Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2023 Feb 21;189:114746. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114746

The presence of COVID-19 face masks in the largest hypersaline lagoon of South America is predicted by urbanization level

Leonardo Lopes Costa a,⁎, Danilo Freitas Rangel b, Ilana Rosental Zalmon a
PMCID: PMC9941313  PMID: 36857992

Abstract

The inadequate disposal of face masks has caused a widespread presence of COVID-19 litter in the environment. We monitored 10 beach arcs along approximately 15 km of the largest hypersaline lagoon of South America looking for face masks during the lockdown (2021) and in the “new normal” (2022) period. Our working hypothesis is that the probability of finding face masks increases with higher urbanization levels, which was estimated by the Human Modification Metric. Approximately 3 × 10−3 face masks m−2 were found on nine of 10 beaches (90 %) during the lockdown. However, this reduced to 1 × 10−4 face masks m−2 found in eight beaches (80 %) after the lockdown. The probability of finding a face mask was significantly higher as urbanization increased (z = 2.799; p = 0.005). This situation imposes the need for a better waste management and environmental education actions, targeting the reduction of direct littering on coastal ecosystem.

Keywords: Birds, Coronavirus, Coastal lagoon, SARS-CoV-2, Personal protective equipment, Plastic pollution

The long-term persistence of plastic in aquatic systems is recognized as one of the most relevant environmental problem of the “Plasticene” era (Reed, 2015), impacting wildlife through ingestion, entanglement, entrapment, injuries and suffocation (Gall and Thompson, 2015). Also, plastic is a recognized vector for the introduction of non-indigenous algae, animals and pathogens, potentially amplifying the risk of bioinvasion and outbreak of wildlife diseases (Kiessling et al., 2015; Rech et al., 2016). Commonly, the amount of mismanaged litter in inland and coastal environments is predicted by surrounding urbanization and distance from rivers and streams, which thus should be targets of waste management actions (Dobaradaran et al., 2018; Schuyler et al., 2021; Serra-Gonçalves et al., 2019).

The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19) on January 2020. Since then, a growing body of scientific evidences suggests that the pandemic is having mixed effects on the environment. Immediate positive effects include reduction of air and noise pollution (Bertucci et al., 2021; Yumin et al., 2021) and improved habitat quality for wildlife due the reduced human activities during the “anthropause” (Ben-Haddad et al., 2022; Costa et al., 2022; Gilby et al., 2021; LeClair et al., 2021; Manenti et al., 2020; Soto et al., 2021). However, the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) such as face masks to strengthen prevention against the spread of the virus had caused novel problems. Most of PPE is single-use, and the inadequate disposal created an iconic problem related to waste management: the widespread presence of COVID-19 related litter in the environment (Ben-Haddad et al., 2021; Rakib et al., 2021). This is not surprising, since approximately 20 % of individuals usually recklessly throw away their disposable face masks (Selvaranjan et al., 2021).

A monthly use of almost 130 billion face masks is estimated globally (Prata et al., 2020). Considering improper disposal of just 1 % of disposable face masks by the world population, it would release to the environment ~10 million face masks (WWF International, 2020). This inevitably has led to interaction of animal life with this COVID-19 related litter with potential for short- and long term adverse effects (Hiemstra et al., 2021; Patrício et al., 2021). For instance, case studies have shown animals entangled in and ingesting face masks, and some birds using this PPE as nesting material (Hiemstra et al., 2021). COVID-19 related litter increases serious pressure on biodiversity already impacted by common plastic items, such as death related with digestive tract obstruction and starvation, due to restricted feeding activity after ingesting face masks and physical damages caused by entanglement (reviewed by Patrício et al., 2021). In addition to physical effects, PPE can act as vector for adsorbed heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and even for human-derived pathogens (Luksamijarulkul et al., 2014).

