Journal of
Marine Science
and Engineering
Article
Occurrence of Microplastics in the Gastrointestinal Tract and
Gills of Fish from Guangdong, South China
Zhengkun Pan 1 , Chaonan Zhang 1,2,3 , Shaodan Wang 1 , Di Sun 1,3 , Aiguo Zhou 1,2 , Shaolin Xie 1,2 ,
Guohuan Xu 3, * and Jixing Zou 1,2, *






Citation: Pan, Z.; Zhang, C.; Wang,
S.; Sun, D.; Zhou, A.; Xie, S.; Xu, G.;
Zou, J. Occurrence of Microplastics in
the Gastrointestinal Tract and Gills of
Fish from Guangdong, South China. J.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981. https://
doi.org/10.3390/jmse9090981
Academic Editor: Monia Renzi
Received: 23 June 2021
Accepted: 28 July 2021
Published: 8 September 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9090981
1 Joint Laboratory of Guangdong Province and Hong Kong Region on Marine Bioresource Conservation
and Exploitation, College of Marine Sciences, South China Agricultural University,
Guangzhou 510642, China; 20192150008@stu.scau.edu.cn (Z.P.); zhangchaonan@stu.scau.edu.cn (C.Z.);
20182048005@stu.scau.edu.cn (S.W.); sundi@stu.scau.edu.cn (D.S.); aiguozhou@scau.edu.cn (A.Z.);
xieshaolin@scau.edu.cn (S.X.)
2 Guangdong Laboratory for Lingnan Modern Agriculture, South China Agricultural University,
Guangzhou 510642, China
3 State Key Laboratory of Applied Microbiology Southern China, Guangdong Provincial Key
Laboratory of Microbial Culture Collection and Application, Institute of Microbiology,
Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510070, China
* Correspondence: wswsl@gidm.cn (G.X.); zoujixing@scau.edu.cn (J.Z.); Tel.: +86-20-87571321 (J.Z.)
Abstract: Microplastic pollution has become a major global concern. Coastal areas are densely
populated with human activity, commercial enterprises, and fishing, resulting in high incidences of
fish microplastic pollution. It has been shown that microplastics exist in commercial fish in coastal
areas of Guangdong, China. Most of the microplastics were less than 1 mm, white and blue fibers.
The abundance, type, shape and color of microplastics in gills and in the gastrointestinal tract (GIT)
of eight species of commercial fish in the coastal waters of central and western Guangdong Province
were analyzed. The overall abundance of microplastic particles in fish was 6.6 items/individual,
with an average of 2.2 particles in gills and 4.4 in the GIT. The GIT of carnivorous fish was less likely
to ingest microplastics than that of herbivores or omnivores. Middle-water fish, on the other hand,
are less likely to have their gills contaminated with microplastics. These results revealed the degree
of microplastic pollution in fish tissues from the central and western coastal areas of Guangdong
province. The quantity of microplastics in the GIT of fish in the Pearl River Delta was the highest
compared with the surrounding areas.
Keywords: microplastics; fish; coast; gills; gastrointestinal tract
1. Introduction
Plastic pollution has recently become a major problem for global marine ecosystems
by destroying the environment and harming organisms [1]. Microplastic pollution is
widespread around the world and is widely found in soil [2], sediment [3], seawater,
estuaries [4], freshwater lakes [5], and in the Arctic [6]. Previous field studies have reported
severe plastic pollution in oceans and seas around the world, such as the Amazon River
estuary [7], Pacific Ocean [8], Mediterranean Sea [3], and the Arctic Ocean [9]. Plastic
breaks down into microplastics, which persist in various forms in our environment in
sand, dust and water [10]. Microplastics are defined as plastic particles less than 5 mm.
Microplastics can be classified as primary microplastics and secondary microplastics,
based on different routes of entry into the environment [11]. Primary microplastics are
microscopic plastics that invade the environment directly after use, such as cosmetics
containing microplastic particles or plastic particles and resin particles used as industrial
raw materials [12]. Secondary microplastics are plastic particles formed by splitting and
reducing the volume of large plastic waste through physical, chemical and biological
processes, such as plastic bags and packaging plastics [10]. It has been reported that
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/jmse
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 2 of 11

