain brushed woven, filament ○ Microfibre woven, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	Y*	Scissor cut samples led to a 3–21 time increase in FFs released Significantly higher number of FFs released from textiles with mechanically processed surfaces (fleece and plain brushed) No significant relationship found between fibre release and yarn type or fabric structure
[35]	2020	100% cotton, single jersey knit, staple 100% acrylic, 1 × 1 rib knit, staple 100% polyester, single jersey knit, staple 100% polyamide, single jersey knit, filament	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Cotton found to shed the most FFs; polyester shed the least Acrylic shed significantly more FFs than polyester and polyamide A higher mass of material exposed in a textile can increase shedding Lower fibre cohesion within a textile can increase shedding
[9]	2020	100% polyester ○ Woven, filament ○ Knit, filament ○ Knit, staple 50% polyester/50% cotton, knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest FF release from polyester-cotton blend; lowest from polyester woven filament Majority of fibres released from the polyester-cotton blend were cotton Woven structure and higher yarn twist associated with lower shedding
[69]	2020	100% virgin cotton, single jersey knit 80% virgin/20% recycled cotton, single jersey knit 60% virgin/40% recycled cotton, single jersey knit 100% virgin polyester, single jersey knit 60% virgin/40% recycled polyester, single jersey knit 30% virgin/70% recycled polyester, single jersey knit 30% virgin PET/70% virgin cotton, twill weave 30% virgin PET/63% virgin cotton/7% recycled cotton, twill weave 30% virgin polyester/49% virgin cotton/21% recycled cotton, twill weave	Y	-	Y	-	-	Samples containing 70% recycled polyester shed fewer than those with 40% recycled polyester Virgin polyester shed the lowest number of FFs No significant difference in FF release between cotton knit and twill weave as a function of recycled fibre content Use of recycled content overall does not increase FF release
[54]	2021	100% cotton, interlock knit, ring-spun ○ Durable press ○ Silicone softener ○ C6-based fluorinated (non-PFOA) water repellent ○ Blue 19 dye	-	-	-	Y*	-	All finishing treatments promoted the release of FFs Water repellent and silicone softener finishes showed a statistically significant increase in the generation of FFs
[47]	2021	Textured polyester filament warp and acrylic staple weft ○ Plain weave ○ Twill weave ○ Satin weave	-	-	Y*	-	-	A higher interlacement coefficient is associated with lower FF shedding Higher density (yarns/cm) associated with lower FF release No significant relationship found between weave pattern and level of FF shedding
[40]	2021	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Hard-twist filament ○ Non-twist filament ○ Staple	-	Y	-	-	-	Higher release from staple than filament yarns Higher degree of fibre freedom is associated with increased shedding (i.e., non/low-twist yarns, low yarn density)
[48]	2021	100% polyester ○ plain weave, filament ○ twill weave, filament ○ plain knit (single jersey), filament	-	-	Y	-	-	Looser textile structures lead to increased FF release Higher release from plain knit fabric More FF release from twill-woven than plain-woven fabrics Higher degree of fibre freedom is associated with increased shedding
[65]	2021	100% polyester, knit, ○ Ring-spun staple, sewn with double heat-sealing ○ Filament, sewn with 100% polyester thread	-	Y	-	-	Y	Sample sewn with polyester thread released more FFs than the heat-sealed sample
[13]	2021	100% polyester, single jersey knit ○ With raised loop piles, fleece, anti-pill, filament ○ With raised loop piles, fleece, filament ○ Filament 100% polyester, pique knit, filament 96% polyester/4% elastane (composite fabric): shell—plain weave, filament; fleece—single jersey knit with raised loop piles, filament 92% polyamide/8% elastane, single jersey knit, filament 100% acrylic, knit, staple	Y	-	Y	Y	-	Acrylic textile found to shed the most FFs over sequential washes Fleece textiles released the most FFs over sequential drying cycles
[44]	2021	100% virgin polyester, 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Staple ○ Filament 100% recycled polyester, 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Staple ○ Filament	Y*	Y*	-	-	-	Higher FF release from recycled polyester Fabrics produced from thicker staple yarns shed more FFs Significant positive correlation between yarn hairiness > 4 mm and number of FFs released
[67]	2021	100% cotton ○ Single jersey knit, staple ○ Woven, staple ○ Woven, staple, brushed 50% cotton/50% polyester, fleece knit, staple, napped 50% cotton/50% recycled polyester, jersey knit, staple 100% wool, single jersey knit, staple 100% virgin polyester ○ Fleece, napped ○ Microfibre, fleece, napped ○ Double-sided fleece, napped ○ Brushed fleece, napped ○ Cross dye fleece, napped ○ Two-side brushed fleece, napped, anti-pill	Y	Y	Y	Y	-
		100% virgin polyester ○ Jersey knit, filament, brushed ○ woven, staple, brushed 100% recycled polyester ○ Double velour, napped ○ Cross dye fleece, napped ○ Taffeta, filament 70% recycled/30% virgin polyester ○ High-pile fleece, napped ○ Pile fleece, filament, brushed 70% recycled/30% virgin polyester ○ High-pile fleece, napped ○ Pile fleece, filament, brushed 64% recycled/33% virgin polyester/3% elastane, fleece, napped 90% virgin/10% elastane, jersey knit with velour back, filament, mechanically processed 93% virgin polyester/7% elastane, jersey knit, filament ○ Brushed ○ Sanded ○ Double knit pique, filament 46% nylon/46% polyester/8% spandex, stretch knit, filament 100% virgin nylon ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Ripstop taffeta, filament						Natural fibres (cotton and wool) shed more FFs than both polyester and nylon; nylon sheds the least Higher shedding found in mechanically treated samples Shedding from synthetic textiles was associated with material area density
		92% virgin nylon/8% elastane, softshell, filament, brushed 88% virgin nylon/12% elastane, double weave, filament 96% virgin nylon/4% elastane, double weave stretch, filament 88% virgin nylon, 12% elastane, double weave stretch, filament 100% recycled nylon, plain weave, filament, crinkle finish Nylon-polyester composite, taffeta, filament Nylon-ePTFE composite, filament ○ Laminated ○ Brushed and laminated 35% nylon/39% polyester/16% spandex composite, softshell, filament Polyester-polyurethane composite, filament
[10]	2022	100% polyester, single jersey knit, staple 100% acrylic, single jersey knit, staple 100% nylon, single jersey knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest release from acrylic fabric, followed by polyester then nylon Higher flexural stiffness and tensile strength of a fabric is associated with lower release Higher yarn breaking strength is associated with lower release
[49]	2022	100% polyester ○ Plain knit ○ Plain weave 100% polyester ○ Twill weave ○ Satin weave	-	-	Y	-	-	Looser fabric structures lead to increased FF release Increased fibre friction is associated with higher FF release Increased interlacing points in woven fabrics decrease fibre shedding (plain < satin < twill)
[73]	2022	95% polyamide/3% elastane/2% polypropylene 100% polyester 100% polypropylene 100% polyurethane 100% cotton	Y	-	-	-	-	Fibres with lower tenacity or higher hydrophilicity may increase FF shedding Cotton released the highest number of FFs Of the synthetic fabrics, polyurethane released the most FFs
[11]	2022	100% polyester, ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Knit, filament 88% polyester/12% polyamide, woven, filament and staple 100% cotton, rib knit, staple 100% acrylic, terry cloth, staple	Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release from acrylic textile (release for cotton and polyester/polyamide not recorded) Release of FFs stabilize over multiple wash cycles
[52]	2022	100% polyamide	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Higher fabric surface density is associated with lower FF shedding Chitosan pretreatment can lower FF shedding by 60%
[70]	2022	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Filament ○ Staple 100% textured polyester, plain weave, filament 52% polyester/48% cotton, plain weave, staple 100% cotton, plain weave, staple	Y	Y	-	-	-	Blended polyester-cotton yarns shed higher masses of cotton FFs than polyester; shedding profile is like that of cotton Among filament samples, texturized filaments shed the highest mass of FF than flat filaments A general decrease in FF shedding with repeated wash cycles for all yarn types except flat filament Yarns with a higher twist level may shed fewer FFs