Beaches are typical sinks of disposable face masks, since the pollution level by PPE seems considerably higher than other places (Patrício et al., 2021). Lagoon beaches are even more exposed to chronic accumulation of face masks because of the limited water circulation. These assumptions led us to monitor 10 beaches along approximately 15 km of the largest hypersaline lagoon of South America looking for face masks during (2021) and after (2022) lockdown periods. Our working hypothesis is that the amount of face masks has decreased during the “new normal” period. In addition, we predict that the probability of finding a face mask increases with higher urbanization levels surrounding the beaches. This lagoon has calm hydrodynamic conditions, so we predict that circulation patterns are negligible as driver of face mask deposition on beaches, thus the pollution strongly depends on urbanization level as a proxy of direct littering.

A total of 10 beach arcs around the largest hypersaline lagoon of South America were inspected for finding face masks (~15 km) (Fig. 1 ). Araruama Lagoon (latitude 22°40′–22°57′ S and longitude 42°00′–42°23′ W) has a surface area of 220 km2, an average depth of 2.5 m, extensive shallow areas with depths of 0.5–1.5 m, and occasional deep holes up to 17 m deep (Kjerfve et al., 1996). A number of small streams intermittently flow into the lagoon from the north (Kjerfve et al., 1996). The runoff from the main tributaries yields a mean discharge of ~67 × 103 m3 s−1 (Kjerfve et al., 1996). A 14-km long narrow channel is the only connection to the sea and acts to limit tidal range between 0.8 and 1.3 m during spring tide (Kjerfve et al., 1996). This hypersaline lagoon is predominately crossed by densely populated urban areas and in numerous areas receives domestic sewage, but some preserved areas are still found (Kjerfve et al., 1996). Even with the increasing human pressure, the Araruama Lagoon still provides suitable habitats for many migratory and resident water bird species (Tavares and Siciliano, 2013).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Study site showing the Araruama Lagoon, Southeastern Brazil. Black squares are the beach arcs where face masks were searched for.

To search for face masks on the 10 beach arcs (continuous sand stretch without barriers) of the Araruama Lagoon, the sand interface was inspected on September and October 2021 (during a lockdown period) and in October 2022 (after the lockdown) during the morning (between 07:00 and 12:00). Beach width (W) and length (L) were determined through the ruler tool of Google Earth to determine beach area (W x L) and to enable the calculation of face mask density (face masks per m−2).

Location of each face mask was geo-coordinated with GPSMAP Garmim (62sc) with at least 5 m accuracy. For each face mask record, a random point was drawn along the entire sampling area. One hundred locations were firstly distributed over the 10 beach arcs using the Google Earth tool and then, 50 background points from this pool were drawn to represent the “random points” (0) used in the presence-absence design. Geo-coordinates of face masks were used to determine the nearest distance to effluents (streams discharging into the lagoon) using the ruler tool in the Google Earth software (30 October 2022), and the urbanization level.

The urbanization level surrounding each face mask and random points was estimated by the HMc - Human Modification Metric (Kennedy et al., 2019) using the packages “raster” (Hijmans, 2020) and “rgdal” (Bivand et al., 2021) in R software (R Core Team, 2022). The HMc measures the degree of human modification across geo-coordinated lands calculated as the per pixel product (HMs) of the spatial extent and the expected intensity of impacts including human population density, build up areas, croplands, livestock, roads, mining, oil wells, wind turbines and night-time lights through satellite imagery (raster data with 1000 m resolution). The final HMc value is calculated as:

HMc=1.00−∏s=1n1−HMs

This fuzzy sum is a function that assumes that the contribution of a given factor decreases as other stressors co-occur. The HMc is a continuous gradient of modification ranging from 0 to 1. The HMc has been shown to be closely related to the classification of the level of human disturbance on beaches at local scales following categorical descriptions provided by authors (Barboza et al., 2021).

Generalized linear models (GLMs) with binomial distribution were employed to test the hypothesis that the presence of face masks on the beaches of Araruama Lagoon is related to urbanization level. The face masks presence (1) and random points (0) were the response variables included in the GLMs, whilst “HMc” and “nearest distance from effluent” were tested as predictor variables. This analysis was performed in R-software (R Core Team, 2022).

