Evaluation of Subsampling Methods for Micro-Spectroscopy Analysis of Microplastics.
- 1Department of Civil, Environmental, and Construction Engineering, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Abstract
Full micro-spectroscopy analysis of micron-size microplastics (MPs) in environmental filter samples can be very time-consuming. Subsampling is necessary but leads to the introduction of uncertainty in the number, mass and type of MPs that have been collected on a filter. Commonly used random and stratified random subsampling makes minimal use of information about the sample and are compared here to subsampling approaches that make use of the particle number and size distribution of collected MPs obtained with fast pilot scans. These informed subsampling approaches bias the subsampling by proximity to mean count (PMC), proximity to mean size (PMS), proximity to areas with large counts (PPC), and proximity to areas with large size (PPS). These informed subsampling methods were benchmarked against Random and Stratified methods by Monte Carlo Simulations that concerned three metrics: (1) count estimation, (2) size profiling, and (3) identification profiling. For count estimation, the PMC method was marginally better than random methods. For size and identification profiling, the PMS outperformed all other methods. To reaffirm the practicality of the proposed methods, a demonstration was presented relying on PMC and PMS to execute the subsampling and estimate the overall count, size and identification of MPs. The results of this study make strong arguments for applying subsampling methods that make use of particle number and size distribution rather than random subsampling.
Related
- Raman imaging spectroscopy approach for the microplastics detection in the Oka estuary in the Urdaibai biosphere reserve (Basque Country, Spain)
- Sampling and extraction methods for soil microplastics: current advances and limitations
- Comparative Evaluation of Electrocoagulation for the Removal of Polyethylene and Polyvinyl Chloride Microplastics from Wastewater
- Micro- and nanoplastics in human biological materials: a systematic review of detection methods and methodological challenges
- TCA precipitation and ethanol/HCl single-step purification evaluation: One-dimensional gel electrophoresis, bradford assays, spectrofluorometry and Raman spectroscopy data on HSA, Rnase, lysozyme - Mascots and Skyline data
BibTeX
@article{wang2026evaluation,
title = {{Evaluation of Subsampling Methods for Micro-Spectroscopy Analysis of Microplastics.}},
author = {Yifei Wang and Ujjwal Ghimire and Danny Reible and Balaji Rao},
journal = {Toxics},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.3390/toxics14100843},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42931630},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Evaluation of Subsampling Methods for Micro-Spectroscopy Analysis of Microplastics.
AU - Yifei Wang
AU - Ujjwal Ghimire
AU - Danny Reible
AU - Balaji Rao
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/22
JO - Toxics
DO - 10.3390/toxics14100843
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42931630
AB - Full micro-spectroscopy analysis of micron-size microplastics (MPs) in environmental filter samples can be very time-consuming. Subsampling is necessary but leads to the introduction of uncertainty in the number, mass and type of MPs that have been collected on a filter. Commonly used random and stratified random subsampling makes minimal use of information about the sample and are compared here to subsampling approaches that make use of the particle number and size distribution of collected MPs obtained with fast pilot scans. These informed subsampling approaches bias the subsampling by proximity to mean count (PMC), proximity to mean size (PMS), proximity to areas with large counts (PPC), and proximity to areas with large size (PPS). These informed subsampling methods were benchmarked against Random and Stratified methods by Monte Carlo Simulations that concerned three metrics: (1) count estimation, (2) size profiling, and (3) identification profiling. For count estimation, the PMC method was marginally better than random methods. For size and identification profiling, the PMS outperformed all other methods. To reaffirm the practicality of the proposed methods, a demonstration was presented relying on PMC and PMS to execute the subsampling and estimate the overall count, size and identification of MPs. The results of this study make strong arguments for applying subsampling methods that make use of particle number and size distribution rather than random subsampling.
SN - 2305-6304
ER -