Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Pollution Bulletin

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul

Marine litter on a highly urbanized beach at Southeast Brazil: A

contribution to the development of litter monitoring programs
Victor V. Ribeiro a, Mariana A.S. Pinto a, Raul K.B. Mesquita a, Lucas Buruaem Moreira a,
Mônica F. Costa b, Ítalo Braga Castro a, *
a
Instituto do Mar, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Santos, Brazil
b
Departamento de Oceanografia, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil

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

Keywords: Seasonal distribution of Marine Litter (ML) on Santos beaches was assessed using a citizen science strategy.
Plastic Plastics and cigarette butts (CB) were the dominant items in all sampling campaigns. Seasonal distribution did
Cigarette butts not result in significant differences for most items. Plastic and CB amounts were high in summer compared to
Pollution
autumn. For all sampled sites the presence of beach users influenced ML densities. However, results showed that
Citizen science
some sites presented an additional influence of local hydrodynamic. Moderate amounts of hazardous items
Waste
including metal, glass, CB, sanitary waste and plastic tubes used to pack and market illicit drugs represented
between 20.8 and 31% of all ML over the seasons. The beaches of Santos were classified as dirty in autumn and
spring and as extremely dirty in winter and summer. These findings can serve as a baseline to support mitigating
actions by public authorities and start monitoring programs of ML not only in Santos but also in other urbanized
beaches.

1. Introduction Land-based activities have been accounted for 80% of ML discharges

Marine Litter (ML) is understood as all manufactured solid materials
discarded or abandoned that reach marine and coastal environment
through waterways of domestic and industrial outfalls (CPPS, 2007;
National Academy of Sciences, 1975; UNEP, 2009). Urban density near
the coast had a worldwide increase during the last decades. Hence, the
anthropogenic pressures over such zones have led to constant discharges
of different residues (Cabral et al., 2019). The degradation of landscapes
by litter is an issue that have negatively affected economic activities,
including tourism (Lo et al., 2020). In addition, considering that
different types of hazardous materials as plastics, glass, ceramics,
metals, textiles and wood compose the marine litter, these residues are
also closely related to marine and coastal pollution (Galgani et al.,
2019). Indeed, recent studies pointed out deleterious effects over
different levels of biological organization, from biochemical damage to
changes in the composition of natural communities (Henderson and
Green, 2020; Tutman et al., 2017). Therefore, ML is one of the most
troubling environmental issues of our time that is already affecting every
marine environment around the world, even in remotest places (Dunlop
et al., 2020).
(Hartley et al., 2018). The mismanagement of garbage/waste is the main
source of this contamination, that are originate from household, in­
dustrial and local businesses (Thiel et al., 2013). Further, recreational
and tourist activities held in beaches have been identified as major
sources of ML (Asensio-Montesinos et al., 2019). Consequently, the
occurrence of ML has been registered along the shorelines, surface
sediments, sea floor, water column and associated to marine organisms.
In addition, the spatial distribution of such residues is influenced by its
composition, buoyancy, size and shape, combined with action of winds,
biofouling, currents, wave action and other factors (Addamo et al.,
2018). From a seasonal perspective, ML occurrence is often related to
tourist activities (Campana et al., 2018), mostly during summer (Asen­
sio-Montesinos et al., 2019). However, some studies showed no signifi­
cant differences among seasons due the influence of factors such as
public cleaning or transport by environmental processes (Terzi and
Seyhan, 2017a; Williams et al., 2017).
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have played an essential
role in global garbage monitoring, and reports issued by such groups are
a major source of information regarding this matter (Addamo et al.,
2018; Campbell et al., 2019). Citizen science programs organized by