[71]	2022	100% polyester yarn ○ Sliver ○ Staple, ring-spun ○ Staple, compact-spun ○ Staple, rotor-spun ○ Staple, air-jet-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Lowest FF release from air-jet-spun; highest release from rotor-spun yarns Increased speed of rotor spinning resulted in a higher number of FFs FFs are present from the initial bale and continue to be generated during yarn production
[46]	2022	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit ○ 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Single jersey knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Higher stitch density, higher tightness factor, lower thickness, and lower loop length correlated with lower FF release Interlock knit structure shed more FFs compared to the 1 × 1 rib and single jersey knits Increases in filament denier (i.e., coarser) increased FF shedding
[58]	2022	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ 1 × 1 rib knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Knit fabrics treated using a lipase enzyme under optimized conditions see a maximum reduction of 79.11% in number of FFs released and 85.68% reduction in mass of fibres released over repeated laundering No statistically significant influence of fabric structure or mass
[42]	2023	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Ring-spun ○ Rotor-spun ○ Air-jet-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Ring spun fabrics released a significantly higher mass of FFs compared to air-jet and rotor spun fabrics Increased hairiness found with ring spun yarns compared to air-jet and rotor spun yarns
[43]	2023	100% cotton, plain weave ○ Conventional-spun ○ Compact-spun ○ SIRO-spun ○ SIRO-compact-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Conventional spinning releases a higher amount of FFs compared to other spinning methods Higher fibre migration, yarn compactness, tenacity, and lower hairiness are associated with lower release
[59]	2023	100% nylon-6,6, ○ Woven, pre-finished ○ Tulle knit ○ Woven	-	-	Y	Y*	-	PDMS treated fabrics had a 93% reduction in shedding Low friction coatings on textiles can decrease the level of release
[74]	2023	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain weave filament ○ Plain weave, staple	-	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release of FFs after UV exposure seen with the plain-woven filament
[75]	2023	100% nylon-6, 1/1 plain weave	Y*	-	-	-	-	Addition of PDMS to the nylon polymer reduced the coefficient of friction and increased resistance to water and soiling 60% reduction in shedding seen when PDMS was added during melt spinning of nylon
[57]	2023	100% polyester, 1 × 1 interlock knit	-	-	-	Y*	-	Highest reduction when samples were pre-treated with alkali and finished with chitosan (84.29% reduction in number of FFs and 87.61% in FF weight) Samples treated with lipase enzymes showed an increase in FF count and mass
[76]	2023	100% cotton, single jersey knit 98% cotton/2% elastane, single jersey knit 95% cotton/5% elastane, 1 × 1 rib knit 92% cotton/2% elastane, single jersey knit	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Cotton-elastane blends released more than cotton An increase in elastane content was found to be positively correlated with the total number of FFs released
[77]	2023	100% polyester ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Interlock knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	0.75 M is the optimal concentration of the alkali treatment to reduce shedding Woven samples were found to shed fewer FFs than knit samples Structural properties of a fabric (knit/woven) are more important than moisture or physical fabric properties in reducing fibre release
[55]	2023	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ 1 × 1 rib knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Samples treated with alkali (NaOH) under optimal conditions increased abrasion resistance and showed an 80.62% reduction in the number of FF released Alkali treatment was effective in reducing FF release regardless of other polyester fabric properties
[66]	2023	100% polyester, 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament	-	-	-	-	Y*	Ultrasonic and laser cutting reduced FF shedding by up to 20 times compared to scissor cutting EFb (i.e., double fold) seam finishes reduced released by 93% Increases in stitch density reduced FF release (expect for overlock stitches)
[53]	2023	100% polyester ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% cotton ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% wool ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% acrylic, knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Fibre content does not play a significant role in shedding behaviours Woven textiles shed less than knit textiles Significant shedding of FFs occurs when hand-laundering textiles
[68]	2023	100% cotton ○ Yarn, staple ○ Jersey knit, ring-spun, staple ○ Jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple ○ Jersey knit, open-end-spun, staple 100% recycled polyester ○ Yarn, filament ○ Jersey knit, filament 100% virgin polyester ○ Yarn, filament ○ Jersey knit, filament 80% cotton/20% polyester yarn, staple 60% cotton/40% bamboo, jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple 30% cotton/70% bamboo, jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Thinner and denser yarns showed an increased shedding behaviour Yarns with a higher twist associated with lower FF release No significant difference seen between virgin and recycled polyester samples
[78]	2023	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Terry knit, staple ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Knit, fleece, filament ○ Plain weave, filament, surface treated ○ Woven, microfibre, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release of FFs and formation of fibrils per gram of fabric from staple length, jersey knit; lowest from filament length, satin weave No significant effect of yarn type on the number of released FFs or fibrils Abrasion of textiles is a major source of FF and fibril formation and release
[37]	2024	100% virgin polyester, knit ○ Staple ○ Filament ○ Filament, surface treated 100% recycled polyester, knit ○ Staple ○ Filament ○ Filament, surface treated	Y*	-	-	Y	-	No significant difference in FF release found between virgin and recycled polyester Notable increase in shedding seen with textiles that were surface treated
[36]	2024	100% polyester, double jersey knit, staple ○ Air-jet-spun ○ Conventional ring-spun 100% cotton, double jersey knit, staple ○ Air-jet-spun ○ Coventional ring-spun 100% viscose, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple 100% modal, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple 100% acrylic, double jersey knit, rotor-spun, staple 100% lyocell, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple	Y*	Y*	Y*	-	-	Fibre composition and system for yarn spinning has the most influence on release Impact of fabric structure on FF release is influenced by potential damage and action during manufacturing Air-jet-spun yarns released significantly fewer FF In knit form, all cellulose-based textiles shed more than polyester; regenerated cellulose shed more than cotton
[51]	2024	100% cotton, twill weave 70% cotton/30% polyester, satin weave 65% polyester/35% cotton, plain weave 100% polyester, plain weave	Y	-	Y	-	-	Higher textile weight associated with higher FF release Weave structure influences FF release; twill weave had the lowest emissions, followed by plain weave, then satin weave
[61]	2024	100% polyester ○ Classic fleece ○ Laid-in fleece ○ Fur knit bonded with plain knit ○ Heavy fleece ○ Double jersey knit ○ Single jersey knit ○ Warp knit, plush fabric ○ Interlock knit 55% polypropylene/45% polyester, fleece 89% polyester/11% elastane, single knit, fleece	Y	-	Y	Y	-	Surface processing of textiles does not guarantee higher release of FFs
[60]	2024	100% nylon-6,6, 1 × 1 woven, pre-finished 100% polyester, one-sided fleece, pre-finished		-	Y	Y*	-	Textiles with a coefficient of friction < 0.25 show a significant reduction in shedding Liquid-like polymer brush finishes (PDMS, PFPE, and PEG) are highly effective in reducing FF shedding
[56]	2024	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit ○ 1/1 plain weave		-	-	Y	-	Application of a 1% TCA-MC solvent treatment on polyester can decrease FF shedding by up to 93.79% for knit fabrics and 64.72% for woven fabrics

