Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Environmental Research

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marenvrev

Review

The dynamics of plastic pellets on sandy beaches: A new

methodological approach
Anderson Targino da Silva Ferreira a, b, g, *, Eduardo Siegle c, Maria Carolina Hernandez Ribeiro d,
Marcelo Soares Teles Santos e, Carlos Henrique Grohmann f, g
a
Geosciences Institute of the University of São Paulo (IGc-USP), Rua do Lago, 562 Cidade Universitária, 05508-080, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
b
Master’s Program in Geoenvironmental Analysis, Guarulhos University (MAG-UNG), Praça Teresa Cristina, 229, Centro, 07023-070, Guarulhos, São Paulo, Brazil
c
Oceanographic Institute of the University of São Paulo, Praça do Oceanográfico, 191, Cidade Universitária, 05508-120, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
d
School of Arts, Sciences and Humanities, University of São Paulo (EACH-USP), Avenida Arlindo Béttio, 1000, Ermelino Matarazzo, 03828-000, São Paulo, São Paulo,
Brazil
e
Techno-Science and Innovation Training Center, Federal University of Southern Bahia-UFSB, Itabuna Access Highway, km 39-Ferradas, Itabuna, 45613-204, Bahia,
Brazil
f
Institute of Energy and Environment, University of São Paulo (IEE-USP), Avenida Professor Luciano Gualberto, 1289, Cidade Universitária, 05508-010, São Paulo, São
Paulo, Brazil
g
SPAMLab – Spatial Analysis and Modelling Lab, IEE-USP, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Plastic found in the coastal zone is a result of waste mismanagement. This material comes directly from offshore
Nurdles disposal or by fishing debris, other marine activities, and by marine currents and winds, as well as urban
GNSS drainage systems and estuaries. Specifically, in the case of plastic pellets, which are spheres with 2–5 mm that
Strandline altitude
constitute the raw material for the manufacture of plastic products, the Santos Port and the plastic factories in
Extreme events
Storm surge
Cubatão city (Brazilian southeastern coast), are considered the main local sources for the São Paulo state coast.
Consequently, the beaches most affected by this pollutant are those near Santos estuary, like Enseada do Guarujá
beach. However, some questions are still open, such as: what are the mechanisms which control the pellets
deposition, and which locations are most favorable for deposition on the beach? To answer these questions, a
four-step research was carried out at Enseada beach: 1) Plastic pellets geodetic survey based on GNSS posi­
tioning; 2) Beach geomorphometric parameters (altitude, aspect, and slope) derived by Digital Elevation Model
(DEM); 3) Strandline altitude estimated through wave climate and tide height; and, 4) Plastic pellets deposition
Suitability Index (PSI). The joint analysis of the altimetric, geomorphometric and meteoceanographic aspects
showed that the beach areas with altitudes higher than those calculated for the strandline (>2.06 m), slope ~ 3◦
and facing the same direction of the higher energy waves (157.5–202.5◦ ) were more susceptible to pellet
deposition. This indicates that the accumulation of this pollutant on the beach is controlled not only by its
physical characteristics, but mainly by storm surge events. Besides, surveys with geodetic reference (fixed,
univocal, and relatively stable on time) bring up altimetric information as a result of all interactions and can be
compared with other beaches anywhere on the planet — thus contributing to a standardization of the survey
methodology.

1. Introduction “plastic age” (Thompson et al., 2009). Since its introduction and due to
some of its qualities as high production volume at low cost, lightness,
After its invention in the twentieth century, plastic has become an strength, and toughness, ductility, corrosion resistance, practicality in
integral part of our lives, and in the future, we may refer to it as the the ability to assume shape and color and mainly durability (Brighty

* Corresponding author. Geosciences Institute of the University of São Paulo (IGc-USP), Rua do Lago, 562 Cidade Universitária, 05508-080, São Paulo, São Paulo,
Brazil.
E-mail addresses: andersontsferreira@gmail.com (A.T.S. Ferreira), esiegle@usp.br (E. Siegle), maria.carolina.ribeiro@usp.br (M.C.H. Ribeiro), marcelostsantos@
ufsb.edu.br (M.S.T. Santos), guano@usp.br (C.H. Grohmann).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2020.105219
Received 14 December 2019; Received in revised form 23 November 2020; Accepted 26 November 2020
Available online 3 December 2020
0141-1136/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
et al., 2015), there was a global exponential production and consequent
plastic pollution (Barnes et al., 2009).
Plastic is estimated to account for 80% of all ocean waste accumu­
lated, with over 5 trillion pieces floating, and 8 million tonnes reach the
sea each year (Eriksen et al., 2014; Jambeck et al., 2015). Some esti­
mates state that there is currently more plastic than plankton in the
ocean, and this material is being introduced directly and indirectly into
the marine food chain (Andrady, 2011; Frias et al., 2014; Van Sebille,
2015).
Through atmospheric (Brahney et al., 2020), wind (Rezaei et al.,
2019) and current transport (Bergmann et al., 2015), microplastics are
arriving even on remote places (Lavers and Bond, 2017). They constitute
an emerging and widespread problem worldwide, that reached the
deep-sea already (Kane et al., 2020; Van Cauwenberghe et al., 2013) -
where the plastic can remain with a small rate of degradation for de­
cades, impacting the benthic compartiment (Krause et al., 2020).
Over time, the action of ultraviolet rays (UV) degrade the micro­
plastics in the environment, which may release greenhouse gases such as
methane and ethylene (Royer et al., 2018). In addition to adsorbing and
carrying- chemicals, including various metals such as Al, Fe, Mn, Cr, Cu,
Zn (Turner and Holmes, 2011), as well as high concentrations of or­
ganochlorines, such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dichlor­
odiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) and mono-Ethylhexyl phthalate
(MEHP), degraded from diethylhexyl phthalate (DEHP) (Brighty et al.,
2015).
These substances accumulate into the adipose and muscle tissue of
fish and other marine animals and can cause serious illness (i.e., endo­
crine disorders, among others) to animals who consume them (Avio
et al., 2015; Bakir et al., 2014; Choy et al., 2019; Fossi et al., 2012).
Although only a few studies analyzed the effects of microplastic in or­
ganisms under natural conditions (Prokić et al., 2019), it is known that
microplastics can cause death by starvation when ingested by animals,
difficult predator escape (limited predator avoidance and imparirment
of feedig capacity), reduction of the reproductive capacity (Gregory,
2009; Wright et al., 2013), and disruption of the endocrine system,
because of chemical additives, such as bisphenol-A and phtalates
(Teuten et al., 2009).
Microorganisms can inhabit the surface of microplastic (the “plati­
sphere”) due to its hability to adsorb organic matter (Gorman et al.,
2019; Keswani et al., 2016; Zettler et al., 2013), affecting its sinking
velocity (Kaiser et al., 2017) and leading to antibiotic resistance (Aria­
s-Andres et al., 2019). Microplastic adsorb organic contaminants that
can then become bioavailable for marine organisms (Fisner et al.,
2013a), and subsequent trophic levels (Avio et al., 2015; Martellini
et al., 2018; Morais et al., 2020; Nelms et al., 2018), a risk for human
health through the consumption of contaminated seafood (Smith et al.,
2018a). The research concerning plastic waste is recent and the effects of
its contaminants to humans are still being investigated (Dong et al.,
2020; Keswani et al., 2016; Prata et al., 2020; Revel et al., 2018; Vethaak
and Leslie, 2016; Wang et al., 2020).
In the coastal zone, the accumulated plastic is the result of waste
mismanagement (Brighty et al., 2015; Rezaei et al., 2019), and represent
a major concern (Pinheiro et al., 2019), because of its proximity to
human activities. Specially since they can serve as potential carriers/­
vectors/mediums for chemical contaminant and biological pathogens
(Caruso, 2019; Mato et al., 2001; Revel et al., 2018; Shen et al., 2019;
Silva et al., 2019), like E. coli for example (Rodrigues et al., 2019), be­
sides the aesthetic damage (Avio et al., 2015; Zhang, 2017).
