are macro and micro are macro and micro-plastics plastics

39
Are macro and micro Are macro and microplastics plastics impacting marine organisms impacting marine organisms in the in the Pelagos Pelagos Sanctuary? Sanctuary? in the in the Pelagos Pelagos Sanctuary? Sanctuary? M. Cristina Fossi University of Siena [email protected]

Upload: hoangnhu

Post on 02-Jan-2017

242 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

1

Are macro and microAre macro and micro‐‐plastics plastics impacting marine organisms impacting marine organisms in thein the PelagosPelagos Sanctuary?Sanctuary?in the in the PelagosPelagos Sanctuary?Sanctuary?

M. Cristina Fossi ‐ University of Siena ‐ [email protected]

2

l i ffl i ffCan Plastic Affect Can Plastic Affect 

Mediterranean Biodiversity?Mediterranean Biodiversity?Mediterranean Biodiversity?Mediterranean Biodiversity?

3

Marine Litter: a Global ChallengeMarine Litter: a Global ChallengeThe main legal and institutional frameworks affecting The main legal and institutional frameworks affecting the Mediterranean on this topic are:the Mediterranean on this topic are:

(1) Local Agendas 21; (2) national legislation on waste management and environmental protection; (3) the Barcelona Convention and its Protocols;(4) the Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development (MSSD); (5) MEDPOL of UNEP; (6) the EU Environmental Strategy for the Mediterranean and Horizon 2020;(7) the EU Marine Strategy Directive; (8) the EU Thematic strategy on the Prevention and Recycling of Waste;(9) the IMO MARPOL 73/78 Convention – Annex V; (10) the GPA and the Regional Seas Programme of UNEP; (11) the Basel Convention

GAPGAPThere is a general lack of available There is a general lack of available d t i ildlif ff t d bd t i ildlif ff t d bdata on marine wildlife affected by data on marine wildlife affected by marine litter in the Mediterranean.marine litter in the Mediterranean.

UNEP/MAP Barcelona ConventionUNEP/MAP Barcelona Conventioni li i dii li i diRAP on Marine litter in Mediterranean RAP on Marine litter in Mediterranean (Istanbul 2013)   (Istanbul 2013)   

4

GapInformation are required about macro‐plastic and micro plastic inputs Mediterranean distribution

Gapmicro‐plastic inputs, Mediterranean distribution (Pelagos Sanctuary) and the potential effects on 

marine organisms.marine organisms. 

? BEST INDICATOR SPECIES ?? BEST INDICATOR SPECIES ?

5

Do Do microplasticsmicroplastics threatthreatll ??PelagosPelagos Sanctuary?Sanctuary?

The Pelagos Agreement establishing the Sanctuaryg g g yfor marine mammals in the Mediterranean Sea, isan international governmental agreement between

France, Italy and the Principality of Monaco entered into force in 2002 to insure a favorableentered into force in 2002, to insure a favorableconservation status ofmarine mammals by

protecting them and their habitat from direct and indirect negative impacts of human activities, in 

li ith t lcompliance with a management plan. With about 87,500 sq. km, most of which lie in high 

Seas, the Pelagos Sanctuary is registered asa Specially Protected Area of Mediterraneanp y

Importance (SPAMI).

6

Aim of the ProjectAim of the ProjectAim of the ProjectAim of the Project

Do microplastics threatDo microplastics threatppThe The PelagosPelagos Sanctuary?Sanctuary?

Are baleen whalesAre baleen whalesAre baleen whales Are baleen whales exposed to microplastic exposed to microplastic threat?threat?threat? threat? 

7

Marine organisms as sentinel Marine organisms as sentinel 

Case studies: Mediterranean fin whale and basking shark

species: microspecies: micro‐‐plasticplasticCase studies: Mediterranean fin whale and basking sharkAim: exploring the toxicological effects of micro‐plastics in large filter feeders speciesFurther implication: indicators of micro plastics in the pelagicFurther implication: indicators of micro‐plastics in the pelagic environment in the implementation of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (Descriptor 10)

8

BalaenopteraBalaenoptera physalusphysalusBalaenopteraBalaenoptera physalusphysalus

9

300 liters of water daily300 liters of water daily

70,000 liters of water 70,000 liters of water with each mouthful

10

Microplastics and contaminantsMicroplastics and contaminants

Adsorption of POPs on

Plastic additives released in 

Adsorption of POPs on microplastics surface

the environment

11

Experimental workExperimental workThe work is implemented through four steps:

Step 1 collection/count ofmicroplastics in PelagosStep 1‐ collection/count of microplastics in PelagosSanctuary (Mediterranean Sea); Step 2‐ detection of phthalates in superficial neustonic/planktonic samples; Step 3 ‐ detection of phthalates in stranded Mediterranean fin whale;Mediterranean fin whale;Step 4 ‐ detection of phthalates and biomarkers responses (CYP1A1, CYP2B, lipid peroxidation) in skin biopsies of fin whales collected in the Pelagosbiopsies of fin whales collected in the PelagosSanctuary (n=18) and Sea of Cortez (n=7).

