MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414378874 · doi:10.1093/etojnl/vgaf234

Effects of microplastics on survival, reproduction, and the microbiome of the freshwater oligochaete <i>Tubifex tubifex</i>

2025· article· en· W4414378874 on OpenAlexafffund
Quinn P. V. Allamby, Karen A. Kidd, Ryan S. Prosser

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJarislowsky FoundationEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsMicroplasticsTubifex tubifexInvertebrateTubifexJuvenileFecesOligochaeta (plant)Ingestion

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In freshwater ecosystems, particularly in riverine sediments, high levels of microplastics (MPs) (<5 mm) have been reported, potentially putting sediment-dwelling macroinvertebrates at risk. However, the effects of MPs on macroinvertebrates remain unclear, despite their critical roles in freshwater food webs. This study investigated whether exposure to three types of MPs (6 µm and 45 µm polystyrene microbeads, 100 µm polyethylene terephthalate (polyester) microfibers) causes adverse effects in the freshwater oligochaete, Tubifex tubifex. Worms were exposed across five environmentally relevant concentrations of each type of MP in sediment (negative control, 0.1, 1, 10, 100, and 1000 MPs per gram dry weight sediment). The exposures were also conducted using either pristine MPs or MPs that had first been colonized with biofilms. Survival of adult worms along with production of cocoons and juvenile worms were assessed following exposure to MPs for 28 days. Changes in the microbiota of whole oligochaetes and sediments were assessed using the V3-V4 regions of the 16S ribosomal RNA gene. Accumulation of MPs was examined after a gut clearance period to assess the ability of the worms to retain MPs. There were no statistically significant effects to survival or reproduction across all exposure concentrations and scenarios for the three types of MPs, along with no evidence of significant MPs accumulation. However, MPs exposure significantly altered host and sediment microbial communities, with effects varying by polymer type, particle size, and condition. In Tubifex tubifex, pristine 45 µm PS microbeads at the highest concentration increased Shannon diversity, while the highest concentration of biofouled 100 µm PET microfibers significantly altered beta diversity. In exposures using biofouled MPs, more differentially abundant bacterial genera were identified compared to pristine MPs, and included taxa linked to nutrient cycling and plastics degradation. In sediments, both alpha and beta diversity were significantly affected by 45 µm PS microbeads, and more differentially abundant bacteria were identified in these exposures compared to 100 µm PET microfibers. While chronic exposure to environmentally realistic MPs did not cause adverse effects to survival or reproduction in Tubifex tubifex, the consequences of alterations to the host microbiome due to MPs exposure requires further investigation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.002
GPT teacher head0.161
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207