During the lockdown, approximately 3 × 10−3 face masks m−2 were found on nine of 10 beach (90 %) arcs sampled in the Araruama Lagoon. This value is higher than the PPE densities estimated in oceanic beaches from Peru (6 × 10−5 PPE m−2) and Morocco (1 × 10−5 PPE m−2), where face masks comprise more than 90 % of PPE (Ben-Haddad et al., 2021; Rakib et al., 2021). This is surprising because even the most urbanized sectors of Araruama Lagoon are not large enough to receive many people (beach width between ~4 and 20 m) compared to typical oceanic beaches. However, this hypersaline lagoon is mostly urbanized and present low-energy hydrodynamics, allowing the long-term accumulation of face masks in the same areas where people littered them. Face mask density on the Araruama Lagoon fringe was even higher than on beaches surrounding low-energy water bodies (e.g., lakes and embayed beaches) (Mghili et al., 2022; Mohamadi et al., 2023; Ribeiro et al., 2022) (Table 1 ).

Table 1.

Studies reporting mean face mask densities on beaches.

Ecosystem Face mask density (masks m2) Year Country Method Spatial coverage Temporal coverage Reference
Ocean sandy beach 1.4 × 10−2 2021 Philippines Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (three photos at 50 m intervals with resolution of 4160 × 3632 pixel) One site (283.2 m−2) Snapshot Abreo and Kobayashi (2021)
Ocean sandy and rocky beaches 3.6 × 10−2 2020 Iran Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Nine sites (43,577 m−2) Four times in 40 days with interval times of 1, 10, and 40 days after the first sampling Akhbarizadeh et al. (2021)
Ocean sandy and rocky beaches 5.6 × 10−5 2020 Peru Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Eleven sites (110,757 m−2) Twelve consecutive weeks (starting in September) De-la-Torre et al. (2021)
Ocean sandy beaches 6.1 × 10−3 2020 and 2021 Bangladesh Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Thirteen sites (454,600 m−2) Weekly during 12 consecutive weeks (November to January) Rakib et al. (2021)
Ocean sandy and rocky beaches 1.1 × 10−5 2021 Morocco Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Eleven sites (282,374 m−2) Four consecutive months (before and after lockdown) Ben-Haddad et al. (2021)
Ocean sandy beaches 6.0 × 10−3 2020 Chile Citizen Science - Visual inspection in 3 × 3 m quadrats (6 to 22 sampling units depending on beach width) Twenty two sites Snapshot Thiel et al. (2021)
Lake beaches (muddy and rocky substrate) 1.4 × 10−4 2021 Ethiopia Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Nine sites (119,859 m−2) Twelve consecutive weeks (first of April to the end of June) Aragaw et al. (2022)
Ocean sandy beaches 6.2 × 10−4 2021 Peru Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Thirty-six sites (1,179,727 m−2) Snapshot (March to July) De-la-Torre et al. (2022)
Ocean sandy beaches 3.5 × 10−4 2021 Argentina Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Fifteen sites (769,655 m−2) Snapshot (March to July) De-la-Torre et al. (2022)
Wetlands,
coastal and marine, jungle forest, Andean mountains, and Lomas		 1.1 × 10−3 2021 Peru Visual inspection in touristic trails inside Protected Areas Six sites Snapshot (One site per day) Dioses-Salinas et al. (2022)
Embayed sandy beaches 1.1 × 10−3 2021 and 2022 India Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Six sites (143,080 m−2) Three months Gunasekaran et al. (2022)
Embayed sandy and rocky beaches 9.7 × 10−5 2021 Iran Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Thirteen sites (293,825 m−2) Twelve consecutive weeks Hatami et al. (2022)
Island, open gulf and semi-enclosed gulf beaches 2.7 × 10−3 2021 and 2022 Greece Citizen science - Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Fifty sites (315,928 m−2) Fifty-nine sampling campaigns between June and March Kouvara et al. (2022)
Embayed sandy beaches 1.2 × 10−3 2022 Morocco Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Five sites (17,789 m−2) Sixteen sampling campaign between February and June Mghili et al. (2022)
Embayed sandy beaches 6.7 × 10−5 2021 Brazil Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Thirteen sites Two periods (June–July and November–December) Ribeiro et al. (2022)
Ocean sandy beaches 7.8 × 10−3 2021 Philippines Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Thirty-one (48,200 m−2) Snapshot Sajorne et al. (2022)
Ocean sandy beaches 3.9 × 10−3 2022 India Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Ten sites (246,268 m m−2) May, June and July Kannan et al. (2023)
Semi-enclosed gulf sandy and rocky beaches 1.86 × 10−4 2022 Iran Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width Twelve sites (351,463 m−2) Ten weeks (March to May) Mohamadi et al. (2023)
Lagoon sandy beaches 3.0 × 10−3 2021 and 2022 Brazil Visual inspection in transects covering the entire beach width and length Tem sites (17,311 m−2) Two periods (before and after lockdown) Present study
Open in a new tab

