Transport of Microplastics in Shore Substrates over Tidal Cycles: Roles of Polymer Characteristics and Environmental Factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tidal zones providing habitats are particularly vulnerable to microplastic (MP) pollution. In this study, the effects of tidal cycles on the transport of MPs (4-6 μm polyethylene, PE1; 125 μm polyethylene, PE2; and 5-6 μm polytetrafluoroethylene, PFTE) in porous media combined with various environmental and MPs properties were systemically investigated. The results indicated that smaller substrate sizes exhibited higher retention percentages compared to those of larger substrate sizes under different tidal cycles. In terms of the size of MPs, a larger size (same density) was found to result in enhanced retention of MPs in the column. As the number of tidal cycles increased, although the transport of MPs from the substrate to the water phase was enhanced, PE1 was washed out more with the change in water level, compared to PTFE. Additionally, more MPs were retained in the column with the increase of salinity and the decrease of flow velocity under the same tidal cycles. Ultraviolet and seawater aged PE1 showed enhanced transport, while aged PTFE showed enhanced retention under the same tidal cycles. These results can help understand the MP behaviors in the shoreline environment and provide support for future cleanup and sampling in tidal zones.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".