Y—textile parameter has been studied; Y*—textile parameter has been studied with other influencing parameters held constant.

Table 2. Summary of textile parameters findings.

Ref.	Year	Samples Tested	Textile Parameter Studied					Findings
			Fibre	Yarn	Fabric	Finish	Garment
[38]	2016	100% polyester 100% acrylic 65% polyester/35% cotton	Y	-	-	-	-	Polyester-cotton blend shed fewer FFs than other fabric types regardless of temperature, detergent presence/type, and conditioning presence Highest release from acrylic sample
[72]	2017	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ With 2% spandex plating, single jersey knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	No significant difference in shedding found between jersey and interlock knit constructions Toughness and stability of polyester makes shedding less likely Stress and FFs produced during the production of yarns and fabric can be stored within the textile and subsequently released Fibre shedding predominantly due to fibre slippage, coating point rupture, and/or fibre breakage
[12]	2017	100% polyester ○ anti-pill fleece ○ fleece 96% polyester/4% elastane, softshell 100% polyester 100% cotton	Y	-	Y	-	-	Highest number of fibres released from the softshell sample, followed by 100% cotton FF release decreases and stabilizes over sequential washes
[21]	2018	100% polyester ○ Knit, filament ○ Knit, staple ○ Microfleece, filament ○ Fleece, filament 100% acrylic (polyacrylic) knit, staple 100% nylon (polyamide) knit, filament	Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Fleece and microfleece fabrics release more FFs than knit fabrics Looser fabric structures are associated with higher shedding Materials containing yarns that are made from a greater number of exposed filaments per area shed more fibres Tighter yarn structures are associated with lower shedding
[62]	2018	Raw 100% polyamide-6,6, woven	-	-	-	Y*	-	Pectin treatment reduced the number of FFs released by approximately 90%
[50]	2018	100% mechanically recycled polyester, tricot ○ Ultrasonic cut ○ Scissor cut 100% virgin polyester ○ Tricot, ultrasonic cut ○ Fleece, ultrasonic cut 100% recycled polyester, fleece, ultrasonic cut	Y*	-	Y*	-	Y*	No significant difference found between virgin and recycled fibre content No significant difference found between knit and fleece constructions Large difference in shedding seen between ultrasonic and scissor-cut fabrics; higher shedding seen with the scissor-cut textiles
[34]	2019	100% polyester ○ “Fluffy”, woven ○ “Fluffy”, knit ○ Knit ○ Woven 80% polyester/20% elastane, knit 70% acrylic/30% polyamide, knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Acrylic/polyamide shed the highest number of FFs per unit weight and area Garment weight of “fluffy” garments were positively correlated with FF release FF release rate positively correlated with superficial density (g/cm2)
[63]	2019	Raw 100% polyamide-6,6, woven	-	-	-	Y*	-	PLA and PBSA coasting applied to polyamide fabrics resulted in over 80% reduction in FF shedding
[41]	2019	100% polyester, ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ Warp knit, filament 25% virgin/65% recycled polyester, satin weave, filament Double structure garment: front—100% polyester, satin weave, filament; back—50% cotton/50% modal, rib knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest FF release from the polyester/cotton/modal blend; majority of these fibres were cellulosic Filament, low hairiness, and high twist in yarns are associated with lower FF release Woven structures shed less than knit structures
[45]	2019	100% polyester, plain weave 100% polyamide, plain weave 100% acetate, satin weave	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest number and mass of FFs released from polyamide A higher yarn count is associated with increased FF release Higher number of yarns per unit length (tighter structure) is associated with decreased FF release
[24]	2019	100% cotton, interlock knit, staple 100% polyester, interlock knit, staple 100% rayon, interlock knit, staple 50% polyester/50% cotton, interlock knit, staple	Y	Y	-	-	-	High breaking load of yarns and abrasion resistance of fabrics are associated with decreased FF release Rayon, cotton, and polyester/cotton all released higher number of FFs than polyester
[39]	2020	100% polyester ○ Sliver ○ Yarn, filament ○ Yarn, staple—ring-spun ○ Yarn, staple—air-jet-spun ○ Yarn, staple—rotor-spun ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Terry knit, staple ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain brushed woven, filament ○ Microfibre woven, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	Y*	Between yarns and the sliver, the lowest number of fibres were released from the filament yarn; highest from rotor-spun yarn Significantly higher number of FFs extracted from textiles with processed surfaces (fleece and plain brushed) Highest shedding found with the microfibre textile; lowest with the filament twill weave No significant relationship found between fibre release and yarn type or fabric structure Positive correlation between edge length and FFs extracted for scissor-cut samples
[64]	2020	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain brushed woven, filament ○ Microfibre woven, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	Y*	Scissor cut samples led to a 3–21 time increase in FFs released Significantly higher number of FFs released from textiles with mechanically processed surfaces (fleece and plain brushed) No significant relationship found between fibre release and yarn type or fabric structure
[35]	2020	100% cotton, single jersey knit, staple 100% acrylic, 1 × 1 rib knit, staple 100% polyester, single jersey knit, staple 100% polyamide, single jersey knit, filament	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Cotton found to shed the most FFs; polyester shed the least Acrylic shed significantly more FFs than polyester and polyamide A higher mass of material exposed in a textile can increase shedding Lower fibre cohesion within a textile can increase shedding
[9]	2020	100% polyester ○ Woven, filament ○ Knit, filament ○ Knit, staple 50% polyester/50% cotton, knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest FF release from polyester-cotton blend; lowest from polyester woven filament Majority of fibres released from the polyester-cotton blend were cotton Woven structure and higher yarn twist associated with lower shedding
[69]	2020	100% virgin cotton, single jersey knit 80% virgin/20% recycled cotton, single jersey knit 60% virgin/40% recycled cotton, single jersey knit 100% virgin polyester, single jersey knit 60% virgin/40% recycled polyester, single jersey knit 30% virgin/70% recycled polyester, single jersey knit 30% virgin PET/70% virgin cotton, twill weave 30% virgin PET/63% virgin cotton/7% recycled cotton, twill weave 30% virgin polyester/49% virgin cotton/21% recycled cotton, twill weave	Y	-	Y	-	-	Samples containing 70% recycled polyester shed fewer than those with 40% recycled polyester Virgin polyester shed the lowest number of FFs No significant difference in FF release between cotton knit and twill weave as a function of recycled fibre content Use of recycled content overall does not increase FF release
[54]	2021	100% cotton, interlock knit, ring-spun ○ Durable press ○ Silicone softener ○ C6-based fluorinated (non-PFOA) water repellent ○ Blue 19 dye	-	-	-	Y*	-	All finishing treatments promoted the release of FFs Water repellent and silicone softener finishes showed a statistically significant increase in the generation of FFs
[47]	2021	Textured polyester filament warp and acrylic staple weft ○ Plain weave ○ Twill weave ○ Satin weave	-	-	Y*	-	-	A higher interlacement coefficient is associated with lower FF shedding Higher density (yarns/cm) associated with lower FF release No significant relationship found between weave pattern and level of FF shedding
[40]	2021	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Hard-twist filament ○ Non-twist filament ○ Staple	-	Y	-	-	-	Higher release from staple than filament yarns Higher degree of fibre freedom is associated with increased shedding (i.e., non/low-twist yarns, low yarn density)
[48]	2021	100% polyester ○ plain weave, filament ○ twill weave, filament ○ plain knit (single jersey), filament	-	-	Y	-	-	Looser textile structures lead to increased FF release Higher release from plain knit fabric More FF release from twill-woven than plain-woven fabrics Higher degree of fibre freedom is associated with increased shedding
[65]	2021	100% polyester, knit, ○ Ring-spun staple, sewn with double heat-sealing ○ Filament, sewn with 100% polyester thread	-	Y	-	-	Y	Sample sewn with polyester thread released more FFs than the heat-sealed sample
[13]	2021	100% polyester, single jersey knit ○ With raised loop piles, fleece, anti-pill, filament ○ With raised loop piles, fleece, filament ○ Filament 100% polyester, pique knit, filament 96% polyester/4% elastane (composite fabric): shell—plain weave, filament; fleece—single jersey knit with raised loop piles, filament 92% polyamide/8% elastane, single jersey knit, filament 100% acrylic, knit, staple	Y	-	Y	Y	-	Acrylic textile found to shed the most FFs over sequential washes Fleece textiles released the most FFs over sequential drying cycles
[44]	2021	100% virgin polyester, 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Staple ○ Filament 100% recycled polyester, 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Staple ○ Filament	Y*	Y*	-	-	-	Higher FF release from recycled polyester Fabrics produced from thicker staple yarns shed more FFs Significant positive correlation between yarn hairiness > 4 mm and number of FFs released
[67]	2021	100% cotton ○ Single jersey knit, staple ○ Woven, staple ○ Woven, staple, brushed 50% cotton/50% polyester, fleece knit, staple, napped 50% cotton/50% recycled polyester, jersey knit, staple 100% wool, single jersey knit, staple 100% virgin polyester ○ Fleece, napped ○ Microfibre, fleece, napped ○ Double-sided fleece, napped ○ Brushed fleece, napped ○ Cross dye fleece, napped ○ Two-side brushed fleece, napped, anti-pill	Y	Y	Y	Y	-
		100% virgin polyester ○ Jersey knit, filament, brushed ○ woven, staple, brushed 100% recycled polyester ○ Double velour, napped ○ Cross dye fleece, napped ○ Taffeta, filament 70% recycled/30% virgin polyester ○ High-pile fleece, napped ○ Pile fleece, filament, brushed 70% recycled/30% virgin polyester ○ High-pile fleece, napped ○ Pile fleece, filament, brushed 64% recycled/33% virgin polyester/3% elastane, fleece, napped 90% virgin/10% elastane, jersey knit with velour back, filament, mechanically processed 93% virgin polyester/7% elastane, jersey knit, filament ○ Brushed ○ Sanded ○ Double knit pique, filament 46% nylon/46% polyester/8% spandex, stretch knit, filament 100% virgin nylon ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Ripstop taffeta, filament						Natural fibres (cotton and wool) shed more FFs than both polyester and nylon; nylon sheds the least Higher shedding found in mechanically treated samples Shedding from synthetic textiles was associated with material area density