Plastic resin pellets (also known as nurdles, granules or microbeads),
which are spheres with 2–5 mm, constitute the raw material for the
manufacture of plastic products (Heo et al., 2013). The world produc­
tion reached nearly 350 million tonnes in 2017, while in Brazil, it
reached 7.5 million tons (~2% of the world total) (ABIPLAST, 2018;
PlasticsEurope, 2018). This material comes directly from waste dis­
carded offshore by vessels (mainly debris from fishery activities) and
elsewhere by sea currents and winds, as well as urban drainage systems,
2
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
rivers and/or estuaries (Kuo and Huang, 2014; Law et al., 2014; Moreira
et al., 2016a, 2016b; Pham et al., 2014; Rech et al., 2014).
Antunes et al. (2013) and Leite et al. (2014) found larger quantities
of marine debris closer to urban regions, including port and industrial
facilities, following the same pattern described in other studies (e.g.
Zhang, 2017). Such particles remain in these areas for decades (Lebreton
et al., 2012). The municipality of Cubatão (in the São Paulo state)
concentrates half of the Brazilian factories that produce pellets or plastic
manufactures. However, despite the lack of loss estimates of these
sources, it is known that the entry of this pollutant into the environment
is due to losses during production, transportation and transshipment
processes in factories and port terminals (Pereira, 2014). Consequently,
the Santos Port, as well as the plastic factories in Cubatão city, are
considered the main local sources of this input in the environment and
the most affected beaches are those near Santos estuary (Moreira et al.,
2016a; Turra et al., 2014).
Due to their low density, pellets tend to float and disperse widely on
the water surface driven by natural forcings such as currents and winds
(Epa, 1992; GESAMP, 2019). Much of this suspended material is
deposited on beaches because of the action of waves and high tides,
where it is incorporated into the sand grains of the beaches (Young and
Elliott, 2016).
Studies focusing on industrial resin pellets around the world con­
sisted of registering the occurrence, abundance, contaminant load, or
describing its surface characteristics (Van Cauwenberghe et al., 2015).
On Brazilian sandy beaches, these studies have been mainly quantitative
(i.e., Costa et al., 2010; Falcão, 2015; Fernandino et al., 2015; Ivar do Sul
et al., 2009; Martinelli Filho and Monteiro, 2019; Moreira et al., 2016a;
Moreira et al., 2016b; Pereira, 2014; Turra et al., 2014) or about
contaminant load (Fisner et al, 2013a, 2013b); both on surface and
subsurface (up to 2 m deep). However, the geodetic position of the
pellets, as well as geomorphometric and meteoceanographic factors,
have not been evaluated by an integrative approach.
Nevertheless, it is known that the deposition or exposure of these
debris can be drastically altered by storm events (GESAMP, 2019),
which makes the choice of the appropriate zone for microplastics sur­
veys on beaches a critical factor in the coastal regions (Kim et al., 2015)
and consequently for coastal management and reduction in the vari­
ability of quantitative estimates. Thus, the evaluation of potential
accumulation zones of microplastics on the beach is necessary (Avio
et al., 2017; Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2012; Van Cauwenberghe et al., 2015).
The present work proposes a low cost and time effective method,
applicable in any sandy beach context, capable to point with geodetic
precision the location of plastic pellet on the beach and the factors that
contribute to its deposition — combining the Global Navigation Satellite
System (GNSS) survey, with geomorphometric parameters (altimetry,
slope, and beach orientation) and meteoceanographics data.
2. Methodological approach
This work was based on the idea to propose a methodology of
investigating why plastic pellets are found in the coastal zone and
mainly concentrated in the higher areas of the beach. Studies on this
subject showed that in São Paulo coast, pellets were found mostly in the
foredune and backshore zones on the beaches near Santos Channel
(Fig. 1), that gives access to Santos Port and drains Cubatão plastic
factories (Falcão, 2015; Moreira et al., 2016b; Pereira, 2014; Turra et al.,
2014). Based on this principle, the Enseada beach was chosen because it
has all the necessary morphological requirements as a case study, like a
boardwalk, long beach length, different altitudes, orientations, slopes,
and different shoreline widths and angles of wave incidence along the
beach. Due to these circumstances, it was necessary to measure the
pellets’ positions with geodetic precision, as well as to identify the pa­
rameters driving this deposition process. The following parameters
related to pellets deposition were listed: (i) Geodetic position of pellets
in the beach; (ii) Beach geomorphometric and meteoceanographic
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
Fig. 1. Location of Enseada beach (Guarujá) and its surrounding estuarine
complex that hosts the Santos port (black continuous line) and an indus­
trial complex.
characteristics.
2.1. Index development
The methodology of this research can be divided into four steps: 1)
Plastic pellets geodetic survey based on GNSS positioning; 2) Beach
geomorphometric parameters (altitude, aspect, and slope) derived by
Digital Elevation Model (DEM); 3) Strandline altitude estimated by
WaveWatch III (WW3) wave model analysis and tide height; and, 4)
Plastic pellets deposition suitability Index (PSI) (Fig. 2).
2.1.1. GNSS positioning and plastic pellets survey
The positioning of the topographic sampled field points was deter­
mined from the geodetic coordinates (latitude, longitude, and geometric
altitude) surveyed with the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).
The post-processed kinematic relative method was used, in which two
receivers (Emlid Reach REACH RS2 Multi-band and RS + Single-band)
simultaneously track up to 72 channels with observations from the
constellations GPS/QZSS, GLONASS, BeiDou, and Galileo. One is
installed at a reference station (GNSS Base - Multi-band) and the other at
interest points (GNSS Rover - Single-band) (Monico et al., 2009; Ferreira
et al., 2019). The tracked data was stored in the receivers and later
transferred and adjusted with the aid of RTKPOST software, v. 2.4.3
from Emlid. The reference station deployed within the study area pro­
vided short baselines throughout the study area (<3 km). The GNSS field
track was performed in oblique and orthogonal topographic profiles
Fig. 2. Flowchart of the several steps in the methodology used in this research.
WW3: WaveWatch III model; Hs: Significant wave height; Tp: Wave period (s);
GNSS: Global Navigation Satellite System; DEM: Digital Elevation Model.
3
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
along the shoreline and the main morphological features of the beach,
aiming to represent them as better as possible (Fig. 4). The GNSS sam­
pling points carried out at Enseada beach - Guarujá/SP, on June 16,
2019, the data sampling rate was of 1 point per second, and the accuracy
√̅̅̅
was performed by the standard error (SE = σ/ n) and standard devia­
tion (σ), where the n is the sample size (Ferreira et al., 2014, 2016,
2019).
In the reference station positioning, the active station of the Brazilian
Network for Continuous Monitoring (BNCM) closest to the study area
(Polytechnic School of the São Paulo University - POLI-USP) was used,
which have geodetic coordinates in the Geocentric Reference System for
the Americas 2000(SIRGAS2000, 2019). The geometric altitudes ob­
tained with GNSS (related to the SIRGAS2000 system reference ellip­
soid) were converted to orthometric (H) altitudes (mean sea level of the
Brazilian Geodetic System – Imbituba/SC Datum) using the GNSS
altimetry. The calculation consists of determining the orthometric alti­
tude of a point of interest by the difference between the geometric
altitude (h) determined with GNSS and the geoidal height (N) from the
Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) geoidal model,
MAPGEO2015 (Nunes, 2015).