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ibcastro@unifesp.br (Í.B. Castro).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.111978
Received 28 October 2020; Received in revised form 28 November 2020; Accepted 3 January 2021
0025-326X/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V.V. Ribeiro et al.
NGOs often recruit local communities and other stakeholders to collect,
analyze and report data on ML occurrence from local to global scale.
Campbell et al. (2019) also stated that such activities have contributed
to raise environmental awareness, identification of sources and in the
removal of tons of ML from coastal areas. Furthermore, the imple­
mentation of public policies were based on data analysis generated by
such organizations (Richards and Heard, 2005). Nowadays there are
several NGOs dedicated to combat and reduce ML in global scale. In
developing countries, however, similar actions have been carried out in
local scenarios (Becherucci et al., 2017; Ivar do Sul and Costa, 2007).
In Brazil, some studies allowed the identification and quantification
of ML in different beaches along the coast (Andrades et al., 2020; Araújo
et al., 2018; Corraini et al., 2018; Fernandino et al., 2015a, 2015b; Leite
et al., 2014; Machado and Fillmann, 2010; Marin et al., 2019; Santos
et al., 2020; Silva et al., 2018; Suciu et al., 2017). However, in the
central portion of São Paulo coast, which presents one of the highest
urban density in Brazil (1494 hab./km2), no studies assessing spatial or
seasonal distribution of urban ML were done so far. Additionally, the
metropolitan region of Santos is affected by the activities of petro­
chemical, steel and fertilizer industries at Cubatão municipally and also
the largest port complex in Latin America, located at the estuarine sys­
tem (Begliomini et al., 2017; Pusceddu et al., 2019). Thus, the region is a
well-known case of complex environmental impacts caused by multiple
anthropogenic activities.
Besides the industrial and port activities, Santos is also a tourist city,
receiving a floating population estimated at 1.5 million people during
the summer, many of which make recreational use of the beaches
(Lescreck et al., 2016). This contingent generates jobs and income for
local residents while enhancing the costs of public cleaning services.
Thus, based in recent studies reporting the prevalence of ML in highly
urbanized beaches (Leite et al., 2014), we consider that ML assessments
of these areas can provide an essential contribution to the development
of worldwide marine litter monitoring programs. Considering this sce­
nario, the main objective of this study is to evaluate the seasonality
distribution of ML on Santos beaches, using citizen science strategies
Fig. 1. Location of transects defined for seasonal ML monitoring on Santos beaches (a) and the beach screening approach using citizen scientists to collect sam­
ples (b).
2
Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978
and producing scientific diagnoses on its composition to assist the
decision-making process on waste management by the public
authorities.
2. Material and methods
Santos Estuarine System presents two estuarine channels draining
towards Santos bay (23◦ 58′ 36′′ S/46◦ 20′ 7′′ W). This bay receives
contaminant releases from industrial complexes, port terminals located
along the channels. In addition, the presence of a submarine sewage
outfall combined with urban occupation has been pointed out as rele­
vant sources of contaminants to Santos bay (Abreu et al., 2020). The
circulation inside the bay is strongly influenced by mixed tides, cold
fronts, intense rainfall regime and variations in sea level (Harari and
Camargo, 1998). Also, the bay presents a low hydrodynamics regime
being bordered by approximately 7 km of sandy beaches highly urban­
ized and presenting similar environmental features (Fig. 1). On the other
hand, seasonal conditions of coastal currents, waves, and tides influ­
encing the sand strip have been reported (Freire et al., 2018; Magini
et al., 2007).
The Instituto Mar Azul (IMA) is an NGO operating in Santos since
2015, using beach clean-ups as a tool for promoting environmental
awareness. In the present study the expertise of IMA was utilized for the
dissemination, recruitment and training of volunteers, covering the
sampling campaigns, separation and accountancy of ML collected. The
recruitment used a database already created by IMA during previous
clean-up campaigns. The attendees had from 8 to 70 years old and were
connected to private companies, schools, scouts’ groups and other