		92% virgin nylon/8% elastane, softshell, filament, brushed 88% virgin nylon/12% elastane, double weave, filament 96% virgin nylon/4% elastane, double weave stretch, filament 88% virgin nylon, 12% elastane, double weave stretch, filament 100% recycled nylon, plain weave, filament, crinkle finish Nylon-polyester composite, taffeta, filament Nylon-ePTFE composite, filament ○ Laminated ○ Brushed and laminated 35% nylon/39% polyester/16% spandex composite, softshell, filament Polyester-polyurethane composite, filament
[10]	2022	100% polyester, single jersey knit, staple 100% acrylic, single jersey knit, staple 100% nylon, single jersey knit, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Highest release from acrylic fabric, followed by polyester then nylon Higher flexural stiffness and tensile strength of a fabric is associated with lower release Higher yarn breaking strength is associated with lower release
[49]	2022	100% polyester ○ Plain knit ○ Plain weave 100% polyester ○ Twill weave ○ Satin weave	-	-	Y	-	-	Looser fabric structures lead to increased FF release Increased fibre friction is associated with higher FF release Increased interlacing points in woven fabrics decrease fibre shedding (plain < satin < twill)
[73]	2022	95% polyamide/3% elastane/2% polypropylene 100% polyester 100% polypropylene 100% polyurethane 100% cotton	Y	-	-	-	-	Fibres with lower tenacity or higher hydrophilicity may increase FF shedding Cotton released the highest number of FFs Of the synthetic fabrics, polyurethane released the most FFs
[11]	2022	100% polyester, ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Knit, filament 88% polyester/12% polyamide, woven, filament and staple 100% cotton, rib knit, staple 100% acrylic, terry cloth, staple	Y	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release from acrylic textile (release for cotton and polyester/polyamide not recorded) Release of FFs stabilize over multiple wash cycles
[52]	2022	100% polyamide	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Higher fabric surface density is associated with lower FF shedding Chitosan pretreatment can lower FF shedding by 60%
[70]	2022	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Filament ○ Staple 100% textured polyester, plain weave, filament 52% polyester/48% cotton, plain weave, staple 100% cotton, plain weave, staple	Y	Y	-	-	-	Blended polyester-cotton yarns shed higher masses of cotton FFs than polyester; shedding profile is like that of cotton Among filament samples, texturized filaments shed the highest mass of FF than flat filaments A general decrease in FF shedding with repeated wash cycles for all yarn types except flat filament Yarns with a higher twist level may shed fewer FFs
[71]	2022	100% polyester yarn ○ Sliver ○ Staple, ring-spun ○ Staple, compact-spun ○ Staple, rotor-spun ○ Staple, air-jet-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Lowest FF release from air-jet-spun; highest release from rotor-spun yarns Increased speed of rotor spinning resulted in a higher number of FFs FFs are present from the initial bale and continue to be generated during yarn production
[46]	2022	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit ○ 1 × 1 rib knit ○ Single jersey knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Higher stitch density, higher tightness factor, lower thickness, and lower loop length correlated with lower FF release Interlock knit structure shed more FFs compared to the 1 × 1 rib and single jersey knits Increases in filament denier (i.e., coarser) increased FF shedding
[58]	2022	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ 1 × 1 rib knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Knit fabrics treated using a lipase enzyme under optimized conditions see a maximum reduction of 79.11% in number of FFs released and 85.68% reduction in mass of fibres released over repeated laundering No statistically significant influence of fabric structure or mass
[42]	2023	100% polyester, plain weave ○ Ring-spun ○ Rotor-spun ○ Air-jet-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Ring spun fabrics released a significantly higher mass of FFs compared to air-jet and rotor spun fabrics Increased hairiness found with ring spun yarns compared to air-jet and rotor spun yarns
[43]	2023	100% cotton, plain weave ○ Conventional-spun ○ Compact-spun ○ SIRO-spun ○ SIRO-compact-spun	-	Y*	-	-	-	Conventional spinning releases a higher amount of FFs compared to other spinning methods Higher fibre migration, yarn compactness, tenacity, and lower hairiness are associated with lower release
[59]	2023	100% nylon-6,6, ○ Woven, pre-finished ○ Tulle knit ○ Woven	-	-	Y	Y*	-	PDMS treated fabrics had a 93% reduction in shedding Low friction coatings on textiles can decrease the level of release
[74]	2023	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Fleece knit, filament ○ Plain weave filament ○ Plain weave, staple	-	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release of FFs after UV exposure seen with the plain-woven filament
[75]	2023	100% nylon-6, 1/1 plain weave	Y*	-	-	-	-	Addition of PDMS to the nylon polymer reduced the coefficient of friction and increased resistance to water and soiling 60% reduction in shedding seen when PDMS was added during melt spinning of nylon
[57]	2023	100% polyester, 1 × 1 interlock knit	-	-	-	Y*	-	Highest reduction when samples were pre-treated with alkali and finished with chitosan (84.29% reduction in number of FFs and 87.61% in FF weight) Samples treated with lipase enzymes showed an increase in FF count and mass
[76]	2023	100% cotton, single jersey knit 98% cotton/2% elastane, single jersey knit 95% cotton/5% elastane, 1 × 1 rib knit 92% cotton/2% elastane, single jersey knit	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Cotton-elastane blends released more than cotton An increase in elastane content was found to be positively correlated with the total number of FFs released
[77]	2023	100% polyester ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Interlock knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	0.75 M is the optimal concentration of the alkali treatment to reduce shedding Woven samples were found to shed fewer FFs than knit samples Structural properties of a fabric (knit/woven) are more important than moisture or physical fabric properties in reducing fibre release
[55]	2023	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament ○ Single jersey knit, filament ○ 1 × 1 rib knit, filament	-	-	Y	Y*	-	Samples treated with alkali (NaOH) under optimal conditions increased abrasion resistance and showed an 80.62% reduction in the number of FF released Alkali treatment was effective in reducing FF release regardless of other polyester fabric properties
[66]	2023	100% polyester, 1 × 1 interlock knit, filament	-	-	-	-	Y*	Ultrasonic and laser cutting reduced FF shedding by up to 20 times compared to scissor cutting EFb (i.e., double fold) seam finishes reduced released by 93% Increases in stitch density reduced FF release (expect for overlock stitches)
[53]	2023	100% polyester ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% cotton ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% wool ○ Knit ○ Woven 100% acrylic, knit	Y	-	Y	-	-	Fibre content does not play a significant role in shedding behaviours Woven textiles shed less than knit textiles Significant shedding of FFs occurs when hand-laundering textiles
[68]	2023	100% cotton ○ Yarn, staple ○ Jersey knit, ring-spun, staple ○ Jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple ○ Jersey knit, open-end-spun, staple 100% recycled polyester ○ Yarn, filament ○ Jersey knit, filament 100% virgin polyester ○ Yarn, filament ○ Jersey knit, filament 80% cotton/20% polyester yarn, staple 60% cotton/40% bamboo, jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple 30% cotton/70% bamboo, jersey knit, vortex-spun, staple	Y	Y	Y	-	-	Thinner and denser yarns showed an increased shedding behaviour Yarns with a higher twist associated with lower FF release No significant difference seen between virgin and recycled polyester samples
[78]	2023	100% polyester ○ Interlock knit, staple ○ Jersey knit, staple ○ Rib knit, staple ○ Rib knit, filament ○ Terry knit, staple ○ Plain weave, staple ○ Plain weave, filament ○ Twill weave, filament ○ Satin weave, filament ○ Knit, fleece, filament ○ Plain weave, filament, surface treated ○ Woven, microfibre, filament	-	Y	Y	Y	-	Highest release of FFs and formation of fibrils per gram of fabric from staple length, jersey knit; lowest from filament length, satin weave No significant effect of yarn type on the number of released FFs or fibrils Abrasion of textiles is a major source of FF and fibril formation and release
[37]	2024	100% virgin polyester, knit ○ Staple ○ Filament ○ Filament, surface treated 100% recycled polyester, knit ○ Staple ○ Filament ○ Filament, surface treated	Y*	-	-	Y	-	No significant difference in FF release found between virgin and recycled polyester Notable increase in shedding seen with textiles that were surface treated
[36]	2024	100% polyester, double jersey knit, staple ○ Air-jet-spun ○ Conventional ring-spun 100% cotton, double jersey knit, staple ○ Air-jet-spun ○ Coventional ring-spun 100% viscose, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple 100% modal, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple 100% acrylic, double jersey knit, rotor-spun, staple 100% lyocell, double jersey knit, compact ring-spun, staple	Y*	Y*	Y*	-	-	Fibre composition and system for yarn spinning has the most influence on release Impact of fabric structure on FF release is influenced by potential damage and action during manufacturing Air-jet-spun yarns released significantly fewer FF In knit form, all cellulose-based textiles shed more than polyester; regenerated cellulose shed more than cotton
[51]	2024	100% cotton, twill weave 70% cotton/30% polyester, satin weave 65% polyester/35% cotton, plain weave 100% polyester, plain weave	Y	-	Y	-	-	Higher textile weight associated with higher FF release Weave structure influences FF release; twill weave had the lowest emissions, followed by plain weave, then satin weave
[61]	2024	100% polyester ○ Classic fleece ○ Laid-in fleece ○ Fur knit bonded with plain knit ○ Heavy fleece ○ Double jersey knit ○ Single jersey knit ○ Warp knit, plush fabric ○ Interlock knit 55% polypropylene/45% polyester, fleece 89% polyester/11% elastane, single knit, fleece	Y	-	Y	Y	-	Surface processing of textiles does not guarantee higher release of FFs
[60]	2024	100% nylon-6,6, 1 × 1 woven, pre-finished 100% polyester, one-sided fleece, pre-finished		-	Y	Y*	-	Textiles with a coefficient of friction < 0.25 show a significant reduction in shedding Liquid-like polymer brush finishes (PDMS, PFPE, and PEG) are highly effective in reducing FF shedding
[56]	2024	100% polyester ○ 1 × 1 interlock knit ○ 1/1 plain weave		-	-	Y	-	Application of a 1% TCA-MC solvent treatment on polyester can decrease FF shedding by up to 93.79% for knit fabrics and 64.72% for woven fabrics

