A market survey used digestion and microFTIR to analyze edible tissue from commercial shellfish purchased in different regions.
Source details
Tamara Mutić, Jelena Mutić, Miloš Ilić, Vesna Jovanović, Jelena Aćimović, Boban Andjelković, Dragana Stanić-Vučinić, Maria Krishna de Guzman, Mirjana Andjelkovic, Mirjana Turkalj, Tanja Cirkovic Velickovic. Foods. 2024.
Findings
A market survey used digestion and microFTIR to analyze edible tissue from commercial shellfish purchased in different regions.
- 43.68% of sampled individuals; Edible parts of commercial shellfish; 190 animals analyzed individually.
- 0.21 ± 0.39 particles/g wet edible tissue; Clams purchased in Korea; all tested individuals, including nondetections.
- 0.13 ± 0.20 particles/g wet edible tissue; Mussels purchased in Belgium; all tested individuals, including nondetections.
- 10 µm reported lower analysis limit; MicroFTIR characterization of shellfish isolates; paper distinguishes image spatial resolution from reported smaller detected particles.
Methods and scope
Alkaline, dual enzymatic and peroxide digestion; whole-filter microFTIR screening with spectral matching and manual checks. Air and procedural blanks; no confirmed plastic in reported procedural blanks. Recovery and polymer integrity were tested.
What this source can support
Direct evidence about edible tissue from the sampled market lots.
Selected markets and species, not a global prevalence estimate. The main text reports a size limit but finer analytical consistency is limited; supplementary tables were not supplied separately. Purchase location is not necessarily harvest location.
Related evidence
Reported values and source locations
| Reported value | Measurement basis | Conditions and size context | Original document location |
|---|---|---|---|
| 43.68% of sampled individuals | Occurrence frequency across this sampled set | Edible parts of commercial shellfish; 190 animals analyzed individually Reported microFTIR lower size limit 10 µm; not a nanoplastic measurement | PDF p. 7 §3.2.1 |
| 0.21 ± 0.39 particles/g wet edible tissue | mean ± SD | Clams purchased in Korea; all tested individuals, including nondetections MicroFTIR reported size limit 10 µm | PDF p. 7 Table 2 |
| 0.13 ± 0.20 particles/g wet edible tissue | mean ± SD | Mussels purchased in Belgium; all tested individuals, including nondetections MicroFTIR reported size limit 10 µm | PDF p. 7 Table 2 |
| 10 µm reported lower analysis limit | method limit stated by authors; no independently supplied size recovery validation | MicroFTIR characterization of shellfish isolates; paper distinguishes image spatial resolution from reported smaller detected particles Reported lower analysis limit 10 µm; not nanoplastics | PDF p. 5 §2.4 |
Source provenance
Primary PDF SHA-256: d4417412ccc4174d8fb2332c132502389d5d9a14dc2f5f0ddf710edc2924efb0
The source record identifies the scope and limits of the primary-document review. Follow the DOI or official source link for the original document; this site does not redistribute the PDF.