NGOs. After registering, a 1 h-long training workshop was performed
with the attendees, explaining the clean-up objectives and methodo­
logical procedures. Such workshops were always held during the week
before the sampling campaigns.
According to the methodology established by the European Com­
mission/OSPAR (Galgani et al., 2013), six sampling transects of 50 m
length were defined, distributed equidistantly along the range delimited
V.V. Ribeiro et al.
by the low tide (Fig. 1a). For this study, the transects were considered
sampling replicates for the seasonal analysis, but the individual results
were also discussed in terms of spatial distribution. Four campaigns
were carried out between the autumn of 2019 and the summer of 2020
aiming to investigate the seasonal distribution, composition, and
amounts of ML. The samplings were performed always on Saturdays,
between 9 and 12 am, by 20 citizen scientists at each transect, totaling
120 people per campaign. All manufactured or processed residues
collected were stored for analysis. The sampling area of transects were
calculated for each campaign based on distances between the upper
limit of the beaches and the waterline in that day (Fig. 1b).
After each sampling campaign, all collected items were separated
into categories adopted by the United Nations Environment Program in
collaboration with the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
(UNEP/IOC, 2009) to quantify solid waste in beach areas. These cate­
gories included items made up of unique materials, such as plastic,
styrofoam, metal, glass, paper, and manufactured wood. In addition,
residues with high incidence presenting a mixed composition were
classified into exclusive categories, including cigarette butts (Araújo and
Costa, 2019). Additionally, items with low occurrence were grouped
into a category assigned as “others” which included, tires, inner tubes,
compound toys, lighters, cutlery, shoes and clothing. After the separa­
tion by category, the materials were individually counted, and the data
obtained were recorded for statistical analysis. After data processing and
generation of the final diagnosis, all collected material were destined to
recycling programs or forwarded to the public cleaning system.
∑
For all individual litter categories, the densities ( items on transect/
2
total area of transect in m ) were calculated based in each sampling
campaign. The Clean-Coast Index (CCI) was obtained by season ac­
∑
cording to Alkalay et al. (2007), using the following equation: CCI = (
litter on transect/total area of transect) × K, where is the K (constant) =
20. Later, each season was categorized for cleanliness according to the
scale provided by Alkalay et al. (2007). In addition, the total of items
offering potential health risks were used to calculate the Hazardous
Items Index (HII). Such a group was formed by sharp blades, CB, med­
icine containers, condoms, safe-lock microcentrifuge plastics tubes used
to pack and market illicit drugs, and sanitary wastes. Then, HII consisted
ofthe total hazardous items per m2, considering the relation between
their occurrence and all residues collected by transecton a logarithmic
scale (log10) (Rangel-Buitrago et al., 2019a).
Data on ML collected in Santos were assessed using the non-
parametric permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMA­
NOVA), assuming a nonparametric distribution (Anderson et al., 2008).
For each category, significant differences of calculated densities among
sampling campaigns were tested through a one-way PERMANOVA
considering season as a fixed factor with 4 levels (autumn, winter,
spring, and summer). A resemblance matrix was constructed based on
the Euclidean distance, and pairwise comparisons were performed
following 4999 permutations of raw data (unrestricted permutation
method). After that, if existent, significant differences were reported (p
< 0.05). The results of total items were also analyzed by means of a
nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination to explore as­
sociations of litter categories, for investigation of its origin. First, a
matrix was constructed consisting of transects as samples and litter
categories as variables. Data were normalized by the subtract of means
and divide by its standard deviation. After that, a resemblance matrix
was constructed based on the Euclidean distance and a 2-d ordination
carried with the minimal stress calculated by the Kruskal’s method. Both
analyzes were performed using the software PRIMER® (version 6)
(Clarke and Gorley, 2006).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. ML composition