Y—textile parameter has been studied; Y*—textile parameter has been studied with other influencing parameters held constant.

Through analysis of the selected articles, there are key textile properties that have been shown to reduce FF release. For example, fibres with high tenacity, yarns with higher twist, and fabrics with high abrasion resistance [10,24,36,43,44,45,55,68,72]. A summary of the optimal textile parameters for reducing FF release is provided in

Table 3. Textile parameters that reduce FF release.

Level	Parameter	Direction	References
Fibre	Fibre tenacity	Increase	[24,36,44,72,79]
	Fibre length	Increase	[24,40,72]
Yarn	Yarn Type	Filament	[40,44,62,72]
	Yarn Hairiness	Decrease	[24,39,41,42,44,70]
	Yarn Twist	Increase (to an optimal point)	[10,21,24,39,40,43,68,70]
Fabric	Fabric structure	Tighter (to an optimal point)	[9,13,21,39,41,45,47,48,49,51,77]
	Abrasion resistance	Increase	[24,55,78,80]
Treatments/Finishes	Mechanical finishes	Finishes/treatments that reduce protruding fibre ends	[39,58,64,67]
	Chemical finishes	Finishes/treatments that increase the abrasion resistance of the fabric	[52,55,57,59,60,63]
Garment construction	Sewing and cutting method	Enclosure or sealing of fabric edges	[39,50,64,65,66]

.

4. Discussion

4.1. Fibre Properties

Patterns of FF release differ when the fibre type is changed, this is due to the impact of fibre tenacity, fibre type, length, and interactions with water.

4.1.1. Fibre Tenacity

The tenacity of fibres has been found to influence the level of FF release. Fibres with a reduced tenacity are more likely to break and thus, increase FF release [44]. Textiles are prone to mechanical and chemical actions during both washing and wear that can weaken the fibre structure. At the molecular level, the effects of washing and wear can manifest as damages to the molecular chain and reductions in the degree of polymerization—both of which can contribute to lower fibre tenacity [79].

4.1.2. Fibre Type

Synthetic fibres that are inherently stable and tough such as polyester are less prone to individual fibre breakage and will release fewer FFs in comparison to natural fibres [24,36,72]. In line with this, Cesa et al. [35] found that the highest levels of shedding were from cotton textiles, followed by acrylic and polyester. A study by Sillanpää and Sainio estimated that the average number of FF released per wash for cotton textiles was 9.73 × 10⁵, and 2.23 × 10⁵ for polyester [12]. Additionally, Periyasamy and Tehrani-Bagha [23] suggested that high static charge and cohesion between polyester fibres further contribute to its lower release. However, the same FF release behaviour was not necessarily observed with recycled polyester. Studies by Jönsson et al. [50], Frost et al. [69], Gao et al. [37], and Wang et al. [68] all concluded that there was no significant difference in shedding behaviour between recycled and virgin polyester fibres. Still, these studies do not provide definitive evidence that recycled fibres are a perfect replacement. For example, Frost et al. [69] acknowledge that the potential impacts from polymer and yarn structures are not examined in their study. Additionally, Jönsson et al. [50] point out that while no significant difference was found between recycled and virgin fibres, the standard deviation of their analyses was rather high.