The average density of face masks found on Chilean ocean beaches was substantially higher (6 × 10−3 face masks m−2, Table 1), but the sampling was performed when lockdown measures had been suddenly relaxed, resulting in more people enjoying tourist beaches (Thiel et al., 2021). The mean density of PPE was also exceptionally high in Bangladesh (6 × 10−3 PPE m−2), probably because the sampled beaches are near a large river (Rakib et al., 2021). The runoff from the main tributaries for the Araruama Lagoon is considered negligible (Kjerfve et al., 1996), and this reflected in the fact that the distance from effluent was not a strong predictor of the occurrence of face masks on the beaches (z = 0.081; p = 0.935) (Table 2 ).

Table 2.

Binomial Generalized Linear Models. Masks occurrence points and random points are response variables. Significant predictors are marked with an asterisk.

Mask Estimate Std.Error z-value p-value
(Intercept) −4.107 1.623 −2.530 0.011*
Urbanization (HMc) 5.558 1.986 2.799 0.005*
Nearest distance to effluent 0.000 0.000 0.081 0.936
Open in a new tab

Among the face masks registered in Araruama Lagoon, 90 % were found in the most urbanized areas. Thus, the probability of finding a face mask was significantly higher as urbanization increased (z = 2.666; p = 0.008) (Table 2, Fig. 2 ). Almost all studies that quantified the amount of PPE on sandy beaches have found higher density of face mask on recreational beaches than in areas predominated by surfing, fishing or none activities (Ben-Haddad et al., 2021; De-la-Torre et al., 2021; Thiel et al., 2021). Clearly, this is associated with the high influx of beachgoers compared to low-used beaches. After the lockdown, the face masks were three times less abundant (9 × 10−4 face masks m−2), which is a further evidence that cleaning services was not efficient during the pandemic. This situation requires the instant supervision because of the environmental risks that the disposal of hazardous materials on coastal ecosystems poses.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Probability of finding a face mask according to urbanization level [Human Modification Metric by Kennedy et al., 2019] (A) and distance to effluent (B) (predictor variables) on beaches in the Araruama Lagoon, Southeastern Brazil. The line represents a Generalized Linear Model fitted with binomial distribution; the upper bars are the number of face masks and lower bars are the random points for each HMc intervals (x-axis); line inside boxes is median and boxes are interquartile intervals of the predictor variables in face mask points and random points.

As mentioned above, beaches in the Araruama Lagoon are not usually overcrowded, and physical activities on the boardwalks in urban areas are very likely the main source of face mask disposal. The current litter pollution, still including face masks, therefore, requires an extension of cleaning operations as a basic management action. However, the addition of more garbage cans along the beaches edge and educational signs that make people aware of environmental and health risks of disposing face masks in the environment is pivotal for an efficient waste management (Thiel et al., 2021).

At the economic point of view, the aesthetic landscape should be a priority quest regarding the propagation of PPE in the Araruama Lagoon, since this hypersaline lagoon plays an essential role in the local tourism economy (Bertucci et al., 2016). However, the widespread presence of COVID-19 related PPE is beyond the risk of deterrence of beachgoers (Krelling et al., 2017). The remarkable coexistence of PPE and wildlife in the Araruama Lagoon has countless environmental risks that should be target of specific management actions. Firstly, the negative effects of COVID-19 litter on animal life are obvious, similar to those that have been reported for decades (Gall and Thompson, 2015; Laist, 1987). Hiemstra et al. (2021) performed an overview of interaction between animal species and PPE worldwide and among ~28 interactions found in the scientific literature, 25 % involved birds manipulating, ingesting, entangling in or using face masks as nesting materials. Birds are very abundant in the Araruama Lagoon, specially synanthropic and migratory species (Tavares and Siciliano, 2013).