microplastics are more harmful than plastic due to their small size and persistent presence
in the environment [13].
Microplastics can be ingested by a variety of marine organisms, including plankton,
bivalve filter feeders, fish, and mammals [14–16]. The physical characteristics of microplas-
tics allow for easy absorption of heavy metals, persistent organic pollutants, and other
harmful substances [17]. These harmful substances will be released after being ingested
by organisms, causing adverse effects in both the health of the organism, as well as the
stability of the environment [18].
Accumulation of microplastics starts at the plankton level then moves up to higher
nutrient levels. Some fish carry and transmit microplastics that have been transmitted
up through the food web [19]. Humans may ingest microplastics from eating fish. For
example, Jabeen et al. found that large amounts of microplastics were found in commercial
fish from the Shanghai fish market [20]. However, market research on microplastics in
contaminated seafood is still relatively rare [21]. Therefore, contamination of food with
microplastics and related chemicals is an urgent problem due to potential harmful effects
on human health [22].
Studies have shown that the intake of microplastics in fish is affected by many factors,
such as local microplastic pollution levels, fish nutrition level and feeding strategy [23,24].
In addition, high microplastic abundance is also associated with strong human activities.
For example, studies have shown that the quantity of microplastics in coastal fish may be
much higher than in fish found in the open sea [25].
Coastal areas are important feeding and spawning grounds for fish, having high
biodiversity. These specialized zones in the aquatic ecosystem are crucial to commercial
aquaculture production [26]. China’s Gross Domestic Product reached 101 trillion RMB
in 2020, with booming economic activity that has caused many environmental pollution
problems. Guangdong is the southern-most part of the Chinese mainland with a coastline
of 4114.3 km. The Pearl River Delta, on the central coast of Guangdong, is one of the most
developed regions in China. In recent years, China’s coastal areas, such as the Pearl River
Delta, have been targeted as “hot spots” of microplastic pollution [27]. However, in these
coastal areas of Guangdong where the risk of microplastic pollution is high, data has been
severely lacking.
Thus, the aim at the present study was to investigate the level of microplastic pollution
in commercial fish located in the central and western coastal areas of the Guangdong
Province. The shapes, colors, and sizes of microplastics found in wild commercial fish were
counted. The data showed the accumulation of microplastics in commercial fish in this
region, which may pose a food-safety risk. The data quantitating microplastic pollution in
fish can provide a basis for future treatment of microplastic contamination in this area.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sampling
Thirty sampling sites were assessed from 26 December 2019 to 8 January 2020 in
seven cities along the coast of China’s Guangdong Province (Supplementary Table S1
and Figure 1). Fish were purchased from local fish markets. For this study, only fish
(three per species) that were caught in the wild and not farmed were selected and used.
Fish were placed in an incubator with ice packs, then transferred to a −20 ◦ C freezer until
use. Eight species of fish were selected for our study, including Clupanodon punctatus,
Clupanodon thrissa, Siganus fuscessens, Leiognathus brevirostris, Alepes djedaba, Gerres lucidus,
Sillago sihama and Terapon jarbua, since these eight species are common in the coastal areas
of Guangdong (Supplementary Figure S1). The length and wet weight of each fish was
measured and recorded (Supplementary Table S2).
J.J. Mar.
Mar. Sci.
Sci. Eng.
Eng. 2021, 9, x981
2021, 9, FOR PEER REVIEW 33 of
of 11
11

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Sampling
Sampling locations
locations in
in the
the coastal
coastal areas
areas of
of central
central and
and western
western Guangdong
Guangdong province.
province.

2.2.
2.2. Microplastic
Microplastic Extraction
Extraction
One
One fish
fish per
per species
species was
was selected
selected at at each
each sampling
sampling point,
point, aa total
total of
of eighty
eighty fishes
fishes being
being
analyzed.
analyzed. Fish
Fish are
are divided
divided into
into different
different feeding
feeding habits
habits and different habitats. Both Both gill
tissue
tissue and
and gastrointestinal
gastrointestinal tract
tract (GIT)
(GIT) tissue
tissue were
were used
used to
to study
study the
the microplastic
microplastic pollution
pollution
of
of fish in different
differenthabitats,
habitats,andandfishfishwith
withdifferent
different diets.
diets. Fish
Fish were
were then
then thawed,
thawed, andand tis-
tissues
sues
werewere dissected.
dissected. GillsGills
and and
GITGIT tissues
tissues were were placed
placed in ain a digestion
digestion container
container containing
containing an
appropriate
an appropriatevolume
volume of 10% KOH
of 10% KOH solution. Digestion
solution. containers
Digestion containerswere 300 300
were mL mLandand
500 500
mL
glass
mL bottles.
glass TheThe
bottles. digestion container
digestion containerwaswasplaced
placed 60a◦ C
in a in 60water bathbath
°C water for two daysdays
for two [12].
The digestion
[12]. solution
The digestion was absorbed
solution was absorbed by vacuum filtration,
by vacuum and the
filtration, andresidue was adsorbed
the residue was ad-
on a 0.45
sorbed onµm filterμm
a 0.45 membrane. For a solution
filter membrane. containing
For a solution a large amount
containing a largeofamount
sand, saturated
of sand,
NaCl wasNaCl
saturated addedwas to oscillate,
added tomix, and suspend
oscillate, mix, andthe upper layer
suspend of thelayer
the upper solution,
of thewhich was
solution,
then adsorbed on a 0.45 µm filter membrane
which was then adsorbed on a 0.45 μm filter membrane [20]. [20].

2.3. Microscopy
2.3. Microscopy
The filter
The filter membrane
membrane was
was analyzed
analyzed with
with microscopy
microscopy (CNOPTEC
(CNOPTEC SZ680,
SZ680, Chongqing,
Chongqing,
China). Microplastics were classified and counted. Microplastics less than
China). Microplastics were classified and counted. Microplastics less than 1 mm 1 mm were
were
grouped as: <0.5 mm and 0.5–1 mm; larger than 1 mm were classified as a
grouped as: <0.5 mm and 0.5–1 mm; larger than 1 mm were classified as a group at inter-group at
intervals of 1 mm. The microplastics in the sample were classified as six colors: black,
vals of 1 mm. The microplastics in the sample were classified as six colors: black, yellow,
yellow, red, green, blue and white. Both transparent and white were classified as white
red, green, blue and white. Both transparent and white were classified as white since it
since it was difficult to distinguish the clearly in the microscope. We squeezed the suspect
was difficult to distinguish the clearly in the microscope. We squeezed the suspect with
with iron tweezers, sifting out materials that were damaged or deformed, and substances
iron tweezers, sifting out materials that were damaged or deformed, and substances that
that have a certain elasticity are considered microplastics. The microplastics were divided
have a certain elasticity are considered microplastics. The microplastics were divided into
into fiber type, sphere type, fragment type, and film type. Fiber judgment criteria: fiber
fiber type, sphere type, fragment type, and film type. Fiber judgment criteria: fiber is re-
is required be in a long strip; uniform thickness is required; the overall color should be
quired be in a long strip; uniform thickness is required; the overall color should be uni-
uniform; terminal non-bifurcation. Sphere microplastics are smooth, spherical or granular
form; terminal non-bifurcation. Sphere microplastics are smooth, spherical or granular
microplastics. Fragments: Grains must have clear boundaries, uniform overall color,
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 11
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 4 of 11

microplastics. Fragments: Grains must have clear boundaries, uniform overall color, ir-
regular shape,
irregular sharp
shape, edges
sharp andand
edges no no
metallic color.
metallic Film:
color. thin thin
Film: sheet, no metallic
sheet, luster,luster,
no metallic uni-
form
uniform color. Microplastics of typical shapes observed in the microscope in this study are
color. Microplastics of typical shapes observed in the microscope in this study are
shown
shown in
in Figure
Figure 2.
2.

