Lichen Biomonitoring of Airborne Microplastics in Milan (N Italy)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the deposition of airborne microplastics (MPs) in the urban area of Milan across 12 sites and at a background control site (northern Italy) using 3-month transplants of the fruticose lichen species Evernia prunastri (exposed in triplicate). The primary objective was to evaluate the use of lichen transplants for the assessment of MP deposition; as such, the study sites spanned a gradient in vehicular traffic and population density across four concentric land-use zones (i.e., urban parks, centre, semi-periphery, and periphery). A total of 149 MP particles were detected in the exposed lichen samples; 94.6% were classified as fibres and 5.4% as fragments. The control site and urban parks experienced a similar number of MPs per gram of dry lichen (20–26 MP/g), while a higher number of MPs were detected in central and peripheral areas (44–56 MP/g), with a clear increasing gradient from the city centre towards the periphery. We estimated the MP deposition in Milan to be in the range of 43–119 MPs m2/d, indicating that people living in Milan are exposed to airborne MPs, with potential health effects. This study suggests that lichens are suitable biomonitors of airborne MPs under a relatively short exposure of three months in urban environments.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".