The beach of 5.5 km was divided into ten sectors of approximately
550 m, and one across-shore transect was made in each of them. When
some pellet were visualized along the transect, we designated sampling
areas of 1 m2 to collect those inside the grid. Then the plastic pellets
found in this area were counted by visual recognition (GESAMP, 2019;
Heo et al., 2013) and their geodetic coordinates (latitude, longitude, and
orthometric altitude - H) were collected by GNSS positioning within the
center of each grid. After collecting all the pellets in the area, the survey
continued in the transect. The sampling was made one week after a
storm surge (SS) event, on 2019-07-13.
2.1.2. Digital elevation model generation
The Digital Elevation Model (DEM) with 0.5 m vertical equidistance
was generated by the interpolation of the GNSS samples points using the
Delaunay triangulation, which uses the criterion of maximization of the
minimum angles of each triangle (Ferreira et al., 2014, 2016, 2019). The
DEM quality control was performed by control points randomly selected
in the study area and not used in the model, and the accuracy was given
bythe Root Mean Square Error (RMSE), according to Monico et al.
(2009):
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
∑ n
ΔH 2i
RMSE =
n
i=1
where, i = 1, 2, 3…n is the number of control points used in the evalu­
ation, and ΔHi is the set of discrepancies between the orthometric alti­
tudes obtained in the model (Him ) and the reference altitudes (Hir ), given
by the expression:
ΔHi = Him − Hir
The beach face slope calculates the maximum rate of change in value
from that cell to its eight neighbors derived from DEM, identifying the
steepest downhill descent from the cell (Burrough et al., 1998).The rates
of change (delta) of the surface in the horizontal (dz/dx) and vertical
(dz/dy) directions from the center cell determine the slope:
(√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )̅)
Slope radians (β) = atan [dz/dx]2 + [dz/dy]2
The slope is commonly measured in units of degrees, which uses the
algorithm:
(√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
( )̅)
Slope degrees (◦ ) = atan [dz/dx]2 + [dz/dy]2 *57.29578
The advantage of this information is that it provides a rapid empir­
ical assessment of the beach stage only based on the slope values derived
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
from the DEM (Sasaki 1980; Klein 1997; Ferreira et al., 2014).The aspect
identifies the slope direction measured clockwise in degrees from 0 (due
north) to 360 (again due north) from each cell to its neighbors. Flat areas
having no downslope direction are given a value of − 1 (Burrough et al.,
1998; Smith et al., 2018b).
2.1.3. Strandline altitude (SA)
The Strandline Altitude (SA) can be measured by calculating the
wave run-up combined with maximum tide height based on a fixed,
univocal and relatively time stable geodetic reference. To estimate this
variable, the wave climate data was based on the global wave generation
model WaveWatch III (WW3), hindcast reanalysis, developed and ran by
the National Center for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) of the Na­
tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) (Tolman et al.,
2002). These have a spatial and temporal resolution up to 30 arc-minute
at the global grid at 3-h intervals and are available at the NOAA re­
pository (ftp://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/pub/history/waves/). For the
study area, wave information has been extracted at the 24◦ S, and 46◦ W
coordinate (1997-01-29 to 2019-05-31), and the tide data elevation
were obtained from the WXTIDE32 (http://www.wxtide32.com), a free
tide prediction program (Table 1). Near Santos Port, the highest tide is
0.79 m above the Mean Sea Level (MSL) from the Imbituba/SC datum of
the Brazilian Geodetic System (BGS).
For the Enseada beach, the wave run-up (Wr) of the waves arriving at
the coast was calculated as described by Stockdon et al. (2006):
( )
[H0 L0 (0.563β2 + 0.004)]
0.5
Wr = 1.1 0.35β(H0 L0 )0.5 +
2 limits established (for a 95% confidence interval). This method has the
Where Ho is the offshore significant wave height (m), Lo is the offshore
wavelength and β is the beach slope (in radians). The applied formula­
tion considers normal wave incidence, therefore, results may slightly
overestimate wave runup at the eastern end of the beach, where wave
refraction makes the wave reach the shoreline at an angle. This approach
is similar to the study conducted by Stein and Siegle (2020) on the
nearby Santos bay beaches. The beach slope is influenced by the
asymmetry of the flow due to infiltration, which is determined by the
particle sizes of the sediments present in the foreshore (de Andrade
et al., 2019), while the SA was calculated by summing the wave run-up
(Wr) values with the tide height (Th), according to Ferreira et al. (2014,
2019):
SA = Wr + Th
Five statistical SA classes were defined (Fig. 3) based on the mean
value (μ) and standard deviation (σ), correspond to the five categories of
SA (Fig. 3): very low (1); low (2); medium (3); high (4); and,very high (5).
In this work, the very high SA represents the total observed seawater level
during a storm, resultant from the positive combination of SS and the
astronomical tide (NOAA, 2019). The meteorological tide height was not
used in this work because its effects (e.g., atmospheric pressure) are
unrepresentative (less than 10% of the total SS), and the wind shear
stress on the sea surface is the main component (Camargo and Harari
1994; Campos et al., 2010).
2.1.4. Plastic pellets deposition suitability index (PSI)
Considering the source proximity and availability of plastic pellets in
Table 1
Indicators of the plastic pellets deposition suitability Index (PSI).
Susceptibility to deposition of plastic pellets on sandy beaches
AS value Beach surface altitude higher than mean+2σ of SA
calculated
Slopevalue Beach slope indicating an intermediate morphodynamic
stage tending to reflective (2-4◦ )
Aspectvalue Beach face aspect orientated to the same direction to the
very high energy waves (157.5–202.5◦ )
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
Fig. 3. Five categories of Strandline Altitude (SA) (μ is the mean, and σ is the
standard deviation).
the marine environment brought by tidal movements and alongshore
drift currents (Manzano, 2009; Moreira et al., 2016a, 20016b; Turner
and Holmes, 2011; Turra et al., 2014), three mechanisms were used as
indicators of plastic pellets depositions index, calculated as:
SAvalue + Slopevalue + Aspectvalue
PSI =
3
Following Alexandrakis and Poulos (2014), the arithmetic mean was
chosen because this approach considers all indicators of equal impor­
tance, and reduces not only subjectivity, but it also permits the identi­
fication of the relative significance of indicators. Subsequently, the
classes produced correspond to the four categories of the suitability of
plastic pellets deposition expressed as very low (0.0–0.2); low (0.2–0.4);
medium (0.4–0.6); high (0.6–0.8); and very high (0.8–1.0).
For each parameter, the Equivalence Test (Berger and Hsu, 1996;
Hsu et al., 1994) evaluated the hypothesis that averages altitude, slope,
and aspect of the pellet positions were respectively centered on the
advantage of assessing if the averages are within a limit considered
acceptable.The statistical analyses were performed using MINITAB v.
19. While all maps map processing and generation were performed using
ArcGIS v. 10.7 and the geographic coordinate system, datum SIRGAS
2000.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Sampling characteristics and quality control of DEM
Fig. 4 (a) shows a map with the topographic sampling points (gray)
carried out at the beach.The reference GNSS station (GNSS Base) pro­
cessing obtained the following precisions (SE and σ): 0.014 m and
±0.014 m in North (Latitude); 0.014 ± 0.014 m in East (Longitude); and
0.035 ± 0.036 m in ellipsoidal altitude (h). The orthometric altitude of
the reference station, calculated from the MAPGEO2015 geoidal model,
was 26.499 m (h = 22.329 m; N = − 4.62 m).
Topographic sampling points, including the position of the plastic
pellets, had the following average precisions (SE and σ): 0.016 m 0.016
m in North (Latitude), 0.019 ± 0.019 m in East (Longitude), and 0.019
± 0.019 m in h. The orthometric altitudes of the sampling points,
calculated from the reference station (GNSS Base) and the MAP­
GEO2015 geoid model, presented an average altitude of 1.556 m,
ranging from − 0.431m to 4.416 m and a standard deviation of 0.804 m.