Figure 2.
2. Shapes
Shapesofofmicroplastics
microplasticsinin
fish samples
fish samplesfrom thethe
from coastal areas
coastal of central
areas andand
of central western Guangdong
western province:
Guangdong (A–
province:
C) fragments; (D,E) sphere; (F)film; (G–I) fibers. Black arrows indicate microplastics.
(A–C) fragments; (D,E) sphere; (F) film; (G–I) fibers. Black arrows indicate microplastics.

2.4.
2.4. Quality
Quality Assurance
Assurance and
and Control
Control
In order to reduce the
In order to reduce the influence of external
influence microplastics
of external on the
microplastics onexperiment, no plas-
the experiment, no
tic tools were used on samples during the whole experiment. The same experimental
plastic tools were used on samples during the whole experiment. The same experimental op-
erations were
operations carried
were out by
carried outthe
bysame experimenter
the same to achieve
experimenter a unified
to achieve operating
a unified stand-
operating
ard. To further
standard. prevent
To further the influence
prevent of microplastics
the influence in thein
of microplastics experiment, anatomical
the experiment, tools
anatomical
and experimental utensils were rinsed with clean water before use.
tools and experimental utensils were rinsed with clean water before use.

2.5.
2.5. Statistical
Statistical Analysis
Analysis
ArcMap
ArcMap 10.2
10.2was
wasused
usedtoto
draw maps,
draw Microsoft
maps, Office
Microsoft Excel
Office and and
Excel SPSSSPSS
19 were used
19 were
used
to to analyze
analyze data.data.
There There
werewere
no no correlations
correlations foundbetween
found betweenmicroplastics
microplasticsand
and fish
length/weightby
length/weight bythe
thecomputations
computationsofofPearson’s
Pearson’scorrelation
correlationcoefficents
coefficentstwo-tailed
two-tailedtest.
test.

3. Results
3. Results
3.1. Microplastics in Fish
3.1. Microplastics in Fish
Of the 80 fish studied, only three had no microplastics, and the average quantity was
Of the 80 fish studied, only three had no microplastics, and the average quantity was
6.6 items/individual (Table 1). The majority of microplastics were fibers (78%), followed
6.6 items/individual (Table 1). The majority of microplastics were fibers (78%), followed
by fragments (20%), then spheres and films (only 1% each) (Figure 3a). The proportion of
by fragments (20%), then spheres and films (only 1% each) (Figure 3a). The proportion of
white to blue was identical (36%), with black particles as the next most abundant (22%)
white to blue was identical (36%), with black particles as the next most abundant (22%)
(Figure 3b). The maximum length of all microplastics counted was less than 5 mm. Small
(Figure 3b). The maximum length of all microplastics counted was less than 5 mm. Small
microplastics were in a large portion of the fish samples. The microplastics <0.5 mm in
microplastics were in a large portion of the fish samples. The microplastics <0.5 mm in
size were predominant (50%), with 0.5–1 mm, 1–2 mm and 2–3 mm as the next abundant
size were predominant (50%), with 0.5–1 mm, 1–2 mm and 2–3 mm as the next abundant
 J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 11

J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 5 of 11

(constituting of 21%, 14% and 7%, respectively). Only a small amount of microplastics 3–
4 mm (4%) and 4–5 mm (4%) in size were observed (Figure 3c).
(constituting of 21%, 14% and 7%, respectively). Only a small amount of microplastics
Table 1. Microplastics
3–4(MPs)
mmin(4%)
fish and
from4–5
the coastal
mm (4%) areasinofsize
central
wereandobserved
western Guangdong province, China.
(Figure 3c).
Living Feeding Number Body Length Wet Weight Number Average (Items
Species
Table 1. Microplastics (MPs) in fish from the coastal areas of central and western Guangdong province, China.
Habitats Habitats of Fish (cm) (g) of MPs Individual−1)
Clupanodon punctatus Living Pelagic Herbivorous
Feeding Number of9 13.6 ± 1.74
Body Length 47.3
Wet ± 15.12 Number
Weight 85 of 9.4 (Items
Average
Species
Habitats Habitats Fish (cm) (g) MPs Individual−1 )
Clupanodon thrissa Pelagic Herbivorous 6 17.8 ± 3.03 92.3 ± 38.93 50 8.3
Clupanodon punctatus Pelagic Herbivorous 9 13.6 ± 1.74 47.3 ± 15.12 85 9.4
Siganus fuscessens
Clupanodon thrissa
Pelagic
Pelagic
Herbivorous
Herbivorous 6
14 12.7 ± 1.74
17.8 ± 3.03
46.6 ± 23.44
92.3 ± 38.93
158
50
11.3 8.3
Leiognathus brevirostris Pelagic
Siganus fuscessens Midwater Omnivorous 14 10
Herbivorous 7.8
12.7 ± 0.88
± 1.74 11.5
46.6 ± 4.08
± 23.44 41
158 4.111.3
Leiognathus brevirostris Midwater Omnivorous 10 7.8 ± 0.88 11.5 ± 4.08 41 4.1
Alepes
Alepes djedaba
djedaba Midwater
Midwater Omnivorous
Omnivorous 5 5 11.2 ± 1.61
11.2 ± 1.61 21.8 ±
21.8 ± 7.637.63 36
36 7.2 7.2
Gerres
Gerreslucidus
lucidus Midwater
Midwater Carnivorous
Carnivorous 7 7 ± 1.48
8.18.1 ± 1.48 14.3
14.3± 7.43
± 7.43 13
13 1.9 1.9
Sillago sihama Demersal Carnivorous 15 12.4 ± 1.76 18.9 ± 8.57 72 4.8
Sillago
Terapon sihama
jarbua Demersal
Demersal Carnivorous 14 15
Carnivorous 12.4
11.3 ± 1.76
± 1.42 18.9
34.5 ± 8.57
± 14.16 72
73 4.8 5.2
Terapon jarbua Demersal Carnivorous 14 11.3 ± 1.42 34.5 ± 14.16 73 5.2