Furthermore, conflicting evidence has also been published. Özkan and Gündoğdu [44] found that recycled polyester released higher levels of FFs than virgin polyester, independent of yarn and fabric type. Due to the friction and heat of the polyester recycling process, the resulting fibres have a reduced molecular weight and chain length. These structural changes led to fibres that were 2.3 times weaker, with lower elongation and breaking points [44]. As a result of these structural changes, recycled polyester releases higher levels of FFs.

The possibility of higher shedding from recycled polyester is an important behaviour to note due to the fibre’s reputation as a more environmentally sustainable option [81,82]. Often, lifecycle assessments conducted on recycled polyester have been deemed favourable [83]. A large problem with these assessments is that they look at a limited scope that only includes cradle-to-gate. When compared to virgin polyester, it is true that recycled polyester reduces both the use of virgin materials and environmental impact during production [82]. However, the cradle-to-gate lifecycle assessment fails to acknowledge the impacts of the material’s use and end-of-life [83]. Not only does recycled polyester carry the same environmental burdens as virgin polyester when it comes to disposal, but it potentially poses an even larger environmental threat during its use phase due to higher FF release [44]. Additional work needs to be conducted to examine the environmental impacts of recycled polyester fibres before it can be presented as a sustainable fibre option.

4.1.3. Fibre Length

Formation and release of FFs during laundering and wear are mainly due to the breakage of shorter staple fibres and fibre slippage [24,72]. Therefore, the length of the fibres plays a role in FF release. Manufactured fibres can be found in a continuous filament length or a shorter staple length [84]. Fibres of shorter lengths are more easily released from the structure of the textile [40,72]. For staple-length fibres to be shed from the textile, the base material does not need to be broken down. The fibres are released by being loosened and pulled out of the textile structure [72]. In contrast, filament-length fibres must be first broken down by abrasion before they are able to escape the textile structure [85].

As a natural fibre, cotton is only found in a staple length. Therefore, cotton is likely to have higher levels of release in comparison to filament-length synthetic fibres [35,73,86]. Cotton fibre lengths also have a lower uniformity, further increasing its tendency to be shed from the textile structure [70]. This characteristic of cotton fibres lends itself to the understanding of how to minimize FF release from yarns, which is to be discussed in the following section. Despite cotton being a natural fibre, high levels of shedding remain a concern. Due to modifications during production that alter its biodegradation, cotton fibres have been found to be accumulating in the environment [14,17].

Polyester when kept in its filament form will release fewer FFs due to its tenacity and fibre length [72]. This logic can be extended to most synthetic fibres as many also have high tenacity and are kept in filament lengths [84]. A notable exception to this is acrylic. Acrylic is found to have higher levels of FF release than other synthetic fibres [10,11,13,34,35,38]. This is attributed to the tendency for acrylic to be used as a wool alternative, and thus, cut down to staple lengths [87]. Additionally, acrylic has a lower tenacity than fibres like polyester or nylon.

4.1.4. Fibre Interactions with Water

Fibres that are hydrophilic are found to release more FFs during washing [73,88]. This is thought to be caused by additional friction from the water molecules on and in the fibres—making hydrophilic fibres more susceptible to abrasion during laundering [35]. As a result, hydrophilic fibres such as cotton and rayon exhibit higher shedding behaviours because they are more susceptible to damage due to wet abrasion. Fibrillation and increased fibre breakage due to the swelling of cellulosic fibres in detergent and water can occur, further increasing FFs (see Figure 2).

With this understanding of how fibre properties can influence FF release, some research has been conducted to modify the properties of synthetic fibres. For example, Qian et al. [75] found that the addition of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) during melt spinning of nylon reduced FF shedding by 60%. This reduction is due to PDMS lowering the material’s coefficient of friction. Furthermore, Qian et al. [75] found that this modification to the nylon polymer improved its resistance to water and soiling.

4.2. Yarn Properties

As we move to the yarn level, there are multiple factors that contribute to FF release. The type and length of fibres used to create the yarns [40,44,70,72], yarn thickness [21,45], yarn hairiness [24,39,41,70,89], yarn twist [10,24,40,43,68,70], as well as the chosen production process [39,43,44,71,72] can influence FF release.

4.2.1. Staple vs. Filament Yarns

Thicker, staple yarns have been found to shed more fragments than filament yarns [44]. In a study that compared staple and filament-length polyester yarns, staple yarns were found to release an average of 2461 FFs per litre of washing effluent, while filament yarns released an average of 1606 FFs [44]. As discussed at the fibre level, yarns that are made of shorter, staple fibres will release more FFs due to the ease with which shorter fibres are able to migrate to the yarn surface and be removed from the structure [40,62,72]. Woven fabric that consisted of textured filament fibres was found to release a significantly higher proportion of FFs than fabric constructed from flat filament yarns [70]. However, an interesting trend was apparent as FF release typically decreased consistently for each repeated wash cycle, but for the flat filament, FFs increased from wash cycle 2 to 5. Flat filament fibres typically are formed from coarser individual monofilaments, which results in higher rigidity and a reduced ability to absorb mechanical impact. Therefore, flat and coarser filaments become more likely to create FFs when exposed to abrasion during repeated wear or laundering [70].

4.2.2. Yarn Count

The yarn count can play a role in FF release as well. Yarn count is a measurement that expresses the thickness or fineness of a yarn [90]. It is a measure of linear density (mass per unit length). As the yarn count increases, the number of fibres per unit cross section increases and results in higher levels of FF release [45,68]. Yarns with higher yarn count have a greater number of exposed fibres in the yarn structure that can be released during laundering and/or wear [21].

4.2.3. Blended Yarns

In yarns that contain a blend of fibres, the characteristics of the individual fibres can influence how they move during twist insertion [44]. Longer, fine, and flexible fibres are likely to move towards the core of the yarn, while shorter, coarser, and stiffer fibres migrate to the sheath [91]. An example of this behaviour is seen with cotton-polyester blends, where cotton fibres may favourably migrate to the outer edges of the yarn causing higher FF release from cotton [9,70].

Blended yarns that contain polyester often require the polyester fibres to be cut down into staple lengths [92]. As a result, blended yarns will have a higher level of polyester FF release in comparison to yarns where the polyester fibres remain in filament length [41,62,72]. Similarly, a study by Rathinamoorthy et al. [76] found that samples made of cotton–elastane blends shed more FFs than samples that were 100% cotton. Furthermore, the increase in elastane content in the yarn blends was found to be positively correlated with the total number of FFs released. Blended yarns are often employed in the clothing and textile industry to get the best qualities of each fibre and to reduce costs since synthetic fibres are cheaper [93]. Additionally, synthetic fibres are preferred because they can improve the ease of processing [94].

The result is a fast fashion industry that favours the use of blended yarns containing synthetic fibres. Not only do these blended yarns have the potential to release more FFs over their lifetime, but they also make post-consumer waste very difficult to recycle [93]. Techniques available to recycle blended textiles are extremely limited; the best recycling options work only for mono-materials. Perhaps one method that can be employed by the industry to reduce FF release and improve circularity is shifting towards the use of mono-material yarns [95].

4.2.4. Yarn Hairiness and Twist

Yarn properties created during production can play a significant role in the resulting level of FF release. While increased hairiness of yarns can produce a softer and more insulating garment, Özkan and Gündoğdu [44] concluded that significant shedding was found in yarns with a hairiness of more than 4 mm. Surface friction during laundering increases as the hairiness on the yarn surface increases [24]. Further, increased hairiness means there are more protruding fibre ends and free fibre loops along the surface of the yarn. These fibre ends and loops are either broken off or completely pulled out of the structure, thus increasing its FF release [24,41] (refer to Figure 2).