These values indicate that the geodetic coordinates and the orthometric
altitudes of the topographic sampling points have a centimetric preci­
sion in relation to the geodetic network implanted in the study area,
linked to the Brazilian Geodetic System (BGS) which is fixed, univocal
and relatively stable in time (Ferreira et al. 2014, 2016).
3.2. Geomorphometric parameters derived from DEM
Yes No
The high accuracy of DEM,coupled with the adequate spatial distri­
1 0
bution of the collected points, allowed modeling the main morpholog­
1 0 ical features of the beach state indicators.These include the frontal dunes
(foredunes) adjacent to the transects 5, 6, 7 and 8, whose altitude range
1 0 from 2 to 4.5 m, from the base to the crest, occupying an area of
13,442.54 m2 and an estimated volume of 13,839.85 m3 (colors in
4
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
Fig. 4. (a) Digital Elevation Model and spatial distribution of plastics pellets and GNSS survey (Base and Rover) highlighting the transects where the pellets were
found. Distribution of the geomorphometric parameters derived from DEM to each transect: (b) Altitude above mean sea level; (c) Slope (radians and degree); (d)
Beach face aspect orientation (in degrees from north).
shades of yellow, orange and red in Fig. 4 - a).
Low and flat areas (0–0.5 m) form shoreline inflections adjacent to
transects 1, 4–6, and 8–10.These coastline inflections are the result of
erosion caused by concentrated rainwater flow from urban drainage
channels (blue-toned colors in Fig. 4 - a). It is important to note that dark
blue areas near transect 10, which has the lowest average altitude
(− 0.01 m), are submerged during high tides (Fig. 4 - a).
Through the slope parameter it was possible to infer in Fig. 4 (c)
three morphodynamic sectors: 1) intermediate with dissipative ten­
dency (~2◦ ) alternating flat areas with arising of berms between tran­
sects 1–3; 2) intermediate with reflective tendency with berms presence
between transects 4–8 (~3◦ ), and; 3) intermediate with dissipative
tendency (flats areas < 2◦ ) between transects 9–10 (Fig. 4 - c).The
Aspect (◦ ) or slope orientation shows three preferential directions zones,
similar of the beach slopes: 1) to SE-SSE between transects 1–6; 2) S-
SSW, respectively for transects 7 and 8; and; 3) SSW-SW, for the portion
after transect 8 to 10 (Fig. 4 - d).According to Ferreira et al. (2014), the
geomorphometric factors conjunction points to an acretional sequence
from dissipative transects towards the transects 2, 5, and 7.
3.3. Plastic pellets deposition indicators
Six of the ten transects of the Enseada beach had pellets. Transects 2,
and 4 to 6 presented only 12% (59 pellets) and transects 7 and 8 with
88%, respectively 288 and 128 pellets. The WW3 model data, showed
5
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
the most frequent waves in the region originate predominantly from the
SE-S(46.6%), E-SE (36.8%) and S-SW (15.1%) directions in the range of
0.5–2.0 m (Fig. 5 - a), with periods between 7 and 13s (Fig. 5 - b). During
austral autumn and winter (from April to September), the frontal sys­
tems (cold fronts) higher frequencies (Stein and Siegle, 2019), and sig­
nificant waves (Hs) and wave periods (Tp) can reach respectively
2.14–3.9 m, and 13–20s during storm surge (SS) events, from the
southern quadrant (157.5–202.5◦ ), centered on 180◦ (Fig. 5 – a, and b).
According to Souza et al. (2019) around 76.5% of SS of these events
occur during this season, and the prevailing winds are E-NE (anti­
cyclone), and under the influence of cold fronts, theS-SW winds prevail
(Pianca et al., 2010).
Lavers and Bond (2017) and Álvarez-Hernández et al. (2019) already
indicated that microplastics tend to accumulate along and above the
strandline. Likewise, the highest pellets concentrations, around 83%
were observed in the very high (5) interval of SA. In this way, the average
pellet distribution altitude (2.42 m) was significantly placed within the
equivalence interval of 2.06–2.62 m (p = 0), which indicates that pellets
deposition and extreme events have a possible relationship (Young and
Elliott 2018) (Fig. 5 – c, and d). On the other hand, only 17% were found
mainly on the backshore portion (around 1.74–2.06 m), suggesting that
their position was related to medium to high energy events. The accu­
mulation of pellets was significantly greater between the 2-4◦ equiva­
lence range (p = 0), and the slope range of the portion of the beach face
most susceptible to this pellet deposition was around 3◦ (Fig. 5 - e).
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
Fig. 5. (a, and b) Directional histograms of the significant wave heights (Hs) and the peak periods (T) of the waves from 1997 to 01–29 to 2019-05-31; (c) Statistic
range of Strandline Altitude (SA); Equivalence Mean Test for pellets: (d) altitude (m), (e) slope, and (f) aspect in Enseada beach (LEL = Lower Equivalence Limit, UEL
= Upper Equivalence Limit, CI = Confidence Interval).
Therefore, indicating a moderate beach profile with an intermediate
morphodynamic state (Ryan et al., 2014). In the same way, pellet
accumulation was also dominant on the beach portions with its face
oriented toward the same direction of the very high energy waves (storm
surge waves, around 188◦ ) significantly placed within the equivalence
interval between 157.5 and 202.5◦ (p = 0) (Fig. 5 – f).
As in Moreira et al. (2016a), in these transects (7 and 8), most of the
pellets were close to the scarp and face of the frontal dune (Fig. 6 - d).
Due to its lower density (compared to the sea seawater) microplastics
can suffer entrainment and dispersion by atmospheric drivers (Brahney
et al., 2020). So its distribution profile is influenced by wind and waves
(Thiel et al., 2013). In this way, the outlier pellets found above the very
high SA (Fig. 5 - d), trapped by grasses over the face of the frontal dunes
in a slope about 48◦ , suggest an aeolian transport increased by storms
windblown (>16 m/s) and extreme weather conditions (Alvarez-Zefer­
ino et al., 2020; Ryan et al., 2009). Otherwise, the low average altitudes
and the dissipative tendency of the areas adjacent to the transects 1, 9,
and 10 (Fig. 4 –b, and c) favor the beach washing during high tides, and
consequently, the pellet fluctuation back to the alongshore drift
currents.
The joint analysis of the indicators (Fig. 6 - a) showed that areas
around transects 1, 3, 9–10 had low (PSI ≤ 0.4) and very low pellet
deposition suitability (PSI ≤ 0.2) mainly due to low average altitudes (<
1.5 m) and slope (< 2◦ ). These factors, coupled with the absence of
6
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
frontal dunes, very small or without a backshore, and artificial struc­
tures over the beach face (boardwalk), favor the erosion processes
(Ferreira et al. 2014, 2019) and associated pellets during high tides.
Areas adjacent to transects 2 and 5–6 (Fig. 6 - a) have medium-high
suitability to pellet deposition (0.04 < PSI ≤ 0.8). Although these areas
have a backshore with sufficient altitude and slope for pellets deposi­
tion, they are not properly oriented towards the higher energy waves.
This is because the very high energy waves arrive at these portions of the
beach at a 45◦ angle, favoring carrying these pellets by alongshore drift
currents toward ENE.
It is important to identify the factors that influence microplastic
deposition on beaches, and the main local of its deposition (Ryberg
et al., 2019). The areas most suitable (very high) for pellet deposition (0.8
< PSI ≤ 1.0) were those adjacent to transects 7 and 8 (Fig. 6 - a), whose
combination of factors had the following characteristics: 1) surface
altitude higher than mean + 2σ of SA - areas marked by red dashed lines
(Fig. 6 - b) represents strandlines with the debris accumulation, close to
the scarp and face of the frontal dune (Fig. 6 – c, and d); 2) slope within
2-4◦ ; and, 3) Beach face aspect-oriented to the same direction to the very
high waves (SSE-SSW). Under this condition, the very high energy waves
arrive at the beach at a ± 90◦ angle, promoting a minimum transport,
favoring the maintenance of the beach system (de Andrade et al., 2019)
and consequently the pellets deposition. Similarly, Eriksen et al. (2014),
showed that the order of magnitude of beaches litter found was the
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
result of the slope, orientation, exposure, as well as the strength and
direction of the wind combination.