12

Do Microplastics threatDo Microplastics threat Yes!Yes!ppthe the PelagosPelagos Sanctuary?Sanctuary? Yes!Yes!

Microplastics(Items/m3)

0-0.1

0 11-1

MPM14 MPM15

MPM16MPM12

MPM13

Ligurian Sea

LIGURIA

Microplastic particles insuperficial neustonic/planktonicsamples (items/m3) collected in0.11 1

1.01-5

5.01-10

Sardinian Sea

MPM18

MPM4

MPM3MPM6

MPM5MPM8

MPM7MPM9

MPM10

MPM12MPM11

Ligurian Sea samples (items/m ) collected inthe Pelagos Sanctuary (LigurianSea and Sardinian Sea) and meanDEPH and MEPH concentrations(ng/g).

Sardinian Sea

SARDINIAMPM21

MPM25

MPM26

MPM24

MPM17

MPM19

MPM20

MPM23

Phthalates concentration in superficial neustonic/planktonic samples

AREADEHP (ng/g) MEHP (ng/g)

n mean s d n mean s dn mean s.d. n mean s.d.

Ligurian Sea 14 18.38 44.39 14 61.93 124.26

Sardinian Sea 9 23.42 32.46 9 40.30 41.55

13

Microplastics inMicroplastics in LigurianLigurian SeaSeaMicroplastics in Microplastics in LigurianLigurian SeaSea

14

Microplastics in Sardinian SeaMicroplastics in Sardinian Sea

15

Microplastics and MEPH Microplastics and MEPH –– DEPHDEPHii P lP l S tS tin in PelagosPelagos SanctuarySanctuary

16

Phthalates as plastic tracer?Phthalates as plastic tracer?

17

Are baleen whales exposed Are baleen whales exposed ll h ?h ? Yes!Yes!to to microplasticsmicroplastics threat?threat? Yes!Yes!

DEHP concentrations (ng/g) in blubber samples of five stranded fin whales collected along the Italian coasts during the period 

MEHP concentration in stranded fin whales

SPECIES TISSUE MeanMEHP (ng/g)

Balaenoptera physalus Blubber 57 9757 97 July 2007 – June 2011 in five different locations. 

San Rossore PI (Male)MEPH 53.98 ng/g

Balaenoptera physalus Blubber 57.9757.97

g/gOrbetello GR (Male)MEPH 51.84 ng/g

Castelsardo SS (nd)MEPH 1.00 ng/g

lf ( l )Amalfi SA (Female)MEPH 99.93 ng/g

Palinuro SA (nd)MEPH 83.12 ng/g

18

Presence and effects of Presence and effects of t i t i fi h l ki bi it i t i fi h l ki bi icontaminants in fin whale skin biopsiescontaminants in fin whale skin biopsies

19

20

Contaminants in fin whaleContaminants in fin whalek bk bskin biopsiesskin biopsies

80

90 MEHP25000

30000OCs

40

50

60

70

g/g d.w.

15000

20000

ng/g d.w.

0

10

20

30

ng

5000

10000

n

0

Pelagos Sanctuary Sea of Cortez 0

Pelagos Sanctuary Sea of Cortez 

21

Endocrine interference Endocrine interference i fi h l ki bi ii fi h l ki bi i

10

12ssion

**

in fin whale skin biopsiesin fin whale skin biopsies

8

fold expres

EstrogenEstrogen ReceptorReceptor αα MalesF l

4

6

ormalize

d f Females

((** ** = p< 0.05= p< 0.05))

2

No **

0Pelagos Sanctuary Gulf of California

Undesirable Biological EffectUndesirable Biological EffectUndesirable Biological EffectUndesirable Biological Effect

22

Differences between areasDifferences between arease e ces bet ee a ease e ces bet ee a easCluster dendrogram: phthalates, Ocs and biomarkers responses in skin bi i f fi h l ll d i h P l S d S fbiopsies of fin whales collected in the Pelagos Sanctuary and Sea of Cortez

Cluster DendrogramCluster Dendrogram

3

012

0000

1400

00

Messico

3

012

0000

1400

00

Messico

000

8000

010

0000

Hei

ght

000

8000

010

0000

Hei

ght

1 2

2000

040

000

600

Sardegna Liguria

1 2

2000

040

000

600

Sardegna Liguria2 g g2 g g

23

Do fin whales like microplastics ?