Yarn hairiness can be changed with adjustments to the twist level of the yarn. Higher twist creates yarns that are more compact—resulting in less protruding fibre ends available for release [21,39,89]. High twist yarns have a lower degree of fibre freedom and exposed surface area; therefore, the number of fibres susceptible to abrasion and release is lower [40,68,70]. Increases in twist also increase the tensile strength of the yarn up to an optimal point. When the strength of the yarn is low, fibre breakage and shedding are more likely [10,24,43]. Furthermore, hairiness can be influenced by the spinning method used. Conventional ring spinning is thought to increase levels of fibre release due to its tendency to create hairier yarns in comparison to compact ring spinning [43,44].

4.2.5. Yarn Production Process

Differences in the yarn production process create unique yarn characteristics that in turn influence FF release. In some cases, the mechanical procedure of spinning breaks and cuts fibres into short fragments that remain in the yarn structure until the first wash of the textile [72]. Examples of this were found by Cai et al. [39] and Pinlova et al. [71], where the number of FFs released from rotor-spun yarns was higher than air-jet or ring-spun yarns. Conversely, Jabbar and Tausif [42] found polyester ring-spun yarns to produce longer and greater mass of FFs compared to air jet and rotor-spun fabrics (all of similar yarn size). The common thought for higher FF release arising from rotor-spun yarns is due to the use of sharp opening rollers in rotor spinning to open fibre bundles [39]. The sharp edges of these rollers often cut up the fibres into short fragments that become twisted together into the yarn. As the speed of rotor spinning increases, a higher number of FFs is generated [71]. However, Jabbar and Tausif [42], explained that although ring spinning can produce a greater variety of yarn counts, and ultimately higher-quality yarns, ring-spun yarns tend to create hairier fabrics compared to rotor- and air-jet-spun yarns of similar size [42].

Similarly, the process of carding has the potential to create additional FFs. Following the opening and cleaning of fibre bales, tufts of fibre are run through hundreds of fine wires to straighten and orient the fibres—this is known as carding [92]. This step removes any remaining impurities from the fibres. However, studies have shown that the carding process has the potential to cause fibre breakage when the speed of the intake drum is increased [96,97]. Fibre breakage from this process leads to yarns with compromised quality and FFs that are readily available to be released during garment use. With the strong emphasis on speed and efficiency in fast fashion, these issues associated with faster carding may be overlooked.

On the other hand, if a combing process is used in yarn production, the shortest fibres will be removed and a more uniform, less hairy yarn is produced [23]. The combing process uses a similar mechanism to carding but with wires that are closer together [98]. Due to its resulting characteristics, yarns that go through the additional step of combing exhibit lower FF emissions [23].

Combing fibres before spinning produces higher-quality yarns but increases the cost of the final product [92,99]. In an industry that values speed and low cost, combing is often skipped [92]. Ultimately, this contributes to the production of clothing that will shed more FFs during use. The lower quality also perpetuates the consumer need for constant consumption [100].

4.3. Fabric Properties

As the fibre and yarn characteristics are combined into a fabric, there are additional fabric attributes that can influence FF release.

4.3.1. Knit vs. Woven Fabrics

Fabrics that have a more compact structure exhibit lower levels of release [9,49]. Loose fabric structures allow for FFs in the textile structure to be more easily extracted [21,39]. FF shedding becomes more likely because the fibres and yarns are more vulnerable to friction in a loose structure and the overall durability of the fabric may be reduced [48]. As a result, plain knit fabrics tend to release more FFs than woven fabrics due to its looser structure [9,13,41,45,48,53,77].

When comparing different woven structures, weaves that contain a higher number of floats (i.e., satin and 3/1 twill) are looser and lead to higher levels of emissions [48]. Yarns have a lower degree of freedom in a plain woven fabric due to maximum yarn interlacement and this assists in preventing fibre release [48,49].

4.3.2. Fabric Weight

The weight of the fabric can also impact FF release. However, whether emissions are increased or decreased depends on the main factor that contributes to the increased weight [46]. If the increase in fabric weight is due to the tightness in the structure, FF release is reduced due to the restricted movement of yarns and fibres [45,46,47]. However, if the higher weight is due to thickness, fibre emissions increase because of the greater number of fibres per unit area of fabric [21,35,46]. A study by Vassilenko et al. [67] found that FF release was positively correlated with fabric thickness for both nylon and polyester. Additionally, Vassilenko et al. [67] discovered preliminary evidence that shedding of fibres is not exclusive to the fabric surface. This further supports that FF release increases as the thickness of the fabric increases. Higher levels of shedding from thicker textiles may then be used to explain the higher FF release from interlock knit structures compared to 1 × 1 rib or single jersey knits [46].

4.3.3. Abrasion Resistance

Overall abrasion resistance of the fabric correlates with the number of FFs released during laundering [24,78]. Abrasion of textiles can increase the number of fibrils by a factor of 200 and increase FFs by 5 to 30 times [80]. Therefore, fabrics with higher abrasion resistance can limit FF emissions [78]. For synthetic fabrics, pilling behaviour can be an indicator of its subsequent FF release [85]. Following a similar process to pill formation, the fibres will form a fuzz and/or become loosened from the structure. Rather than becoming tangled and forming pills, the fibre fuzz on the surface of the yarn is released [24].

In a survey conducted by Cooper and Claxton [101], it was found that pilling is the most common physical failure found in discarded clothing items. Pilling occurs more readily in fabrics with more open structures, those with yarns containing shorter fibres, or lower twist. These fabric properties often produce lower-quality garments and are the result of the desire to reduce costs [101]. Following the process proposed by Zambrano et al. [24], the higher likelihood of pilling brings along higher FF emissions. Improvements to these fabric properties can lead to better-quality garments that discourage overconsumption and release fewer FFs [23,101].

It is important to note that there have been some conflicting findings regarding the impact of textile and fabric structures. In studies by Cai et al. [64], Belzagui et al. [34], and Ramasamy and Subramanian [58], the fabric structure did not have a significant influence over emissions. However, it is possible for fabric structure to have less of an influence depending on the fibre types being tested [36]. For example, the fabric structure was found to have less impact on polyester’s fibre release when compared to other textile factors [46].

Further, in the review by Periyasamy and Tehrani [23] they found evidence to support that woven fabrics with fewer floats actually shed more fibres. Rather than a rigid structure preventing fibres from being released, they concluded that more rigid structures made surface rupture of fibres more likely. Perhaps optimal reductions in shedding are found when the fabric structure has a balance of rigidity and freedom of movement. This reasoning can also explain the findings of Julapong et al. [51], where samples with a twill weave were found to shed fewer FFs than plain and satin weaves. Additional evidence of higher FF shedding from plain woven textiles was also found by Pinlova and Nowack [74]. However, this study focuses on the release of FFs following UV weathering, while other existing research focuses on shedding behaviours after washing and/or abrasion from wear. Future studies on the effects of fabric structure on FF release following UV exposure are needed to investigate how UV exposure may differ from washing or abrasion from wear.

4.4. Finishes and Treatments

As a final step to textile production, fabrics may receive additional finishes or treatments.

4.4.1. Mechanical Processes

When mechanical processes are applied to textile surfaces, this can significantly increase its FF emissions [37,64,67]. Processes such as shearing and brushing are often used to alter the bulkiness of fabrics [85]. These processes cut and pull fibres and produce a large quantity of fragments that are readily available to be released from the textile [39]. However, surface processing does not guarantee an increase in FF emissions [61]. Singeing can assist in reducing emissions because this process removes protruding fibre ends from the surface of the textile [36]. Enzymatic treatments on knit fabrics may also reduce protruding fibre ends and consequently, reduce fibre release [58].