Figure 3. Proportion
Figure of shape
3. Proportion (a),(a),
of shape color (b) (b)
color andand
sizesize
(c) (c)
of microplastics in fish
of microplastics samples
in fish from
samples thethe
from coastal areas
coastal of of
areas central and
central
western Guangdong
and western province.
Guangdong province.

Among
Amongallallfish
fishininthis study,Siganus
thisstudy, Siganus fuscessens (11.3items/individual)
fuscessens (11.3 items/individual) hadhad
thethe highest
highest
average abundance of microplastics. Relatively high levels of microplastics
average abundance of microplastics. Relatively high levels of microplastics were found were found
in
Clupanodonpunctatus
inClupanodon punctatus (9.4
(9.4 items/individual),
items/individual), Clupanodon
Clupanodon thrissa
thrissa (8.3 items/individual),
(8.3 items/individual), and
and Alepes
Alepes djedaba
djedaba (7.2(7.2 items/individual),
items/individual), whilewhile relatively
relatively less ofless of Leiognathus
Leiognathus brevirostris
brevirostris (4.1
(4.1 items/individual),
items/individual), Sillago
Sillago sihama
sihama (4.8 items/individual)
(4.8 items/individual) and Terapon
and Terapon jarbua jarbua (5.2 items/
(5.2 items/indi-
individual). Gerres
vidual). Gerres lucidus
lucidus (1.9(1.9 items/individual)
items/individual) waslowest
was the the lowest
(Table(Table
1). 1).

3.2.
3.2.Characteristics
CharacteristicsofofMicroplastics
Microplastics in in the Gills of
the Gills of Fish
Fishfrom
fromDifferent
DifferentHabitats
Habitats
The microplastics in fish gills were mainly fibers, which
The microplastics fish gills were mainly fibers, which accounted for more accounted for than
more70%
than
70% of fish
of fish samples
samples different
different habitats
habitats (Figure(Figure
4A). 4A). Microplastic
Microplastic fragments
fragments were found
were found in the in
the gills
gills of of fish
fish all all habitats.
habitats. Except
Except for sphere
for sphere particles
particles foundfound in pelagic
in pelagic gills, sphere
gills, sphere and
and film
film
werewerenotnot found
found in gills
in the the gills
from from
other other species.
species. More abundant
More abundant microplastics
microplastics were foundwere
in theingills
found theofgills
pelagic and demersal
of pelagic fish thanfish
and demersal from thanmidwater species. Inspecies.
from midwater pelagic fish, mi-
In pelagic
croplastics
fish, were detected
microplastics in the gills
were detected in theof Siganus
gills of fuscessens (3.1 items/individual),
Siganus fuscessens Clupano-
(3.1 items/individual),
don thrissa thrissa
Clupanodon (3 items/individual) and Clupanodon
(3 items/individual) punctatus (2.7
and Clupanodon items/individual).
punctatus In demer-
(2.7 items/individual).
Insal fish, microplastics
demersal in the gillsin
fish, microplastics of the
Terapon
gillsjarbua (2.9 items/individual)
of Terapon and Sillago sihama
jarbua (2.9 items/individual) and
(2.4 items/individual) were nearly identical. In midwater fish, Alepes
Sillago sihama (2.4 items/individual) were nearly identical. In midwater fish, Alepes djedaba djedaba (1.2 items/in-
dividual)
(1.2 was slightly
items/individual) washigher than
slightly higherLeiognathus brevirostris
than Leiognathus (0.9 items/individual)
brevirostris with
(0.9 items/individual)
Gerres lucidus having the lowest (0.4 items/individual)
with Gerres lucidus having the lowest (0.4 items/individual) (Figure 5A). (Figure 5A).
White and blue colored microplastics accounted for the most abundant microplastics
in the gill samples. Green and red microplastics were not observed in midwater and
demersal fish gills. In pelagic fish, the proportion of blue microplastics was greater than
white. In the midwater and demersal fish species, the proportion of white was greater than
blue, and the proportion of black was greater than the other colors (Figure 4B).
J.
J. Mar.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021,
Sci. Eng. 2021, 9,
9, 981
x FOR PEER REVIEW 66 of
of 11
11
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 11

Figure 4. Proportion of
of microplastic
microplasticshape
shape(A/D),
(A/D), color
color (B/E)
(B/E) and
and size
size (C/F)
(C/F)in
indistribution
distribution(A–C)
(A–C) and
and feeding
feeding distribution
distribution
Figure 4. Proportion of microplastic shape (A/D), color (B/E) and size (C/F) in distribution (A–C) and feeding distribution
(D–F) in
(D–F) in fish
fish samples
samples from
from the
the coastal
coastal areas
areas of
of central
central and
and western
westernGuangdong
Guangdongprovince.
province.
(D–F) in fish samples from the coastal areas of central and western Guangdong province.

