Microplastics in Water: Multi-Factor Experimental Assessment of Aqueous Leachate Toxicity and a Framework for Human Health Risk Screening

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3390/w18202587
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The effects of polymer type, particle size, leaching temperature, and duration on leachate bioactivity from polypropylene (PP), polyethylene (PE), and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) were examined with a framework for screening human-health implications. Fractions spanning 0.175–3.0 mm were leached for 30 days. Phytotoxicity was assessed in wheat and lentil with leachates prepared at 25 °C, 37 °C, and 60 °C; sperm motility and dermal irritation were assessed at 40 °C using bull semen and rabbits. Higher temperature significantly inhibited germination parameters (p < 0.001), and 0.175–0.3 mm fractions produced the strongest effects. Phytotoxicity ranked PP > PET > PE, whereas spermatotoxicity ranked PET > PP > PE. The lowest scenario-specific Germination Index (GI) dropped to 38.20%, sperm-motility deviation reached 29.1%, and the responses were inversely correlated (Pearson’s r = −0.547, df = 13, p = 0.035). Compared with previous 1-day data, 30-day leaching increased mean sperm-motility deviation 2.5–4.1-fold. One dermal application caused no visible irritation (index = 0). Across 45 scenarios, the Total Risk Index ranged from 0.012 to 0.400, whereas limiting-factor assessment assigned high-risk classes where endpoint-specific responses were diluted by averaging. The framework supports conservative hazard screening but does not establish human toxicity or exposure thresholds.