Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 4;30(56):119329–119342. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-30333-x

Table 3.

Summary comparison of previous studies identifying the ingestion of microplastics and microfibres in different species of crabs. NA indicates the information was not available and ND indicates the analysis was not determined

Study Location Species Items individual−1 Items g−1 (wet weight) Method used Tissue analysed
This study Balearic Islands, Spain Callinectes sapidus 2.1 ± 1.5 0.4 ± 1.04 10% KOH Stomach
Aliko et al. (2022) Albania Callinectes sapidus 43 to 50 10.75 ± 1.4 to 12.5 ± 2.3 (range) 10% KOH Stomach
Capparelli et al. (2022) Gulf of Mexico Callinectes sapidus 37.9 (mean) 30% H2O2 Gills
8.62 (mean) 30% H2O2 Digestive Tract
Waddell et al. (2020) Corpus Christi Bay, Gulf Coast Callinectes sapidus 0.44 to 0.72 NA 30% H2O2 Stomach
Horn et al. (2019) California Coast Emerita analoga 0.65 ± 1.64 NA Visual separation Digestive Tract
Truchet et al. (2022) Buenos Aires, Argentina Neohelice granulata NA 0.36 ± 0.25 10% KOH Gut
NA 1.5 ± 1.7 10% KOH Carapace
ND ND 10% KOH Eggs
NA 1 ± 1 10% KOH Gills
Cyrtograpsus angulatus NA 0.19 ± 0.11 10% KOH Gut
NA 0.67 ± 0.52 10% KOH Carapace
ND ND 10% KOH Eggs
NA 0.19 ± 0.11 10% KOH Gut
NA 0.11 ± 0.07 10% KOH Gills
Leptuca uruguayensis NA 0.06 ± 0.07 10% KOH Gut
NA 0.11 ± 0.07 10% KOH Carapace
NA 4 ± 2 10% KOH Eggs
NA 0.11 ± 0.07 10% KOH Carapace
NA 0.17 ± 0.14 10% KOH Gills