A total of 62,638 items distributed in ten categories were collected
3
Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978
during the four sampling campaigns. Plastic debris, polystyrene foam
(XPS), and cotton swabs were the most prevalent categories in all sea­
sons, with percentages ranging from 64.8–72.5% (Table 1). In fact, the
global average of plastic among ML in sandy beaches monitoring have
been estimated in 75% (Galgani et al., 2013; Šilc et al., 2018), ranging
between 61 and 87% in other assessments (Asensio-Montesinos et al.,
2020; Gjyli et al., 2020; Munari et al., 2016; Nachite et al., 2019; Nelms
et al., 2020; Sarafraz et al., 2016; Šilc et al., 2018; Terzi et al., 2020). In
studies performed in Portugal, Ionian sea, Italy and Australia, plastic
residues accounted for more than 93% of all items collected (Pieper
et al., 2019; Poeta et al., 2016; Prevenios et al., 2018; Wilson and Verlis,
2017). Plastic items are usually found in densities between 0.0 and 1.0
items/m2 (Zhou et al., 2011), but reached 3.8 items/m2 on the Black sea
coast (Aytan et al., 2019). It is important to highlight that such studies
reporting higher plastic amounts included CB among plastic debris.
However, CB are items composed by paper, ashes, tobacco, and the
cellulose acetate filter, being more appropriately classified as a separate
category (Araújo and Costa, 2019).
CB were the second most frequent item, accounting for 15.5% of all
waste collected during the winter and reaching 24.1% in the summer. It
is well documented that CB often compose percentages between <1.0
and 20% of ML on beaches (Hengstmann et al., 2017; Nelms et al., 2017;
Pasternak et al., 2017; Pieper et al., 2019; Rosevelt et al., 2013; Silva
et al., 2016; Smith et al., 2014; Suciu et al., 2017). However, recent
studies have reported values between 22.9 and 53.2% in Italy, Morocco,
Bulgaria, Chile, Hawaii and Argentina (Becherucci et al., 2017; Blickley
et al., 2016; Hidalgo-Ruz et al., 2018; Maziane et al., 2018; Munari et al.,
2016; Simeonova et al., 2017). The high abundance of CB and small
plastic fragments are possibly related to the inefficiency of the me­
chanical cleaning daily performed along Santos beaches as previously
reported by Ribeiro and Santos (2020), which assessed plastic pellets
distribution in the same area.
XPS was the third most prevalent material (8.5–10.5%). Around the
world, records reaching 8.2% of total ML were seen in a Chinese beach
with high beachgoers flow (Pervez et al., 2020). In addition, values up to
19.3% were recorded in beaches with access limited only to local in­
habitants in Turkish Coast (Terzi et al., 2020), and 41% in central Cal­
ifornia (Rosevelt et al., 2013). Often, the occurrence of XPS on beaches
has been associated with fishing gear, discarded or brought in by tides
and coastal currents (Gallo et al., 2018). However, in the present study,
most of XPS items were associated with take-away food, mostly cups and
plates.
Metal (2.4–5.9%), paper (2.6–6.2%), wood (0.8–2%), glass
(0.1–0.6%) and other residues (1.7–4.5%) presented a relative abun­
dance similar or slightly above to that observed by other studies
assessing ML occurrence on urban beaches (Leite et al., 2014). Such
categories usually have lower relative abundances, probably due to the
societal preference for plastics combined with its persistence in the
marine environment (Derraik, 2002).
Despite the increased amounts of ML (30% observed in summer), no
statistical differences (PERMANOVA, p > 0.05) were seen based on total
collected residues. In fact, ML densities seasonally distributed in Santos
beach presented high standard deviations (sd) among the replicates.
Likewise, regardless seasonal variations, no statistical differences
(PERMANOVA, p > 0.05) among individual densities of XPS, cotton
swabs, paper, wood, and others were observed (Fig. 2). On the other
hand, CB and plastic debris were less prevalent in autumn while higher
amounts of glass and metals were elevated in winter and summer,
respectively. Variations on standard deviations of ML amounts have
been reported by recent studies (García-Rivera et al., 2018; Schulz et al.,
2015). However, no marked seasonal trends have been demonstrated for
beaches located in remote (Ríos et al., 2018) or urban areas (Terzi and
Seyhan, 2017b). Thus, even considering a higher number of beach users
during the summer, the seasonal distribution of ML categories
throughout the year seems to be related to factors other than he number
of visitors.
V.V. Ribeiro et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978

