Beyond plastics: occurrence and ecological risks of non-plastic microfibres in aquatic organisms

Abstract Non-plastic microfibres, here defined as anthropogenically manipulated fibres of cellulosic or animal origin such as wool, cotton and rayon, have been increasingly recognised as a significant component of anthropogenic microparticle pollution in aquatic environments. Emerging attention has also been brought to the ecological ramifications of non-plastic microfibres and their associated chemical additives. However, environmental anthropogenic microparticle surveys have often omitted both plastic and non-plastic microfibres, with greater attention being placed on microplastic fragments, films, and spheres. This lack of attention has potentially led to the underestimation of non-plastic microfibre pollution in aquatic environments and biota. Through a comprehensive systematic review, we collate and analyse published literature (2011–2024) on non-plastic microfibre occurrence in aquatic animals and the associated ecological impacts. This review demonstrates that plastic and non-plastic microfibres, when looked for, are a significant component of anthropogenic microparticle (AMP) loading in aquatic biota across environments, habitats and feeding strategies. Greatest loading appears in freshwater environments with some cases accounting for 100% of detected anthropogenic microparticles, despite relatively limited study focus. The ecological impacts of non-plastic microfibres may also elicit varied effects on biota, depending on the context and nature of exposure, although targeted experiments are scarce in the literature. This review highlights the underestimation and potential misidentification of non-plastics due to methodological limitations, inconsistent reporting, and lack of focus. Here we emphasise that future research should develop standardised anthropogenic microparticle survey methodologies that incorporate non-plastic particles and microfibres, with greater effort placed on understanding microfibre pollution in aquatic biota. Further exploration into the ecological impact of non-plastics is crucial to understanding and mitigating the risks associated with these pollutants.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Microplastics and Nanoplastics
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43591-025-00153-6
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.50
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Beyond plastics: occurrence and ecological risks of non-plastic microfibres in aquatic organisms

T.J. Tolhurst, Eoin J. O’Gorman, Dannielle S. Green, Adil Bakir et al.
1 citations
Microplastics and Nanoplastics
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
0.50
article

Beyond plastics: occurrence and ecological risks of non-plastic microfibres in aquatic organisms

T.J. Tolhurst, Eoin J. O’Gorman, Dannielle S. Green, Adil Bakir, Richard J. Cooper, Daniel J. Jolly
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract Non-plastic microfibres, here defined as anthropogenically manipulated fibres of cellulosic or animal origin such as wool, cotton and rayon, have been increasingly recognised as a significant component of anthropogenic microparticle pollution in aquatic environments. Emerging attention has also been brought to the ecological ramifications of non-plastic microfibres and their associated chemical additives. However, environmental anthropogenic microparticle surveys have often omitted both plastic and non-plastic microfibres, with greater attention being placed on microplastic fragments, films, and spheres. This lack of attention has potentially led to the underestimation of non-plastic microfibre pollution in aquatic environments and biota. Through a comprehensive systematic review, we collate and analyse published literature (2011–2024) on non-plastic microfibre occurrence in aquatic animals and the associated ecological impacts. This review demonstrates that plastic and non-plastic microfibres, when looked for, are a significant component of anthropogenic microparticle (AMP) loading in aquatic biota across environments, habitats and feeding strategies. Greatest loading appears in freshwater environments with some cases accounting for 100% of detected anthropogenic microparticles, despite relatively limited study focus. The ecological impacts of non-plastic microfibres may also elicit varied effects on biota, depending on the context and nature of exposure, although targeted experiments are scarce in the literature. This review highlights the underestimation and potential misidentification of non-plastics due to methodological limitations, inconsistent reporting, and lack of focus. Here we emphasise that future research should develop standardised anthropogenic microparticle survey methodologies that incorporate non-plastic particles and microfibres, with greater effort placed on understanding microfibre pollution in aquatic biota. Further exploration into the ecological impact of non-plastics is crucial to understanding and mitigating the risks associated with these pollutants.

Microplastics and NanoplasticsVol. 6(1)
University of Essex (GB), University of East Anglia (GB), Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (GB), Norwich Research Park (GB), Anglia Ruskin University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 31%
Microplastics and Plastic Pollution
0.50
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.