Figure 5. Abundance of microplastic in habitats (A) and feeding habits (B) in fish samples from the coastal areas of central
Figure 5.
5. Abundance
Abundance of
of microplastic in
in habitats
habitats (A)
(A) and
and feeding
feeding habits
habits (B)
(B) in
in fish
fish samples
samples from
from the
the coastal
coastal areas
areas of
of central
central
Figure
and western Guangdongmicroplastic
province.
and western Guangdong province.
and western Guangdong province.
White and blue colored microplastics accounted for the most abundant microplastics
Whitemicroplastics
and blue colored microplastics
for theaccounted offor the most abundant microplastics
in theSmall
gill samples. Greenaccounted majority
and red microplastics were the
not microplastics
observed in fish
in midwater gills,
andandde-
in the gill samples. Green and red microplastics were not observed in midwater and de-
mersal fish gills. In pelagic fish, the proportion of blue microplastics was greater in
microplastics smaller than 1 mm accounted for at least 50% in the gills from species all
than
mersal fish
habitats. Thegills. In pelagic
proportion of fish, the proportion
microplastics larger of blue
than 2 microplastics
mm in gills in was greater
different than
habitats
white. In the midwater and demersal fish species, the proportion of white was greater
white. In the midwater and demersal fish species, the proportion of white was greater
than blue, and the proportion of black was greater than the other colors (Figure 4B).
than blue, and the proportion of black was greater than the other colors (Figure 4B).
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 7 of 11

was not more than 28%, and the microplastics larger than 2 mm in pelagic, demersal, and
midwater fish were 10%, 28%, and 22%, respectively (Figure 4C).

3.3. Characteristics of Microplastics in the GIT of Fish from Different Feeding Habits
Omnivorous fish had the least proportion of fiber microplastics. However, fish with
other feeding habits had primarily fiber microplastics in the GIT. Neither sphere particles
nor films were found in carnivorous fish, and no film microplastics were found in omnivo-
rous fish. Microplastics of all shape types were found in herbivores, and the proportion of
fiber microplastics was the highest in herbivores (82%) (Figure 4D).
The average content of microplastics was relatively high in the GIT of herbivores. The
microplastic content of herbivorous fish was higher for Siganus fuscessens (8.2 items/ indi-
vidual) than Clupanodon thrissa (5.3 items/individual) and Clupanodon punctatus (6.8 items/
individual). The microplastic content of omnivorous fish was about the same for Alepes
djedaba (6 items/individual) and Leiognathus brevirostris (5.3 items/individual). Lower
microplastics were found in the carnivorous fish Terapon jarbua (2.7 items/individual),
Sillago sihama (2.4 items/individual), and Gerres lucidus (1.4 items/individual) (Figure 5B).
The proportion of fiber microplastics in fish with different feeding habits was more
than 60% (Figure 4D). Sphere and film microplastics in the GIT of fish samples were not
observed in carnivorous fish. The microplastics in the GIT were primarily white and blue,
and the total proportion of these two colors were more than 67% in fish having different
diets. Green microplastics were not found in the GIT of omnivorous fish (Figure 4E).
Approximately 50% of the microplastics from the GIT of fish with different feeding habits
were <0.5 mm, and only less than 22% of the microplastics were >2 mm (Figure 4F).

3.4. Characteristics of Microplastics in Fish Isolated from Three Regions

Thirty sampling points were used to analyze the spatial distribution characteristics of
microplastics among three regions of the west and central coast of the Guangdong Province.
Points W1-8 (the coastal area of the Pan-Pearl River Delta), W9-19 (Yangjiang, Maoming
and Zhanjiang east coastal), and W20-30 (the eastern coast of the Beibu Gulf) were divided
according to their geographical location and economic status. The average quantity of
microplastics found in the GIT and gills of fish in the Pan-Pearl River Delta coastal area
was significantly higher than the Yangjiang, Maoming and Zhanjiang eastern coast of the
Beibu Gulf (Supplementary Figure S2). The proportion of fiber microplastics from W1-8
was higher than from the W9-19 and W20-30 regions (Supplementary Figure S3a). The
proportion of white and blue total microplastics from W1-8 was lower than from W9-19
and W20-30 (Supplementary Figure S3b). Microplastics less than 1 mm were observed in
60–80% of the fish samples of different regions, with W9-W19 (78%) having the highest
(Supplementary Figure S3c).

4. Discussion
4.1. Characteristics of the Microplastics in Fish
Microplastics were primarily found in the digestive tracts of fish. The average quan-
tity of microplastics in the GIT was slightly lower in the fish from the east coast of
Guangdong (5.4 items/individual) [28] and lower than wild freshwater fish in inland
rivers of the Guangdong (7.0 ± 23.8 items/individual) [29] and Beijiang regions (average
5.6 items/ individual) [30]. However, microplastics in these regions were higher than
microplastics in the deep fish in the South China Sea (stomachs 1.96 ± 1.12 and intestines
1.77 ± 0.73 items/individual) [31] the Beibu Gulf, South China Sea (0.228 ± 0.080 items/
individual) [32] and the Nanxun Reef in Nansha Islands (3.1 items/individual) [33]. The
results also showed that the Pearl River Catchment had the highest levels of microplastic
pollution among fish in all of the Guangdong and the South China Sea. The Pearl River
Delta region of Guangdong has a large urban population, as well as highly developed
production and consumption fisheries. Therefore, this region poses a potential safety
hazard for microplastic pollution in commercially sold fish.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 8 of 11