Table 1
Marine litter items in percent (%) and number per square meter collected during seasonal sampling campaigns in Santos beaches.
Category Autumn Winter Spring Summer
2 2 2
% Items/m % Items/m % Items/m % Items/m2

Plastic (mix of polymers) 55.8 0.370 ± 0.174 60.2 0.522 ± 0.219 54.8 0.429 ± 0.378 55.2 0.681 ± 0.192
Polystyrene foam (XPS) 9.3 0.062 ± 0.056 10.6 0.092 ± 0.054 8.5 0.066 ± 0.043 9.6 0.129 ± 0.08
Cotton swabs 1.5 0.010 ± 0.004 1.7 0.015 ± 0.011 1.5 0.011 ± 0.007 1.1 0.016 ± 0.013
Total plastic debris 66.6 0.532 ± 0.078 72.5 0.629 ± 0.094 64.8 0.506 ± 0.144 65.9 0.826 ± 0.095
Cigarette butts 19.7 0.130 ± 0.052 15.5 0.135 ± 0.232 19.6 0.153 ± 0.079 24.1 0.283 ± 0.112
Metal 5.9 0.039 ± 0.020 2.4 0.021 ± 0.029 2.7 0.021 ± 0.013 4.8 0.051 ± 0.023
Paper 3.2 0.021 ± 0.021 4.6 0.040 ± 0.034 6.2 0.049 ± 0.027 2.6 0.030 ± 0.017
Wood 1.2 0.008 ± 0.005 1.5 0.013 ± 0.018 2.0 0.015 ± 0.009 0.8 0.001 ± 0.006
Glass 0.6 0.004 ± 0.003 0.4 0.004 ± 0.012 0.4 0.003 ± 0.008 0.1 0.008 ± 0.001
Others 3.1 0.020 ± 0.013 3.2 0.027 ± 0.019 4.5 0.035 ± 0.037 1.7 0.023 ± 0.011
Total 100 0.669 ± 0.292 100 1.005 ± 0.555 100 0.783 ± 0.567 100 1.224 ± 0.374