Face masks are potential biohazard materials. Kasloff et al. (2021) found that although reduced from a baseline, significant quantities of viable SARSCoV-2 could be recovered from inoculated N-95 and N-100 face masks at 14 days. As SARS-CoV-2 can remain infectious on contaminated PPE for extended periods under environmental conditions, widespread presence of face masks on beaches poses uncertain risks for interspecific zoonotic transmission of SARSCoV-2 or any respiratory viruses among beachgoers (Olival et al., 2020). In addition, multiple species of wild or domestic animals may also carry SARS-CoV-2 or its related viruses; there are evidences that SARS-CoV-2 has a wide host range (Zhou and Shi, 2021). Warm-blooded vertebrates such as birds have particularly favourable characteristics for asymptomatic shedding of viruses and generation of novel mutant, recombinant e reassortant RNA viruses (Chan et al., 2013).

Our dataset has relatively limited temporal coverage, but represents a unique context of PPE pollution of lagoon beaches. Limited hydrodynamic circulation favours the accumulation of face masks disposed in the sand, exposing fauna and visitors to chronic pollution, especially in urban areas. In fact, we found that the presence of face masks in the highest hypersaline lagoon of South America is closely related with urbanization, corroborating our hypothesis and suggesting that direct littering is the main source of PPE at local scale. Incorporation of adequate environmental education to raise awareness about risks of disposing unmanaged face masks in the environment is pivotal to ensure an integral protection of beachgoers and biodiversity. Face masks must be treated as hazardous medical waste, including the proper identification, collection, separation, storage and transportation as basic management actions. Beaches must be cleaned periodically, but additional management handlers like disinfection, personnel protection and training are also required, particularly for cleaners and trash collectors.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Leonardo Costa: Supervision; Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Investigation; Methodology; Project administration; Resources; Validation; Visualization; Roles/Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing.

Danilo Freitas Rangel: Conceptualization; Data curation; Investigation; Methodology; Validation; Visualization; Roles/Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing.

Ilana Zalmon: Validation; Visualization; Roles/Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

LLC is supported by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro - FAPERJ (E-26.210.384/2022 and E-26.200.620/2022). IRZ is supported by FAPERJ (259920/2021) and the Brazilian Agency for Research Development — CNPq (301203/2019-9).