The microplastics found in this experiment were primarily white and blue fibrous
particles of <1 mm. Other microplastics found in fish studies have reported similar re-
sults [27,28]. Fiber microplastics in fish gills may be related to the anatomical structure of
the fish gill. The gills of fish can collect more fibers due to their comb-like structure. In
the color category, transparent microplastics were classified as white because transparent
microplastics may scatter blue light under the light microscope. This phenomenon might
be the reason why blue and white microplastics accounted for a larger abundance in the
data. The proportion of colors other than white, such as blue and black was very low. For
example, the report by Lin Zhu et al. was consistent with the results of our study [31]. Be-
cause fiber microplastics may mimic target food of plankton for fish in the ocean, this may
account for the high proportion of fiber microplastics found in the fish GIT. The majority of
the microplastics were found to be <1 mm. In a related study, Isobe et al. reported that due
to factors such as mechanical action, photochlorination, and biodegradation, large pieces
of plastic debris become smaller and lighter, such that the number of small pieces of plastic
debris increases exponentially [34]. In the present study, the amount of microplastics in fish
increased in the decreasing size of the microplastic particles, which consistently conformed
to this trend.
In studies of microplastic pollution in the wild fish, microplastics are found more
in the gastrointestinal tract, gills, and skin, with less abundance in other organs such as
muscle and liver [35]. In this study, a total of 351 microplastics were found in the GIT and
177 microplastics were found in the gills. In different coastal areas in western Guangdong,
the content of microplastics in the GIT of fish was twice as high as the amount found in the
gills (Supplementary Figure S2). In two reports on 2020, Park et al. and Koongolla et al.,
the situation was similar to the present study in that the amount of microplastics in the GIT
was found to be higher than in the gills [32,36]. In a study of fish microplastics in Haizhou
Bay, China, the microplastics in the gut were lower than in the gills and even lower than
the skin [37]. This result is different from the results of our study. Due to the biological
activities of fish, the gills of demersal fish may accumulate more microplastics in the bottom
mud. The presence of many microplastics in the GIT of fish is justified by the intentionally
or accidental intake of microplastics in water or sediment, or by the predation of prey
that are polluted with microplastics with low nutrient levels [38]. Therefore, microplastic
pollution in the gills is primarily affected by the habitat of the fish, while the microplastic
pollution in the GIT may be more affected by feeding habit. In the present study, the finding
that microplastics were in higher abundance in the GIT than in the gills requires further
study. It is suggested that the GIT, gills, and skin of fish can be used as the research target
organs for the accumulation of microplastic pollution in the study of wild fish.
Fish play a very important role in the biological food chain. If people directly use
contaminated commercial fish, microplastics are likely to accumulate in the human body,
thus affecting people’s health. Therefore, it is very important to select a typical fish as
a surveillance organism for fish microplastic pollution. In this study, Siganus fuscessens
had the highest abundance of microplastics in the gills and GITs, so we considered it as a
candidate for microplastics contamination monitoring in commercial fish. At present, mi-
croplastic pollution in commercial fish food has not received enough attention. This study
provides survey data of potential food safety hazards caused by microplastic pollution
in commercial fish, which can provide data support for the government in formulating
policies to deal with microplastic pollution in commercial fish in the future.

4.2. Microplastics in the Different Feeding Habits and Different Habitats of Fish
Pelagic fish gills are vulnerable to floating and microplastic contaminated plankton.
Demersal fish gills are vulnerable to sediment. There is less microplastic in the midwater,
which can suspend to the surface, settle to the bottom of the ocean or attach to reefs. This
may be the reason why there were more microplastics in the gills of demersal fish and
pelagic fish than midwater fish.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 9 of 11

The dietary habits of fish were classified into carnivorous, omnivorous, and her-
bivorous, and their nutritional grades were successively reduced. In terms of nutrition,
herbivore and omnivore fish need to ingest more food, so the risk of microplastic exposure
is also increased. The minimum value of omnivorous fish species was also higher than the
maximum value of carnivorous fish species. Herbivores typically have more than twice
as much microplastic pollution as carnivores. These results are consistent with previous
studies [39]. The accumulation of microplastics in carnivorous fish was less than that in
herbivorous fish and omnivorous fish, which may be due to the fact that the accumulation
of microplastics in herbivorous fish and omnivorous fish did not reach the average value
in the environment, and the microplastics in the prey fish were less likely to accumulate in
the gastrointestinal tract than the microplastics on the plant surface.

5. Conclusions
The levels of microplastic contamination were analyzed in gills and in the GIT of wild
commercial marine fish from the central and western coast of the Guangdong province.
A total of eighty wild marine fish was divided into eight species and microplastics were
found in seventy-seven specimens (with an average 6.6 items/individual). The quantity
of microplastics in gills and in the GIT was 0–23 (average 2.2) and 0–21 (average 4.4),
respectively. In this study, Siganus fuscessens had the highest abundance of microplastics
in the gills and in the GIT. The particles found were predominantly white and blue fiber
microplastics that were <1 mm. The effects of different feeding habits and different zonal
habitats on uptake of microplastics were also discussed. In the GIT of fish with different
feeding habits, microplastics were predominantly found in herbivores and omnivores
compared to carnivorous fish. Midwater dwelling fish showed fewer microplastics than
fish in zones. The data in this study can provide a reference to the study of microplastic
pollution in coastal fish in central and western Guangdong Province, and can also provide
data for governmental agencies to formulate microplastic pollution control policies.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/