Fig. 2. Seasonal distribution (items/m2 - mean ± sd) of different marine litter categories in Santos beaches during autumn, winter and spring of 2019 and summer
of 2020.

High sedimentation rates have been reported in Santos bay near R3
and R4 (around +1.6 m/year) due to the influence of local oceano­
graphic parameters as coastal currents, waves and tides (Freire et al.,
2018; Magini et al., 2007). Around R3, the low energy refraction current
combined with estuarine flows from the Santos estuary (see map in
Fig. 1) transports residues from East to West (Harari and Camargo,
1998). This may explain some high ML amounts observed in R1, R2 and,
especially in R3. Sedimentation rates of +0.37 m/year have been re­
ported in R3, while negative values were found in R5 (− 2.0 m/year) and
R6 (− 3.4 m/year) (Freire et al., 2018). On the other hand, according to

4
V.V. Ribeiro et al.
Turra et al. (2014) the occurrence of plastic pellets in Santos beaches is
influenced by local hydro and aerodynamic behavior which affect
spatial distribution of these residues by mechanisms of transport and
deposition. This study found the highest amounts of plastic pellets
around R4, R5 and mostly in R6. A similar trend of ML distribution was
observed for pellets accumulation in the final portion of the beach arch
due to marine circulation (Turra et al., 2014). Thus, the distribution of
ML (especially floating debris) in Santos presented similar patterns to
plastic pellets considering the sedimentation rates reported. From a
seasonal perspective, in autumn Turra et al. (2014) observed a higer
density of pellets in R4 as noted in the present study at the same site and
season. Such findings suggest that at least part of the floating waste
collected in R1, R2 and R3 had an allochthonous origin.
The nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) based on litter
categories (regardless of the seasons), exhibited an excellent represen­
tation of reduced dimensions (stress of 0.05) indicating an association
between metals and CB (Fig. 3). Almost all metals collected during the
sampling campaigns were cans, lids and pull tabs of beverage cans,
which accounted for the total residues collected in autumn (5.9%),
winter (2.4%), spring (2.7%) and summer (4.8%). In fact, the concom­
itant consumption of beverages and cigarettes is a quite common habit
on Brazilian beaches. Moreover, according to Santos et al. (2005)
smokers usually leave these residues in the sand without concern. This is
a relevant issue, since metals and cigarette butts are garbage that pose
potential risks to both beach users and fauna, considering the possibility
of physical injuries, drowning, and release of toxic substances (Rangel-
Buitrago et al., 2019a). CB may contain thousands of hazardous chem­
icals including carcinogenic substances such polycyclic aromatic hy­
drocarbons and nitrosamines (Pack et al., 2019) that may be leached to
seawater. Another group of items include plastic debris, XPS and cotton
swabs, which were separated from the remaining categories (paper,
metal, glass, and others). In this case, this association corroborate the
hypothesis of allochthonous origin for plastic debris discussed above.
Results demonstrate the influence of local specificities regarding the
beach use along different sectors. For example, R5 and R6 are pre­
dominantly used for water sports as canoeing, kayak, and stand-up
paddle. Therefore, fewer bathers and food traders make use of this
sector. On the other hand, R1, R2, R3, and R4 have a number of facilities,
including tables and chairs used by commerce to serve beach visitors.
Thus, spatial and temporal distribution of ML along Santos beaches seem
to be under simultaneous influence of direct discard by the beach users
Fig. 3. Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plot of litter categories in Santos beaches.
5
Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978
(in number and distribution during different seasons) and water/wind
transport.
3.2. Clean-Coast Index (CCI)
CCI has been widely used to assess ML contamination worldwide. It
provides a suitable categorization with five cleanliness levels (very clean,
clean, moderate, dirty and extremely dirty) allowing more accurate com­
parisons (Alkalay et al., 2007). All studied sites were classified as dirty by
CCI in at least one season. In the summer, almost every site (except R5)
was extremely dirty; as well as R1 in winter, and R3 in spring and autumn.
The moderate classification occurred in R1 in winter, R2 and R4 in
autumn and R1 and R4 in spring (Fig. 4a). The average values per season
were classified as dirty in autumn (14.6) and spring (15.8) and extremely
dirty in winter (20.1) and summer (24.5) (Fig. 4b). It is important to
highlight that the sampling campaigns in R5 were not performed during
winter and spring due to low number of volunteers available during this
period.
Andrades et al. (2020) assessed CCI in 44 Brazilian beaches along 35
degrees of latitude. Considering the studied areas, highest CCI values
(extremely dirty) were seen in urbanized beaches located in different
regions of Brazil. Such report is in accordance with the pattern observed
in Santos, which has more than 430 thousand inhabitants. On the other
hand, most beaches categorized as dirty by Andrades et al. (2020) were
far from urban centers. This observation suggests that the efficiency of
public cleaning services combined with both water and wind transports,
and estuarine discharges influence ML densities on sandy beaches. The
amounts of residues recorded in Santos allow to classify its beaches
among the most contaminated by ML in Brazil. From a seasonal
perspective, few studies have considered four, or even two seasons in
their sample designs. Additionally, the few seasonal studies providing
CCI values have pointed out no clear correlation with seasons (Kuo and
Huang, 2014; Mokos et al., 2020). In most cases, this lack of correlation
has also been attributed to the occurrence of multiple ML sources
including touristic activities and beach cleaning associated to transport
and deposition.
3.3. Hazardous Items Index (HII)
In Latin America, sharp blades and toxic debris have been recently
categorized as hazardous litter items due to its inherent impacts on
V.V. Ribeiro et al. Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978

Fig. 4. Clean Coast Index (CCI) by sampled sites (a) and average per seasons (b) calculated for Santos beaches.