4.4.2. Chemical Finishes

Like mechanical finishes, chemical treatments can both increase and decrease FF shedding. When a durable press or softener finish is applied to cotton fabrics, FF emissions have been found to increase [54]. Fabric softeners in this case act as a lubricant to the fibres and make removal of FFs easier. On the other hand, finishes and treatments can be used to mitigate the effects of fabric properties that encourage FF shedding. For example, Rathinamoorthy et al. [56] found that applying trichloroacetic acid and methylene chloride (TCA-MC) on polyester fabric modified its hydrophilicity, which is believed to be largely responsible for its shedding behaviour. As a result, release was found to be reduced by up to 93.79% for knit fabrics and 64.72% for woven fabrics. Alternatively, finishes that increase abrasion resistance have been shown to reduce release [55,102]. Water repellent and high abrasion resistant finishes can act as an additional layer of protection that reduces fibrillation of fibres [103].

4.4.3. Eco-Friendly Finishes

While these finishes on textiles can help to reduce release, the durability of these finishes are not completely known. As textiles are laundered, it is possible for the finishes to release particles into the wash water [23]. Concerns surrounding the environmental and health impacts of these particles are beginning to grow. Newer developments of naturally derived chitosan and pectin treatments have shown promising results. Chitosan pre-treatments have been found to increase the strength and stiffness of textiles—making it more resistant to abrasion during laundering [52,57]. Approximately 90% less emissions were seen when a pectin coating was applied to the surface of polyester fibres [62].

Alternatively, a finishing treatment of polylactic acid (PLA) or polybutylene succinate-co-butylene adipate (PBSA) applied using an electrofluidodynamic method was found to reduce FF shedding from nylon fabrics by over 80% [63]. PLA and PBSA coatings mitigate shedding by acting as a protective layer and increasing the strength of the fabric. These polymers are also biodegradable and have minimal impacts on the wettability and hand of the fabric.

Another environmentally friendly finish that has been studied to reduce FF release is the use of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) brushes [59,60]. A nanoscale layer of PDMS brushes is adhered to the nylon fabric using ionic bonding, creating a low-friction coating. This low-friction finish decreases abrasion and reduces the shedding of FFs by 93% without creating secondary environmental pollution or compromising the fabric properties.

4.5. Garment Construction

Once the textiles have been produced, the process in which the garments are constructed can also influence subsequent FF release. The level of FF shedding can be impacted by the cutting method [39,50,64,66] as well as the sewing method [64,65].

4.5.1. Cutting Method

Various studies that have examined the relationship between polyester fabric cutting and FF release have found scissor cuts to increase shedding [39,50,64,66,104]. The suggested theory is that the cutting process creates newly exposed yarn ends that allow fibres deeper in the structure to be released [39,50,64]. In contrast, when a laser or ultrasound cutter is used, the yarn ends and any newly created FFs are melted together. Removing the edges as a potential shedding location is important because edges were found to be responsible for over 80% of the total fibre release—even for textiles with mechanically processed surfaces [64]. Further evidence is provided in another study by Cai et al. [39] where a positive correlation was observed between the length of fabric edges and FF release from scissor-cut textiles.

4.5.2. Sewing Method

Similarly, the level of FF shedding from textiles can vary with the sewing method due to the level of edge exposure. For example, Rathinamoorthy and Balasaraswathi [66] found that seam finishes that completely enclose the fabric edge, such as EFb (i.e., double-fold) seams, reduced FF release by 93%. Lower releases have also been found with sewing methods such as double heat-sealing, which is used with synthetic fabrics because the edges of the fabric are melted in the process [65].

A higher stitch density can help to reduce FF release because it presumably holds more of the fibres tightly in place—with the exception of overlock stitches [66]. Overlock sewing is very commonly used in the clothing and textile industry, and this method has been found to lead to higher release compared to raw edges [64]. An explanation for this behaviour is that overlock sewing does not enclose the edge of the fabric and the process of sewing causes damage that produces new FFs.

However, research in this area is not entirely conclusive. A study by Tiffin et al. [104] noted that the lowest level of FF shedding came from samples that were scissor-cut with both overlock and lock-stitch sewing. More studies need to be conducted in this area to identify the cutting and sewing methods that will be most effective in reducing FF release.

5. Conclusions

The growing clothing and textile industry and the rise of fast fashion have brought about many concerns [3]. Fast and low-cost production of poor-quality items have resulted in overconsumption and massive amounts of textile waste. The current state of the industry is not sustainable, and changes must be made to ensure the future of all people and the planet are not compromised. Often production decisions to reduce costs also lead to textile properties that increase FF release [92,93,101]. Therefore, changes that lead to the production of textiles with lower shedding propensity would help bring the industry closer to the aforementioned SDGs.

At the fibre level, reduction of FF release requires fibres that are longer, stronger, and hydrophobic [36,44,72]. Typically, these properties are found with synthetic fibre types such as polyester. While polyester in its filament form produces the least amount of FFs, we must still consider that it is not a biodegradable fibre [19,22]. Even though cotton has been shown to have higher emissions, it still may be the best possible choice because it is a natural fibre [86].

The optimal properties to reduce shedding at the yarn level require filament yarns with high twists and low hairiness [21,23]. Once again, this points to polyester as the best fibre and yarn option. However, due to its inability to biodegrade, it may be better to apply these methods of reducing release to natural fibres rather than focusing on the production of synthetics. Limiting FF release from cotton can be achieved by utilizing a combing process to remove short fibres and increase yarn evenness [23]. Additionally, a compact ring-spinning process can help to produce higher-twist yarns that minimize fibre release [39,46]. As with most properties, it is important to balance the twist level to ensure the yarn is tight enough to hold fibres together without becoming so rigid that fibre rupture is likely [24,70]. Mono-material yarns can also be employed to reduce FF release and improve recyclability [62,72,95].

Fabrics of a more compact structure have been shown to have lower rates of emission [9]. Woven fabrics are going to perform the best because they prevent FFs from being released [13,48,53]. There are some exceptions to this, and the added property of thickness can influence fibre shedding [85]. Over these fabrics, mechanical finishes such as singeing or enzymatic treatments can be utilized to reduce protruding fibre ends [36,58]. Chemical treatments have become increasingly promising options for limiting FF release, as environmentally friendly treatments such as chitosan, pectin, and PMDS continue to be developed [52,57,59,62]. Lastly, garment construction should utilize methods that will reduce the exposure of fabric edges and limit its potential as a location of fibre release [39,50,64,65,66].

While it is possible to make a list of optimal properties to reduce fibre release, it is not always plausible in application. The specific set of characteristics that limit emissions cannot be applied to all textile end-uses. Additionally, consumer preferences for items such as fleece and napped fabrics can make it difficult to transition to alternatives [105]. Nonetheless, these factors should still be considered and applied where possible at the production level to combat the growing problem of FF pollution. Ultimately, any possible reduction in FFs being released into the environment would help to preserve life both on land and below water (SDG 14 and 15).

It is also noteworthy that many of the properties that reduce FF emissions, such as the use of combed, higher twist, or mono-material yarns, also contribute to higher-quality garments [39,89,92,99]. Implementing these strategies and being mindful of creating higher-quality products that limit FF release can simultaneously promote slower consumption of fashion and circularity [101]. Through encouraging durable textile production to support sustainable consumption patterns, contributions will also be made to SDG 12.

This is a relatively new area of research, and additional studies need to be conducted to clarify conflicting studies and to continue to develop knowledge of the least harmful textile properties. Perhaps as this area continues to be explored, the clothing and textile industry will be able to move one step closer to more environmentally friendly and circular practices.