10.3390/jmse9090981/s1. Figure S1. Fish samples: (A) Clupanodon punctatus; (B) Clupanodon
thrissa; (C) Siganus fuscessens; (D) Leiognathus brevirostris; (E) Alepes djedaba; (F) Gerres lucidus;
(G) Sillago sihama; (H) Terapon jarbua. Information about the sampling sties. Figure S2. Abundance
of microplastic in W1–W8 (the coastal area of the Pan-Pearl River Delta), W9–W10 (Yangjiang,
Maoming and Zhanjiang east coastal) and W20–W30 (the eastern coast of Beibu Gulf) in fish samples
from the coastal areas of central and western Guangdong province. Figure S3. Proportion of
microplastic shape (a), color (b) and size (c) in W1–W8 (the coastal area of the Pan-Pearl River Delta),
W9–W19 (Yangjiang, Maoming and Zhanjiang east coastal) and W20–W30 (the eastern coast of Beibu
Gulf) in fish samples from the coastal areas of central and western Guangdong province. Table S2.
Information about the sampling fishes.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, C.Z.; Data curation, Z.P.; Funding acquisition, G.X.;
Investigation, S.W. and D.S.; Methodology, C.Z. and D.S.; Software, C.Z., A.Z. and S.X.; Validation,
A.Z. and S.X.; Visualization, S.W.; Writing—original draft, Z.P.; Writing—review and editing, J.Z. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was funded by the Key Realm R & D Program of Guangdong Province (No.
2020B0202080005), and China Agriculture Research System of MOF and MARA (CARS-45-50).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: There is no conflict of interest.
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 10 of 11

References
1. Sun, J.; Xia, S.; Yan, N.; Xia, P.; Qu, J.; Xu, Y. Effects of microplastics and attached heavy metals on growth, immunity, and heavy
metal accumulation in the yellow seahorse, Hippocampus kuda Bleeker. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2019, 149, 110510. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Zhang, S.; Liu, F. The distribution of microplastics in soil aggregate fractions in southwestern China. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 642,
12–20. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Tata, T.; Belabed, B.E.; Bououdina, M.; Bellucci, S. Occurrence and characterization of surface sediment microplastics and
litter from North African coasts of Mediterranean Sea: Preliminary research and first evidence. Sci. Total Environ. 2020,
713, 136664. [CrossRef]
4. Xu, P.; Peng, G.; Su, L.; Gao, Y.; Gao, L.; Li, D. Microplastic risk assessment in surface waters: A case study in the Changjiang
Estuary, China. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 133, 647–654. [CrossRef]
5. Felismino, M.E.L.; Helm, P.A.; Rochman, C.M. Microplastic and other anthropogenic microparticles in water and sediments of
Lake Simcoe. J. Great Lakes Res. 2021, 47, 180–189. [CrossRef]
6. Almeda, R.; Rodriguez-Torres, R.; Rist, S.; Winding, M.; Stief, P.; Hansen, B.; Nielsen, T.G. Microplastics do not increase
bioaccumulation of petroleum hydrocarbons in Arctic zooplankton but trigger feeding suppression under co-exposure conditions.
Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 751, 141264. [CrossRef]
7. Pegado, T.D.S.E.; Schmid, K.; Winemiller, K.O.; Chelazzi, D.; Cincinelli, A.; Dei, L.; Giarrizzo, T. First evidence of microplastic
ingestion by fishes from the Amazon River estuary. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 133, 814–821. [CrossRef]
8. Hipfner, J.M.; Galbraith, M.; Tucker, S.; Studholme, K.R.; Domalik, A.D.; Pearson, S.F.; Good, T.P.; Ross, P.S.; Hodum, P. Two
forage fishes as potential conduits for the vertical transfer of microfibres in Northeastern Pacific Ocean food webs. Environ. Pollut.
2018, 239, 215–222. [CrossRef]
9. Morgana, S.; Ghigliotti, L.; Estévez-Calvar, N.; Stifanese, R.; Wieczorek, A.; Doyle, T.; Christiansen, J.S.; Faimali, M.; Garaventa, F.
Microplastics in the Arctic: A case study with sub-surface water and fish samples off Northeast Greenland. Environ. Pollut. 2018,
242, 1078–1086. [CrossRef]
10. Kosuth, M.; Mason, S.A.; Wattenberg, E.V. Anthropogenic contamination of tap water, beer, and sea salt. PLoS ONE 2018, 13,
e0194970. [CrossRef]
11. Hadri, H.E.; Gigault, J.; Maxit, B.; Grassl, B.; Reynaud, S. Nanoplastic from mechanically degraded primary and secondary
microplastics for environmental assessments. Nanoimpact 2020, 17, 100206. [CrossRef]
12. Fu, Z.; Wang, J. Current practices and future perspectives of microplastic pollution in freshwater ecosystems in China.
Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 691, 697–712. [CrossRef]
13. Auta, H.; Emenike, C.; Fauziah, S. Distribution and importance of microplastics in the marine environment: A review of the
sources, fate, effects, and potential solutions. Environ. Int. 2017, 102, 165–176. [CrossRef]
14. Baechler, B.R.; Granek, E.F.; Hunter, M.V.; Conn, K.E. Microplastic concentrations in two Oregon bivalve species: Spatial, temporal,
and species variability. Limnol. Oceanogr. Lett. 2020, 5, 54–65. [CrossRef]
15. Lusher, A.L.; Hernandez-Milian, G.; Berrow, S.; Rogan, E.; O’Connor, I. Incidence of marine debris in cetaceans stranded and by-
caught in Ireland: Recent findings and a review of historical knowledge. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 232, 467–476. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Rist, S.; Vianello, A.; Winding, M.H.S.; Nielsen, T.G.; Almeda, R.; Torres, R.R.; Vollertsen, J. Quantification of plankton-sized
microplastics in a productive coastal Arctic marine ecosystem. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 266, 115248. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Suami, R.B.; Sivalingam, P.; Al Salah, D.M.; Grandjean, D.; Mulaji, C.K.; Mpiana, P.T.; Breider, F.; Otamonga, J.-P.; Poté, J. Heavy
metals and persistent organic pollutants contamination in river, estuary, and marine sediments from Atlantic Coast of Democratic
Republic of the Congo. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 20000–20013. [CrossRef]
18. Kolandhasamy, P.; Su, L.; Li, J.; Qu, X.; Jabeen, K.; Shi, H. Adherence of microplastics to soft tissue of mussels: A novel way to
uptake microplastics beyond ingestion. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 610–611, 635–640. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Ateia, M.; Zheng, T.; Calace, S.; Tharayil, N.; Pilla, S.; Karanfil, T. Sorption behavior of real microplastics (MPs): Insights for
organic micropollutants adsorption on a large set of well-characterized MPs. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137634. [CrossRef]
20. Jabeen, K.; Su, L.; Li, J.; Yang, D.; Tong, C.; Mu, J.; Shi, H. Microplastics and mesoplastics in fish from coastal and fresh waters of
China. Environ. Pollut. 2017, 221, 141–149. [CrossRef]
21. Renzi, M.; Guerranti, C.; Blašković, A. Microplastic contents from maricultured and natural mussels. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 131,
248–251. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Usman, S.; Razis, A.F.A.; Shaari, K.; Amal, M.N.A.; Saad, M.Z.; Isa, N.M.; Nazarudin, M.F.; Zulkifli, S.Z.; Sutra, J.; Ibrahim, M.A.
Microplastics Pollution as an Invisible Potential Threat to Food Safety and Security, Policy Challenges and the Way Forward.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 9591. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Battaglia, P.; Pedà, C.; Musolino, S.; Esposito, V.; Andaloro, F.; Romeo, T. Diet and first documented data on plastic ingestion
ofTrachinotus ovatusL. 1758 (Pisces: Carangidae) from the Strait of Messina (central Mediterranean Sea). Ital. J. Zool. 2015,
83, 121–129. [CrossRef]
24. Romeo, T.; Pietro, B.; Pedà, C.; Consoli, P.; Andaloro, F.; Fossi, M.C. First evidence of presence of plastic debris in stomach of large
pelagic fish in the Mediterranean Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 95, 358–361. [CrossRef]
25. Murphy, F.; Russell, M.; Ewins, C.; Quinn, B. The uptake of macroplastic & microplastic by demersal & pelagic fish in the
Northeast Atlantic around Scotland. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 122, 353–359. [PubMed]
J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 981 11 of 11