24

Are otherAre otherAre other Are other large filter feederslarge filter feederslarge filter feeders large filter feeders 

exposed toexposed toppmicroplastics threat? microplastics threat? 

25

BASKINGBASKING SHARKSHARKBASKINGBASKING SHARK SHARK 

A 12600 i /d !A 12600 i /d !Approx. 12600 items/day!Approx. 12600 items/day!

26

MEHP concentration in basking sharks

SPECIES TISSUE M MEHP ( / )SPECIES TISSUE MeanMEHP (ng/g)

Basking sharks muscle 12.9712.97

h h l l ih h l l iPhthalate as plastic tracer Phthalate as plastic tracer 

27

Marine organisms as sentinel Marine organisms as sentinel species: macrospecies: macro‐‐plasticplastic

Case study: the Mediterranean Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) Aim: exploring the toxicological effects of macro‐plasticsFurther implication: indicators of macro‐plastics in the marine p penvironment in the implementation of the  Descriptor 10 of MSFD

28

found 483 pieces of i litt ithmarine litter with a 

total mass of 62.37g

22 loggerhead 145 plastic items in the stomach145 plastic items in the stomachturtles out of 31 animals had 

ingested marineingested marine debris (71%)

29

MSFD objective: to achieve the Good Environmental status for MSFD objective: to achieve the Good Environmental status for the marine environment for 2020the marine environment for 2020

Caretta caretta has been proposed as a target species in theMediterranean sea inthe MSFD (Descriptor 10) to evaluate indicator IV of GES: trends in the amount

d iti f litt i t d b i i l ( t h l i )and composition of litter ingested by marine animals (e.g stomach analysis)

Stomach content in sea turtles in 2013

Stomach content in 

20202020Plastic  items = ?

sea turtles in 2013 sea turtles in 20XX

Time scale

30

EffectsEffects ofof litterlitter in in freefree‐‐rangingranging turtlesturtles??Comet assay (Frenzilli et al., 1999) ENA assay (Pacheco & Santos 1997)Diffusion assay (Singh et al., 1988)

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (Marsili et al., 1997)Organochlorines (Marsili & Focardi, 1996)

EXCRETAEXCRETA

WHOLE BLOODWHOLE BLOOD

EXCRETAEXCRETAPorphyryns (Grandchamp et al., 1980)

Plastic fragments 

PLASMAPLASMALPO, Lipid peroxidation (Bird & Draper, 1984)γGT, ALT, AST (commercial kits, Polymed)VTG, Vitellogenin (Goksoyr et al., 1991)

EST E di l (Ab h 1969)

PLASMAPLASMA

CARAPACECARAPACETrace elements (Hg, Pb, Cd) (Stoeppler & Backhaus 1978)

EST, Estradiol (Abraham, 1969)BChE, Butyrylcholinesterase (Ellman et al., 1961)AChE, Acetylcholinesterase (Ellman et al., 1961)

SKIN BIOPSYSKIN BIOPSYProtein expression of CYP1A  (Fossi et al., 2008, modified)

Biopsy slices treated with PAHs and PBDEs (Fossi et al., 2009)

(Stoeppler & Backhaus, 1978) 

31

Take Home MessageTake Home Message

32

Th k h d d th t b l h l dThe workshop recommended that baleen whales andother large filter feeders should be considered in nationaland international marine debris strategies (e g Descriptorand international marine debris strategies (e.g. Descriptor10 (marine litter) in the EU Marine Strategy FrameworkDirective) as critical indicators of the presence andimpact of microplastics in the marine environment.

33

Take Home MessageTake Home Message

34

MSFD: Descriptor 10 MSFD: Descriptor 10 Marine LitterMarine LitterMarine LitterMarine Litter

The potential use of these species in the implementation of the Descriptor 10(marine litter) in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), assentinel of the presence and impact of micro‐litter in the pelagicp p p genvironment

35

Marselle

BarcelonaLeghorn

Venice

Barcelona

Naples Dubrovnik

LarnacaLa Valletta Athens

AntalyaAlgiers

Tunis

Gibraltar

Heraklion

Tel AvivTripoli

Beirut

Alexandria

36

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsgg

This project was partially supported by the Italian Ministry for Environment and Territory

37

Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!Thank you for your attention!

38

39