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

  1. Abreo N.A.S., Kobayashi V. First evidence of marine litter associated with COVID-19 in Davao Gulf, Mindanao, Philippines. Philipp. J. Sci. 2021;150:1145–1149. doi: 10.56899/150.05.23. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Akhbarizadeh R., Dobaradaran S., Nabipour I., Tangestani M., Abedi D., Javanfekr F., Jeddi F., Zendehboodi A. Abandoned Covid-19 personal protective equipment along the Bushehr shores, the Persian Gulf: an emerging source of secondary microplastics in coastlines. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021;168 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112386. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Aragaw T.A., De-la-Torre G.E., Teshager A.A. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution driven by the COVID-19 pandemic along the shoreline of Lake Tana, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia. Sci. Total Environ. 2022;820:153261. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153261. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Barboza C.A., Mattos G., Soares-Gomes A., Zalmon I.R., Costa L.L. Low densities of the ghost crab Ocypode quadrata related to large scale human modification of sandy shores. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021;8 doi: 10.3389/fmars.2021.589542. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ben-Haddad M., De-la-Torre G.E., Abelouah M.R., Hajji S., Alla A.A. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution associated with the COVID-19 pandemic along the coastline of Agadir, Morocco. Sci. Total Environ. 2021;798:149282. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ben-Haddad M., Hajji S., Abelouah M.R., Costa L.L., Rangel-Buitrago N., Alla A.A. Has the “Covid-19” lockdown an impact on beach faunal communities? The Central Atlantic coast of Morocco as a case study. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;185 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114259. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Bertucci F., Lecchini D., Greeven C., Brooker R.M., Minier L., Cordonnier S., René-Trouillefou M., Parmentier E. Changes to an urban marina soundscape associated with COVID-19 lockdown in Guadeloupe. Environ. Pollut. 2021;289 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117898. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bertucci T.C.P., Silva E.P., Marques J.R., Monteiro-Neto C., AN Tourism and urbanization: environmental problems of the Araruama Lagoon, state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Ambient. e Soc. 2016;19:59–80. doi: 10.1590/1809-4422asoc137111v1942016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bivand R., Keitt T., Rowlingson B. Data Abstraction Library; 2021. Rgdal: bindings for the “Geospatial”. [Google Scholar]
  10. Chan J.F.W., To K.K.W., Tse H., Jin D.Y., Yuen K.Y. Interspecies transmission and emergence of novel viruses: lessons from bats and birds. Trends Microbiol. 2013;21:544–555. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2013.05.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Costa L.L., Machado P.M., Soares-Gomes A., Zalmon I.R., Barboza C.A.de M. Recovery of ghost crabs metapopulations on urban beaches during the Covid-19 “anthropause.”. Mar. Environ. Res. 2022;180:105733. doi: 10.1016/j.marenvres.2022.105733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. De-la-Torre G.E., Dioses-Salinas D.C., Pizarro-Ortega C.I., Fernández Severini M.D., Forero López A.D., Mansilla R., Ayala F., Castillo L.M.J., Castillo-Paico E., Torres D.A., Mendoza-Castilla L.M., Meza-Chuquizuta C., Vizcarra J.K., Mejía M., De La Gala J.J.V., Ninaja E.A.S., Calisaya D.L.S., Flores-Miranda W.E., Rosillo J.L.E., Espinoza-Morriberón D., Gonzales K.N., Torres F.G., Rimondino G.N., Ben-Haddad M., Dobaradaran S., Aragaw T.A., Santillán L. Binational survey of personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution driven by the COVID-19 pandemic in coastal environments: abundance, distribution, and analytical characterization. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022;426 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.128070. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. De-la-Torre G.E., Rakib M.R.J., Pizarro-Ortega C.I., Dioses-Salinas D.C. Occurrence of personal protective equipment (PPE) associated with the COVID-19 pandemic along the coast of Lima, Peru. Sci. Total Environ. 2021;774:145774. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145774. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Dioses-Salinas D.C., Pizarro-Ortega C.I., Dobaradaran S., Ben-Haddad M., De-la-Torre G.E. Face masks invading protected areas: risks and recommendations. Sci. Total Environ. 2022;847 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.157636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dobaradaran S., Schmidt T.C., Nabipour I., Khajeahmadi N., Tajbakhsh S., Saeedi R., Javad Mohammadi M., Keshtkar M., Khorsand M., Faraji Ghasemi F. Characterization of plastic debris and association of metals with microplastics in coastline sediment along the Persian Gulf. Waste Manag. 2018;78:649–658. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.06.037. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Gall S.C., Thompson R.C. The impact of debris on marine life. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015;92:170–179. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Gilby B.L., Henderson C.J., Olds A.D., Ballantyne J.A., Bingham E.L., Elliott B.B., Jones T.R., Kimber O., Mosman J.D., Schlacher T.A. Potentially negative ecological consequences of animal redistribution on beaches during COVID-19 lockdown. Biol. Conserv. 2021;253 doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108926. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Gunasekaran K., Mghili B., Saravanakumar A. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution driven by the COVID-19 pandemic in coastal environment, southeast coast of India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;180 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Hatami T., Rakib M.R.J., Madadi R., De-la-Torre G.E., Idris A.M. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution in the Caspian Sea, the largest enclosed inland water body in the world. Sci. Total Environ. 2022;824 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hiemstra A.F., Rambonnet L., Gravendeel B., Schilthuizen M. The effects of COVID-19 litter on animal life. Anim. Biol. 2021;71:215–231. doi: 10.1163/15707563-bja10052. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hijmans R.J. 2020. Raster: Geographic Data Analysis and Modeling. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kannan G., Mghili B., De-la-Torre G.E., Kolandhasamy P., Machendiranathan M., Rajeswari M.V., Saravanakumar A. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution driven by COVID-19 pandemic in Marina Beach, the longest urban beach in Asia: abundance, distribution, and analytical characterization. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2023;186 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114476. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kasloff S.B., Leung A., Strong J.E., Funk D., Cutts T. Stability of SARS-CoV-2 on critical personal protective equipment. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:984. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-80098-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Kennedy C.M., Oakleaf J.R., Theobald D.M., Baruch-Mordo S., Kiesecker J. Managing the middle: a shift in conservation priorities based on the global human modification gradient. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2019;25:811–826. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14549. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Kiessling T., Gutow L., Thiel M. In: Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Bergmann M., Gutow Lars, Klages M., editors. Springer; 2015. Marine litter as habitat and dispersal vector; pp. 141–181. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kjerfve B., Schettini C.A.F., Knoppers B., Lessa G., Ferreira H.O. Hydrology and salt balance in a large, hypersaline coastal lagoon: Lagoa de Araruama, Brazil. Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 1996;42:701–725. doi: 10.1006/ecss.1996.0045. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Kouvara K., Papatheodorou G., Kosmopoulou A., Giovos I., Charitou A., Filippides A., Kaberi H., Kalaitzi L., Kyrkitsos F., Koundouri P., Triantafyllou C., Gletsos M., Fakiris E., Geraga M. COVID-19-related litter pollution on Greek beaches and nearshore shallow water environments. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;185 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Krelling A.P., Williams A.T., Turra A. Differences in perception and reaction of tourist groups to beach marine debris that can influence a loss of tourism revenue in coastal areas. Mar. Policy. 2017;85:87–99. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.021. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Laist D.W. An overview of the biological effects of lost and discharded plastic debris in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 1987;18:319–326. doi: 10.1016/S0025-326X(87)80019-X. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. LeClair G., Chatfield M.W.H., Wood Z., Parmelee J., Frederick C.A. Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on amphibian road mortality. Conserv. Sci. Pract. 2021;e535:1–11. doi: 10.1111/csp2.535. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Luksamijarulkul P., Aiempradit N., Vatanasomboon P. Microbial contamination on used surgical masks among hospital personnel and microbial air quality in their working wards: a hospital in Bangkok. Oman Med. J. 2014;29:346–350. doi: 10.5001/omj.2014.92. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Manenti R., Mori E., Di Canio V., Mercurio S., Picone M., Caffi M., Brambilla M., Ficetola G.F., Rubolini D. The good, the bad and the ugly of COVID-19 lockdown effects on wildlife conservation: insights from the first european locked down country. Biol. Conserv. 2020;249 doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Mghili B., Analla M., Aksissou M. Face masks related to COVID-19 in the beaches of the moroccan Mediterranean: an emerging source of plastic pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;174 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.113181. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Mohamadi S., Madadi R., Rakib M.R.J., De-la-Torre G.E., Idris A.M. Abundance and characterization of personal protective equipment (PPE) polluting Kish Island, Persian Gulf. Sci. Total Environ. 2023;854:158678. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158678. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Olival K.J., Cryan P.M., Amman B.R., Baric R.S., Blehert D.S., Brook C.E., Calisher C.H., Castle K.T., Coleman J.T.H., Daszak P., Epstein J.H., Field H., Frick W.F., Gilbert A.T., Hayman D.T.S., Ip H.S., Karesh W.B., Johnson C.K., Kading R.C., Kingston T., Lorch J.M., Mendenhall I.H., Peel A.J., Phelps K.L., Plowright R.K., Reeder D.A.M., Reichard J.D., Sleeman J.M., Streicker D.G., Towner J.S., Wang L.F. Possibility for reverse zoonotic transmission of sars-cov-2 to free-ranging wildlife: a case study of bats. PLoS Pathog. 2020;16:1–19. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1008758. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Patrício A.L., Prata J.C., Mouneyrac C., Barcelò D., Duarte A.C., Rocha-santos T. Risks of Covid-19 face masks to wildlife: present and future research needs. Sci. Total Environ. 2021;792 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148505. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Prata J.C., Silva A.L.P., Walker T.R., Duarte A.C., Rocha-Santos T. COVID-19 pandemic repercussions on the use and management of plastics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020;54:7760–7765. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.0c02178. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. R Core Team . 2022. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. [Google Scholar]
  39. Rakib M.R.J., De-la-Torre G.E., Pizarro-Ortega C.I., Dioses-Salinas D.C., Al-Nahian S. Personal protective equipment (PPE) pollution driven by the COVID-19 pandemic in Cox’s bazar, the longest natural beach in the world. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021;169 doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Rech S., Borrell Y., García-Vazquez E. Marine litter as a vector for non-native species: what we need to know. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2016;113:40–43. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.08.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Reed C. Dawn of the plasticene age. New Sci. 2015;225:28–32. doi: 10.1016/S0262-4079(15)60215-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Ribeiro V.V., De-la-Torre G.E., Castro Í.B. COVID-19-related personal protective equipment (PPE) contamination in the highly urbanized southeast Brazilian coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;177:1–5. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Sajorne R.E., Cayabo G.D.B., Madarcos J.R.V., Madarcos K.G., Omar D.M., Ardines L.B., Sabtal S.A., Mabuhay-Omar J.A., Cheung V., Creencia L.A., Bacosa H.P. Occurrence of COVID-19 personal protective equipment (PPE) litters along the eastern coast of Palawan Island, Philippines. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022;182:113934. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Schuyler Q., Wilcox C., Lawson T.J., Ranatunga R.R.M.K.P., Hu C.S., Hardesty B.D. Human population density is a poor predictor of debris in the environment. Front. Environ. Sci. 2021;9 doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.583454. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Selvaranjan K., Navaratnam S., Rajeev P., Ravintherakumaran N. Environmental challenges induced by extensive use of face masks during COVID-19: a review and potential solutions. Environ. Chall. 2021;3 doi: 10.1016/j.envc.2021.100039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Serra-Gonçalves C., Lavers J.L., Bond A.L. Global review of beach debris monitoring and future recommendations. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019;53:12158–12167. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.9b01424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Soto E.H., Botero C.M., Milanés C.B., Velázquez Y.R., Abbehusen A., Simoes N., Filho J.R.S. How does the beach ecosystem change without tourists during COVID-19 lockdown? Biol. Conserv. 2021;255 doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2021.108972. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Tavares D.C., Siciliano S. An inventory of wetland non-passerine birds along a southeastern Brazilian coastal area. J. Threat. Taxa. 2013;5:4586–4597. doi: 10.11609/JoTT.o3424.4586-97. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Thiel M., de Veer D., Espinoza-Fuenzalida N.L., Espinoza C., Gallardo C., Hinojosa I.A., Kiessling T., Rojas J., Sanchez A., Sotomayor F., Vasquez N., Villablanca R. COVID lessons from the global south – face masks invading tourist beaches and recommendations for the outdoor seasons. Sci. Total Environ. 2021;786 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147486. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. WWF International . 2020. In the Disposal ofMasks and Gloves, Responsibility is Required.https://www.wwf.it/chi_siamo/organizzazione/ Assessed on 14 April 2021. [Google Scholar]
  51. Yumin L., Shiyuan L., Ling H., Ziyi L., Yonghui Z., Li L., Yangjun W., Kangjuan L. The casual effects of COVID-19 lockdown on air quality and short-term health impacts in China. Environ. Pollut. 2021;290 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117988. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhou P., Shi Z.L. SARS-CoV-2 spillover events. Science (80-. ) 2021;371:120–122. doi: 10.1126/science.abf6097. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

Articles from Marine Pollution Bulletin are provided here courtesy of Elsevier

RESOURCES