In the region marked as very high suitability for pellet deposition (red
area in Fig. 6 - a) 310 pellets were found along transects 7 and 8, with an
average of 4.8 pellets/m2. If we extrapolate this estimate to every area
marked as very high suitability, which is 10,665 m2, we can estimate an
incredibly high number of 51,192 pellets only in this sector of the beach
and only for this survey. However, these values are not high when
compared to Turner and Holmes (2011), that found more than 1,000
granules/m2 on the island of Malta (central Mediterranean).
In this way, the increased frequency of storm surge events on the São
Paulo coast due to climate change (Souza et al., 2019), can aggravate the
deposition of this pollutant on beaches near the Santos Port. So the
adequate management of the pellets’ supply chain is imperative to avoid
losses to the environment (Epa, 1992; Pereira 2014; GESAMP 2019).
Finally, understanding the microplastic sources, characteristics, and
factors (like beach topography, weather conditions, and others) that
contribute to the distribution, abundance, and burial of the plastic
pollution (Ryan et al., 2009) on beaches is crucial. However, da Costa
(2018) and Alvarez-Zeferino et al. (2020) highlight the need for sam­
pling method standardization, especially in beaches with high waste
accumulation/deposition. Given that, the rate of debris accumulation on
the beaches is sensitive to sampling interval and environmental factors
already described (Chubarenko et al., 2018; Critchell and Lambrechts,
2016; GESAMP, 2019; Krelling and Turra, 2019; Moreira et al., 2016a;
Moreira et al., 2016b; Ryan et al., 2009; Zhang, 2017). The proposed
method in this work brings up the altimetric data as result of all in­
teractions. The available information so far should help policy and de­
cision makers to pland better coastal management strategies (Avio et al.,
2017), so more adequate politics can be put into action.
4. Conclusions and suggestions
We present a new methodological approach capable of pointing out
the most favorable locations for the deposition of plastic pellets on
beaches through an index and with geodetic precision. For the Enseada
beach, the joint analysis of the altimetric, geomorphometric and
meteoceanographic aspects showed that the beach areas with altitudes
higher than those calculated for the strandline (>2.06 m), slope ~ 3◦
and with the face facing the same direction of the higher energy waves
7
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
Fig. 6. (a) Categories of beach plastic pel­
lets suitability index: very low (0.0–0.2); low
(0.2–0.4); medium (0.4–0.6); high (0.6–0.8);
and, very high (0.8–1.0).(b) The red dashed
lines near transect 7, in the remotely piloted
aircraft image, marks the very high strand­
lines altitudecalculated (respectively the
scarp and face of the frontal dune), where
the number of pellets was higher. (c) The red
dashed lines within 1 m × 1 m area marks
debris line where the pellets were found.(d)
Plastic pellets mixed with debris. (For
interpretation of the references to color in
this figure legend, the reader is referred to
the Web version of this article.)
(157.5–202.5◦ ) were more susceptible to pellet deposition. This in­
dicates that the accumulation and distribution of this pollutant on the
beach is controlled not only by the source proximity and its physical
characteristics but mainly by extreme or storm events. Besides, the work
also guides future research surveys optimizing time and avoiding sub­
samples, as well as a proper beach cleaning. One of the main advantages
of this proposed method is the geodetic reference. Due to its quality
(fixed, univocal, and relatively stable on time), the information collected
can be compared with other beaches anywhere on the planet — thus
contributing to a standardization of the survey methodology.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank the Postgraduate Program in Mineral Resources
and Hydrogeology at Institute of Geosciences of the University of São
Paulo (IGc-USP), the Spatial Analysis And Modelling Lab (SPAMLab -
https://spamlab.github.io/) at the Institute of Energy and Environment
of the University of São Paulo (IEE-USP), the Geoprocessing Laboratory
of the Master Program in Geoenvironmental Analysis of the Guarulhos
University (MAG-UNG), and the Coordination for the Improvement of
Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), grant #88887.342939/2019-00.
Carlos H. Grohmann and Eduardo Siegle are research fellows of Brazil’s
National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq),
grants #304413/2018-6 (CHG), #423481/2018-5 (CHG) and
#307741/2018-4 (ES). Acknowledgments are extended to the Editor-in-
Chief, Associate Editor and to the anonymous reviewers.
References
ABIPLAST, 2018. Indústria Brasileira de Transformação e Reciclagem de Material
Plástico - Perfil 2017. Abiplast 45.
Alexandrakis, G., Poulos, S.E., 2014. An holistic approach to beach erosion vulnerability
assessment. Sci. Rep. 4, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep06078.
Álvarez-Hernández, C., Cairós, C., López-Darias, J., Mazzetti, E., Hernández-Sánchez, C.,
González-Sálamo, J., Hernández-Borges, J., 2019. Microplastic debris in beaches of
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
tenerife (canary islands, Spain). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 146, 26–32. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.05.064.
Alvarez-Zeferino, J.C., Ojeda-Benítez, S., Cruz-Salas, A.A., Martínez-Salvador, C.,
Vázquez-Morillas, A., 2020. Microplastics in Mexican beaches. Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 155, 104633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104633.
Andrady, A.L., 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62,
1596–1605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.05.030.
Antunes, J.C., Frias, J.G.L., Micaelo, A.C., Sobral, P., 2013. Resin pellets from beaches of
the Portuguese coast and adsorbed persistent organic pollutants. Estuar. Coast Shelf
Sci. 130, 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2013.06.016.
Arias-Andres, M., Rojas-Jimenez, K., Grossart, H.P., 2019. Collateral effects of
microplastic pollution on aquatic microorganisms: an ecological perspective. TrAC
Trends Anal. Chem. (Reference Ed.) 112, 234–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trac.2018.11.041.
Avio, C.G., Gorbi, S., Milan, M., Benedetti, M., Fattorini, D., D’Errico, G., Pauletto, M.,
Bargelloni, L., Regoli, F., 2015. Pollutants bioavailability and toxicological risk from
microplastics to marine mussels. Environ. Pollut. 198, 211–222. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.envpol.2014.12.021.
Avio, C.G., Gorbi, S., Regoli, F., 2017. Plastics and microplastics in the oceans: from
emerging pollutants to emerged threat. Mar. Environ. Res. 128, 2–11. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2016.05.012.
Bakir, A., Rowland, S.J., Thompson, R.C., 2014. Enhanced desorption of persistent
organic pollutants from microplastics under simulated physiological conditions.
Environ. Pollut. 185, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.10.007.
Barnes, D.K.A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C., Barlaz, M., 2009. Accumulation and
fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol.
Sci. 364, 1985–1998. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0205.
Berger, R.L., Hsu, J.C., 1996. Bioequivalence trials, intersectio–union tests and
equivalence confidence sets. Stat. Sci. 11, 283–302. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/
1032280304.
Bergmann, M., Gutow, L., Klages, M., 2015. Marine anthropogenic litter. Mar.
Anthropog. Litter 1–447. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3.
Brahney, J., Hallerud, M., Heim, E., Hahnenberger, M., Sukumaran, S., 2020. Plastic rain
in protected areas of the United States. Science 368, 1257–1260. https://doi.org/
10.1126/science.aaz5819 (80-.).
Brighty, G.C., Jones, D., Ruxton, J., 2015. High-level science review for ‘ A plastic oceans
’ film. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233715572744.
Burrough, Peter A., McDonnell, R.A., Lloyd, C.D., 1998. Principles of Geographical
Information Systems. Oxford University Press, New York.