26. FAO. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Contributing to Food Security and Nutrition for All; FAO: Rome, Italy,
2016; p. 190, ISBN 978-92-5-109185-2.
27. Ma, J.; Niu, X.; Zhang, D.; Lu, L.; Ye, X.; Deng, W.; Li, Y.; Lin, Z. High levels of microplastic pollution in aquaculture water of fish
ponds in the Pearl River Estuary of Guangzhou, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 744, 140679. [CrossRef]
28. Zhang, C.; Wang, S.; Pan, Z.; Sun, D.; Xie, S.; Zhou, A.; Wang, J.; Zou, J. Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in commercial
fishes from estuarine areas of Guangdong, South China. Chemosphere 2020, 260, 127656. [CrossRef]
29. Zheng, K.; Fan, Y.; Zhu, Z.; Chen, G.; Tang, C.; Peng, X. Occurrence and Species-Specific Distribution of Plastic Debris in Wild
Freshwater Fish from the Pearl River Catchment, China. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2019, 38, 1504–1513. [CrossRef]
30. Wang, S.; Zhang, C.; Pan, Z.; Sun, D.; Zhou, A.; Xie, S.; Wang, J.; Zou, J. Microplastics in wild freshwater fish of different feeding
habits from Beijiang and Pearl River Delta regions, south China. Chemosphere 2020, 258, 127345. [CrossRef]
31. Zhu, L.; Wang, H.; Chen, B.; Sun, X.; Qu, K.; Xia, B. Microplastic ingestion in deep-sea fish from the South China Sea.
Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 677, 493–501. [CrossRef]
32. Koongolla, J.B.; Lin, L.; Pan, Y.-F.; Yang, C.-P.; Sun, D.-R.; Liu, S.; Xu, X.-R.; Maharana, D.; Huang, J.-S.; Li, H.-X. Occurrence
of microplastics in gastrointestinal tracts and gills of fish from Beibu Gulf, South China Sea. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 258, 113734.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Zhang, D.; Cui, Y.; Zhou, H.; Jin, C.; Yu, X.; Xu, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, C. Microplastic pollution in water, sediment, and fish from
artificial reefs around the Ma’an Archipelago, Shengsi, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 703, 134768. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Isobe, A.; Uchida, K.; Tokai, T.; Iwasaki, S. East Asian seas: A hot spot of pelagic microplastics. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2015, 101,
618–623. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Su, L.; Deng, H.; Li, B.; Chen, Q.; Pettigrove, V.; Wu, C.; Shi, H. The occurrence of microplastic in specific organs in commercially
caught fishes from coast and estuary area of east China. J. Hazard. Mater. 2019, 365, 716–724. [CrossRef]
36. Park, T.-J.; Lee, S.-H.; Lee, M.-S.; Lee, J.-K.; Lee, S.-H.; Zoh, K.-D. Occurrence of microplastics in the Han River and riverine fish in
South Korea. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 708, 134535. [CrossRef]
37. Feng, Z.; Zhang, T.; Li, Y.; He, X.; Wang, R.; Xu, J.; Gao, G. The accumulation of microplastics in fish from an important fish farm
and mariculture area, Haizhou Bay, China. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 696, 133948. [CrossRef]
38. Jovanović, B.; Gökdağ, K.; Güven, O.; Emre, Y.; Whitley, E.M.; Kideys, A.E. Virgin microplastics are not causing imminent harm
to fish after dietary exposure. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 130, 123–131. [CrossRef]
39. Wang, T.; Li, B.; Zou, X.; Wang, Y.; Li, Y.; Xu, Y.; Mao, L.; Zhang, C.; Yu, W. Emission of primary microplastics in mainland China:
Invisible but not negligible. Water Res. 2020, 162, 214–224. [CrossRef] [PubMed]