Camargo, R. de, Harari, J., 1994. Modelagem numérica de ressacas na plataforma sudeste
do Brasil a partir de cartas sinóticas de pressão atmosférica na superfície. Bol. Inst.
Ocean 42 (1), 19–34. https://www.scielo.br/pdf/bioce/v42n1-2/v42n1-2a02.pdf.
Campos, R.M., Camargo, R. De, Harari, J., 2010. Caracterização de eventos extremos do
nível do mar em Santos e sua correspondência com as reanálises do modelo do NCEP
no sudoeste do Atlântico Sul. Rev. Bras. Meteorol. 25 (2), 175–184. https://www.
scielo.br/pdf/rbmet/v25n2/a03v25n2.pdf.
Caruso, G., 2019. Microplastics as vectors of contaminants. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 146,
921–924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.07.052.
Choy, C.A., Robison, B.H., Gagne, T.O., Erwin, B., Firl, E., Halden, R.U., Hamilton, J.A.,
Katija, K., Lisin, S.E., Rolsky, C., Van Houtan, S.K., 2019. The vertical distribution
and biological transport of marine microplastics across the epipelagic and
mesopelagic water column. Sci. Rep. 9, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-
44117-2.
Chubarenko, I.P., Esiukova, E.E., Bagaev, A.V., Bagaeva, M.A., Grave, A.N., 2018. Three-
dimensional distribution of anthropogenic microparticles in the body of sandy
beaches. Sci. Total Environ. 628–629, 1340–1351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2018.02.167.
Costa, M.F., Ivar Do Sul, J.A., Silva-Cavalcanti, J.S., Araújo, M.C.B., Spengler, Â.,
Tourinho, P.S., 2010. On the importance of size of plastic fragments and pellets on
the strandline: a snapshot of a Brazilian beach. Environ. Monit. Assess. 168,
299–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-009-1113-4.
Critchell, K., Lambrechts, J., 2016. Modelling accumulation of marine plastics in the
coastal zone; what are the dominant physical processes? Estuar. Coast Shelf Sci. 171,
111–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2016.01.036.
da Costa, J.P., 2018. Micro- and nanoplastics in the environment: research and
policymaking. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Heal. 1, 12–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
coesh.2017.11.002.
de Andrade, T.S., de Oliveira Sousa, Paulo Henrique Gomes, Siegle, E., 2019.
Vulnerability to beach erosion based on a coastal processes approach. Appl. Geogr.
102, 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.11.003.
Dong, C.-D., Chen, C.-W., Chen, Y.-C., Chen, H.-H., Lee, J.-S., Lin, C.-H., 2020.
Polystyrene microplastic particles: in vitro pulmonary toxicity assessment. J. Hazard
Mater. 385, 121575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121575.
Epa, 1992. Plastic Pellets in the Aquatic Environment: Sources and Recommendations,
vol. 56. United States Environ. Prot. Agency. EPA.842-S-93-001.
Eriksen, M., Lebreton, L.C.M., Carson, H.S., Thiel, M., Moore, C.J., Borerro, J.C.,
Galgani, F., Ryan, P.G., Reisser, J., 2014. Plastic pollution in the world’s oceans:
more than 5 trillion plastic pieces weighing over 250,000 tons afloat at sea. PLoS
One 9, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111913.
Falcão, P.M., 2015. Panorama of the Coastal Pollution through Plastic Pellets in Beaches
of SP (Brazil): a Contribution to Coastal Geography Studies. University of São Paulo.
https://doi.org/10.11606/T.8.2016.tde-12012016-150123.
Fernandino, G., Elliff, C.I., Silva, I.R., Bittencourtc, A.C.S.P., 2015. How many pellets are
too many? the pellet pollution index as a tool to assess beach pollution by plastic
resin pellets in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. J. Integr. Coast. Zo. Manag. 15, 325–332.
https://doi.org/10.5894/rgci566.
8
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
Ferreira, A.T., Amaro, V.E., Santos, M.S.T., 2014. Geodésia aplicada à integração de
dados topográficos E batimétricos na caracterização de SUPERFÍ•CIES de praia. Rev.
Bras. Cartogr. 66.
Ferreira, A.T. da S., Santos, M.S.T., Fernandes, L.D.R., Ribeiro, M.C.H., 2016.
Mapeamento geomorfológico de detalhe para delimitação de áreas de preservação
permanente (app) de zonas costeiras em atendimento ao cadastro ambiental rural
(car). Rev. Bras. Geomorfol. 17 https://doi.org/10.20502/rbg.v17i4.671.
Ferreira, A.T. da S., Amaro, V.E., Santos, M.S.T., Marcelino, A.M.T., Almeida, L.R. de,
Ribeiro, M.C.H., 2019. Método de identificação de áreas de inundação costeira por
sobrelevação do nível do mar a eventos extremos, em escala local. In: Sistema de
Modelagem Costeira Do Brasil: Estudos de Caso. UFSC, p. 411.
Fisner, M., Taniguchi, S., Majer, A.P., Bícego, M.C., Turra, A., 2013a. Concentration and
composition of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in plastic pellets:
implications for small-scale diagnostic and environmental monitoring. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 76, 349–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.09.045.
Fisner, M., Taniguchi, S., Moreira, F., Bícego, M.C., Turra, A., 2013b. Polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs) in plastic pellets: variability in the concentration and
composition at different sediment depths in a sandy beach. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 70,
219–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.03.008.
Fossi, M.C., Panti, C., Guerranti, C., Coppola, D., Giannetti, M., Marsili, L., Minutoli, R.,
2012. Are baleen whales exposed to the threat of microplastics? A case study of the
Mediterranean fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64, 2374–2379.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.08.013.
Frias, J.P.G.L., Otero, V., Sobral, P., 2014. Evidence of microplastics in samples of
zooplankton from Portuguese coastal waters. Mar. Environ. Res. 95, 89–95. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2014.01.001.
GESAMP, 2019. Guidelines for the Monitoring and Assessment of Plastic Litter in the
Ocean. GESAMP Reports & Studies.
Gorman, D., Moreira, F.T., Turra, A., Fontenelle, F.R., Combi, T., Bícego, M.C., de Castro
Martins, C., 2019. Organic contamination of beached plastic pellets in the South
Atlantic: risk assessments can benefit by considering spatial gradients. Chemosphere
223, 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.02.094.
Gregory, M.R., 2009. Environmental implications of plastic debris in marine settings-
entanglement, ingestion, smothering, hangers-on, hitch-hiking and alien invasions.
Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 364, 2013–2025. https://doi.org/10.1098/
rstb.2008.0265.
Heo, N.W., Hong, S.H., Han, G.M., Hong, S., Lee, J., Song, Y.K., Jang, M., Shim, W.J.,
2013. Distribution of small plastic debris in cross-section and high strandline on
Heungnam beach, South Korea. Ocean Sci. J. 48, 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12601-013-0019-9.
Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Gutow, L., Thompson, R.C., Thiel, M., 2012. Microplastics in the marine
environment: a review of the methods used for identification and quantification.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 3060–3075. https://doi.org/10.1021/es2031505.
Hsu, J.C., Hwang, J.T.G., Liu, H., Ruberg, S.J., 1994. Confidence Intervals Associated
with Tests for Bioequivalence Published by. Oxford University Press, pp. 103–114 on
behalf of Biometrika Trust Stable URL. http://www.jstor.com/stable/2337054.
REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article : refe 81.
Ivar do Sul, J.A., Spengler, Â., Costa, M.F., 2009. Here, there and everywhere. Small
plastic fragments and pellets on beaches of Fernando de Noronha (Equatorial
Western Atlantic). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 58, 1236–1238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2009.05.004.
Jambeck, J.R., Ji, Q., Zhang, Y.-G., Liu, D., Grossnickle, D.M., Luo, Z.-X., 2015. Plastic
waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 347, 764–768. https://doi.org/
10.1126/science.1260879 (80-.).
Kaiser, D., Kowalski, N., Waniek, J.J., 2017. Effects of biofouling on the sinking behavior
of microplastics. Environ. Res. Lett. 12 https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa8e8b.
Kane, I.A., Clare, M.A., Miramontes, E., Wogelius, R., Rothwell, J.J., Garreau, P., Pohl, F.,
2020. Seafloor microplastic hotspots controlle by deep-sea circulation. Science 368,
1140–1145. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba5899 (80-.).
Keswani, A., Oliver, D.M., Gutierrez, T., Quilliam, R.S., 2016. Microbial hitchhikers on
marine plastic debris: human exposure risks at bathing waters and beach
environments. Mar. Environ. Res. 118, 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marenvres.2016.04.006.
Kim, I.S., Chae, D.H., Kim, S.K., Choi, S.B., Woo, S.B., 2015. Factors influencing the
spatial variation of microplastics on high-tidal coastal beaches in korea. Arch.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 69, 299–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-015-0155-
6.
Klein, A.H.F., 1997. Um método indireto para a determinação do estágio morfodinâmico
de praias arenosas. In: VI Congresso Da Associação Brasileira de Estudos Do
Quaternário. Curitiba, pp. 76–78.
Krause, S., Molari, M., Gorb, E.V., Gorb, S.N., Kossel, E., Haeckel, M., 2020. Persistence
of plastic debris and its colonization by bacterial communities after two decades on
the abyssal seafloor. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-
66361-7.
Krelling, A.P., Turra, A., 2019. Influence of oceanographic and meteorological events on
the quantity and quality of marine debris along an estuarine gradient. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 139, 282–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.12.049.
Kuo, F.J., Huang, H.W., 2014. Strategy for mitigation of marine debris: analysis of
sources and composition of marine debris in northern Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 83,
70–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.04.019.
Lavers, J.L., Bond, A.L., 2017. Exceptional and rapid accumulation of anthropogenic
debris on one of the world’s most remote and pristine islands. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 114, 6052–6055. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1619818114.
Law, K.L., Morét-Ferguson, S.E., Goodwin, D.S., Zettler, E.R., Deforce, E., Kukulka, T.,
Proskurowski, G., 2014. Distribution of surface plastic debris in the eastern pacific
A.T.S. Ferreira et al.
ocean from an 11-year data set. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 4732–4738. https://doi.
org/10.1021/es4053076.
Lebreton, L.C.M., Greer, S.D., Borrero, J.C., 2012. Numerical modelling of floating debris
in the world’s oceans. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 64, 653–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2011.10.027.
Leite, A.S., Santos, L.L., Costa, Y., Hatje, V., 2014. Influence of proximity to an urban
center in the pattern of contamination by marine debris. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 81,
242–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.01.032.
Manzano, A., 2009. Distribuição, taxa de entrada, composição química e identificação de
fontes de grânulos plásticos na Enseada de Santos, p. 122. SP, Brasil.
Martellini, T., Guerranti, C., Scopetani, C., Ugolini, A., Chelazzi, D., Cincinelli, A., 2018.
A snapshot of microplastics in the coastal areas of the Mediterranean Sea. TrAC
Trends Anal. Chem. (Reference Ed.) 109, 173–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trac.2018.09.028.
Martinelli Filho, J.E., Monteiro, R.C.P., 2019. Widespread microplastics distribution at
an Amazon macrotidal sandy beach. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 145, 219–223. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.05.049.
Mato, Y., Isobe, T., Takada, H., Kanehiro, H., Ohtake, C., Kaminuma, T., 2001. Plastic
resin pellets as a transport medium for toxic chemicals in the marine environment.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 35, 318–324. https://doi.org/10.1021/es0010498.
Monico, F.G.J., Póz, P.D.A., Galo, M., Dos Santos, C.M., Oliveira, L.D.C., 2009. Acurácia
E precisão: REVENDO OS CONCEITOS DE FORMA ACURADA Accuracy and
Precision: reviewing the concepts by means of an accurate procedure. Bol. Ciências
Geodésicas 15, 469–483. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1815.8086.
Morais, L.M.S., Sarti, F., Chelazzi, D., Cincinelli, A., Giarrizzo, T., Martinelli Filho, J.E.,
2020. The sea anemone Bunodosoma cangicum as a potential biomonitor for
microplastics contamination on the Brazilian Amazon coast. Environ. Pollut. 265,
114817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114817.
Moreira, F.T., Balthazar-Silva, D., Barbosa, L., Turra, A., 2016a. Revealing accumulation
zones of plastic pellets in sandy beaches. Environ. Pollut. 218, 313–321. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.07.006.
Moreira, F.T., Prantoni, A.L., Martini, B., de Abreu, M.A., Stoiev, S.B., Turra, A., 2016b.
Small-scale temporal and spatial variability in the abundance of plastic pellets on
sandy beaches: methodological considerations for estimating the input of
microplastics. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 102, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2015.11.051.
Nelms, S.E., Galloway, T.S., Godley, B.J., Jarvis, D.S., Lindeque, P.K., 2018. Investigating
microplastic trophic transfer in marine top predators. Environ. Pollut. 238,
999–1007. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.02.016.
NOAA, 2019. What is storm surge? [WWW Document]. URL. https://oceanservice.noaa.
gov/facts/stormsurge-stormtide.html.
Nunes, M., 2015. O novo modelo de ondulação geoidal do Brasil-MAPGEO2015a.d….
Pereira, F.C., 2014. Microplásticos no ambiente marinho: mapeamento de fontes e
identificação de mecanismos de gestão para minimização da perda de pellets
plásticos.
Pham, C.K., Ramirez-Llodra, E., Alt, C.H.S., Amaro, T., Bergmann, M., Canals, M.,
Company, J.B., Davies, J., Duineveld, G., Galgani, F., Howell, K.L., Huvenne, V.A.I.,
Isidro, E., Jones, D.O.B., Lastras, G., Morato, T., Gomes-Pereira, J.N., Purser, A.,
Stewart, H., Tojeira, I., Tubau, X., Van Rooij, D., Tyler, P.A., 2014. Marine litter
distribution and density in European seas, from the shelves to deep basins. PLoS One
9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095839.
Pianca, C., Mazzini, P.L.F., Siegle, E., 2010. Brazilian offshore wave climate based on
NWW3 reanalysis. Braz. J. Oceanogr. 58 (1), 53–70. https://www.scielo.br
/pdf/bjoce/v58n1/a06v58n1.pdf.
Pinheiro, L.M., Monteiro, R.C.P., Ivar do Sul, J.A., Costa, M.F., 2019. Do beachrocks
affect microplastic deposition on the strandline of sandy beaches? Mar. Pollut. Bull.
141, 569–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.010.
PlasticsEurope, 2018. Plastics – the Facts. Plast. – Facts 2018, p. 38.
Prata, J.C., da Costa, J.P., Lopes, I., Duarte, A.C., Rocha-Santos, T., 2020. Environmental
exposure to microplastics: an overview on possible human health effects. Sci. Total
Environ. 702, 134455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134455.
Prokić, M.D., Radovanović, T.B., Gavrić, J.P., Faggio, C., 2019. Ecotoxicological effects
of microplastics: examination of biomarkers, current state and future perspectives.
TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. (Reference Ed.) 111, 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
trac.2018.12.001.
Rech, S., Macaya-Caquilpán, V., Pantoja, J.F., Rivadeneira, M.M., Jofre Madariaga, D.,
Thiel, M., 2014. Rivers as a source of marine litter - a study from the SE Pacific. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 82, 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.03.019.
Revel, M., Châtel, A., Mouneyrac, C., 2018. Micro(nano)plastics: a threat to human
health? Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Heal. 1, 17–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
coesh.2017.10.003.
Rezaei, M., Riksen, M.J.P.M., Sirjani, E., Sameni, A., Geissen, V., 2019. Wind erosion as a
driver for transport of light density microplastics. Sci. Total Environ. 669, 273–281.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.382.
Rodrigues, A., Oliver, D.M., McCarron, A., Quilliam, R.S., 2019. Colonisation of plastic
pellets (nurdles) by E. coli at public bathing beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 139,
376–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.011.
Royer, S.-J., Ferrón, S., Wilson, S.T., Karl, D.M., 2018. Production of methane and
ethylene from plastic in the environment. PLoS One 13, e0200574. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0200574.
Ryan, P.G., Moore, C.J., Van Franeker, J.A., Moloney, C.L., 2009. Monitoring the
abundance of plastic debris in the marine environment. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol.
Sci. 364, 1999–2012. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0207.
Ryan, P.G., Lamprecht, A., Swanepoel, D., Moloney, C.L., 2014. The effect of fine-scale
sampling frequency on estimates of beach litter accumulation. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 88,
249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.08.036.
Marine Environmental Research 163 (2021) 105219
Ryberg, M.W., Hauschild, M.Z., Wang, F., Averous-Monnery, S., Laurent, A., 2019.
Global environmental losses of plastics across their value chains. Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 151, 104459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104459.
Sasaki, T.O., 1980. A heuristic model of the nearshore zone. In: 2nd Symp. On Coastal
Ocean Management. ASCE, pp. 3197–3209.
Shen, M., Zhu, Y., Zhang, Y., Zeng, G., Wen, X., Yi, H., Ye, S., Ren, X., Song, B., 2019.
Micro(nano)plastics: unignorable vectors for organisms. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 139,
328–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.004.
Silva, M.M., Maldonado, G.C., Castro, R.O., de Sá Felizardo, J., Cardoso, R.P., Anjos, R.M.
dos, Araújo, F.V. de, 2019. Dispersal of potentially pathogenic bacteria by plastic
debris in Guanabara Bay, RJ, Brazil. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 141, 561–568. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.02.064.
SIRGAS2000, 2000. Geocentric Reference System for the Americas. http://www.sirgas.
org.
Smith, M.J. de, Goodchild, M.F., Longley, P.A., 2018a. Geospatial Analysis 6th Edition,
2018 - de Smith, Goodchild, Longley and Colleagues.
Smith, M., Love, D.C., Rochman, C.M., Neff, R.A., 2018b. Microplastics in seafood and
the implications for human health. Curr. Environ. Heal. Rep. 5, 375–386. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s40572-018-0206-z.
Souza, C.R. de G., Souza, A.P., Harari, J., 2019. In: Nunes, L.H., Greco, R., Marengo, J.A.
(Eds.), Long Term Analysis of Meteorological-Oceanographic Extreme Events for the
Baixada Santista Region BT - Climate Change in Santos Brazil: Projections, Impacts
and Adaptation Options. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 97–134.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96535-2_6.
Stein, L.P., Siegle, E., 2019. Santos beach morphodynamics under high-energy
conditions. Rev. Bras. Geomorfol. 20, 445–456. https://doi.org/10.20502/rbg.
v20i3.1419.
Stein, L.P., Siegle, E., 2020. Overtopping events on seawall-backed beaches: Santos Bay,
SP, Brazil. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 40, 101492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rsma.2020.101492.
Stockdon, H.F., Holman, R.A., Howd, P.A., Sallenger Jr., A.H., 2006. Empirical
parameterization of setup, swash, and runup. Coast. Eng. 53, 573–588. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2005.12.005.
Teuten, E.L., Saquing, J.M., Knappe, D.R.U., Barlaz, M.A., Jonsson, S., Björn, A.,
Rowland, S.J., Thompson, R.C., Galloway, T.S., Yamashita, R., Ochi, D.,
Watanuki, Y., Moore, C., Viet, P.H., Tana, T.S., Prudente, M., Boonyatumanond, R.,
Zakaria, M.P., Akkhavong, K., Ogata, Y., Hirai, H., Iwasa, S., Mizukawa, K.,
Hagino, Y., Imamura, A., Saha, M., Takada, H., 2009. Transport and release of
chemicals from plastics to the environment and to wildlife. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B
Biol. Sci. 364, 2027–2045. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0284.
Thiel, M., Hinojosa, I.A., Miranda, L., Pantoja, J.F., Rivadeneira, M.M., Vásquez, N.,
2013. Anthropogenic marine debris in the coastal environment: a multi-year
comparison between coastal waters and local shores. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 71, 307–316.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.01.005.
Thompson, R.C., Swan, S.H., Moore, C.J., Vom Saal, F.S., 2009. Our plastic age. Philos.
Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 364, 1973–1976. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0054.
Tolman, H., Balasubramaniyan, B., Burroughs, L., Chalikov, D., Chao, Y., Chen, H.,
Gerald, V., 2002. Development and implementation of wind-generated ocean surface
wave modelsat NCEP. Weather Forecast. 17, 311–333. https://doi.org/10.1175/
1520-0434(2002)017<0311:DAIOWG>2.0.CO;2. Weather Forecast.
Turner, A., Holmes, L., 2011. Occurrence, distribution and characteristics of beached
plastic production pellets on the island of Malta (central Mediterranean). Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 62, 377–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2010.09.027.
Turra, A., Manzano, A.B., Dias, R.J.S., Mahiques, M.M., Barbosa, L., Balthazar-Silva, D.,
Moreira, F.T., 2014. Three-dimensional distribution of plastic pellets in sandy
beaches: shifting paradigms. Sci. Rep. 4, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep04435.
Van Cauwenberghe, L., Vanreusel, A., Mees, J., Janssen, C.R., 2013. Microplastic
pollution in deep-sea sediments. Environ. Pollut. 182, 495–499. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.envpol.2013.08.013.
Van Cauwenberghe, L., Devriese, L., Galgani, F., Robbens, J., Janssen, C.R., 2015.
Microplastics in sediments: a review of techniques, occurrence and effects. Mar.
Environ. Res. 111, 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marenvres.2015.06.007.
Van Sebille, E., 2015. The oceans’ accumulating plastic garbage. Phys. Today 68, 60–61.
https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.2697.
Vethaak, A.D., Leslie, H.A., 2016. Plastic debris is a human health issue. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 50, 6825–6826. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b02569.
Wang, Q., Bai, J., Ning, B., Fan, L., Sun, T., Fang, Y., Wu, J., Li, S., Duan, C., Zhang, Y.,
Liang, J., Gao, Z., 2020. Effects of bisphenol A and nanoscale and microscale
polystyrene plastic exposure on particle uptake and toxicity in human Caco-2 cells.
Chemosphere 254, 126788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126788.
Wright, S.L., Thompson, R.C., Galloway, T.S., 2013. The physical impacts of
microplastics on marine organisms: a review. Environ. Pollut. 178, 483–492. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2013.02.031.
Young, A.M., Elliott, J.A., 2016. Characterization of microplastic and mesoplastic debris
in sediments from kamilo beach and kahuku beach. Hawai’i. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 113,
477–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.11.009.
Young, A., Elliott, J.A., 2018. Characterization of Microplastic and Mesoplastic Debris in
Sediments from Kamilo Beach and Kahuku Beach. Hawai’i Risk of Zoonotic Disease
from a Wildlife Reservoir View project. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2016.11.009.
Zettler, E.R., Mincer, T.J., Amaral-Zettler, L.A., 2013. Life in the “plastisphere”:
microbial communities on plastic marine debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47,
7137–7146. https://doi.org/10.1021/es401288x.
Zhang, H., 2017. Transport of microplastics in coastal seas. Estuar. Coast Shelf Sci. 199,
74–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2017.09.032.