health. According to Rangel-Buitrago et al. (2019a), this category in­

cludes metal, glass, CB and sanitary waste leading to direct or indirect
risks to people (and fauna). In the present study, safe-lock micro­
centrifuge plastic tubes used to pack and market illicit drugs such as
cocaine and crack were also considered as hazardous items. These often
contain traces of the drugs and were found in all transects throughout
the seasonal sampling campaigns, ranging from 89 units (0.004 item/
m2) in winter to 237 (0.010 item/m2) during the autumn. From a spatial
perspective, tubes were often found in R2 (130 items) and R3 (172
items). Such findings could be used to guide public health interventions,
especially in periods of greater incidence.
The percentages of total hazardous items were determined for
autumn (29.2%), winter (20.8%), spring (24.8%) and summer (31%)
(Fig. 5a). Similarity, the calculated values of Hazardous Items Index
(HII) ranged from 0.8 in winter to 2.0 during the summer (Fig. 5b).
Therefore, based on the HII classification proposed by Rangel-Buitrago
et al. (2019a), Santos beaches presented some hazardous marine debris
over a large area (type II). However, in the summer a considerable
amount of hazardous items were collected, since the beaches were
categorized as type III. This pattern suggests a higher contribution from
beach users, probably because their number tends to triplicate in high
season. Similar pattern was observed along an urban coastal strip in Las
Salinas, Viña Del Mar (Chile), witch presented HII values between 0.2
and 2.3 with different beach sectors categorized as type II or III (Rangel-
Buitrago et al., 2019b). Moreover, high HII values were reported in a
study held by the same research team in a remote island of the Colom­
bian Caribbean Sea. In this case, despite isolation, this island acted as a
sink for large amounts of ML from the nearby areas (Rangel-Buitrago
et al., 2019a). Based on this scenario, the beaches of Santos offer a
certain level of health risk to users, especially during the summer. This
situation may reduce touristic attractions affecting the local economy as
reported for Europe (Brouwer et al., 2017).

4. Conclusion

Plastic debris and CB were the dominant items on Santos beaches

considering the spatial and seasonal assessments. Based on composition
and densities of ML, the presence of bathers plays essential role on beach
contamination, although in some sites local hydrodynamic also
Fig. 5. Seasonal percentages of hazardous debris (a) and values of Hazardous
contribute to ML deposition. Thus, more effective actions based on the
Items index by season (b) calculated for Santos beach.
ML sources must be implemented by the local public authorities. In this
sense, public policies for awareness, inspection and disposal regulation
implemented. Therefore, the present study can serve as a valuable
can be an appropriate way to minimize the problem. Such actions are
baseline to support mitigating actions and monitoring programs in ur­
even more important considering the frequency of hazardous and sani­
banized beaches, such as those from the city of Santos.
tary waste, which may lead to public health issues affecting residents
and visitors. Moreover, the high levels of ML threaten the tourism,
CRediT authorship contribution statement
which is an important socio-economic activity in Santo city. In this re­
gard, well-planned monitoring programs assessing temporal trends is
Victor V. Ribeiro: Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original
the best way to verify the effectiveness of the policies eventually

6
V.V. Ribeiro et al.
draft. Mariana A.S. Pinto: Investigation, Methodology, Writing – re­
view & editing. Raul K.B. Mesquita: Investigation, Methodology,
Writing – review & editing. Lucas Buruaem Moreira: Writing – review
& editing. Mônica F. Costa: Writing – review & editing. Ítalo Braga
Castro: Conceptualization, Project administration, Writing – original
draft, Writing – review & editing.
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.
Acknowledgments
This research was support by São Paulo Research Foundation
(FAPESP n. 2019/13750-4). I.B. Castro (PQ 302713/2018-2) was
recipient of research productivity fellowship from the CNPq. The author
thanks the NGO Instituto Mar Azul (IMA) by logistic support and all
citizen scientists who participated during beach clean-ups.
References
Abreu, F.E., da Silva, J.N.L., Castro, Í.B., Fillmann, G., 2020. Are antifouling residues a
matter of concern in the largest South American port? J. Hazard. Mater. 398, 122937
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.122937.
Addamo, A., Laroche, P., Hanke, G., 2018. Top Marine Beach Litter Items in Europe a
Review and Synthesis Based on Beach Litter Data. https://doi.org/10.2760/496717.
Alkalay, R., Pasternak, G., Zask, A., 2007. Clean-coast index—a new approach for beach
cleanliness assessment. Ocean & Coastal Management 50. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ocecoaman.2006.10.002.
Anderson, M., Gorley, R.N., Clarke, K., 2008. PERMANOVA+ for Primer: Guide to
Software and Statistical Methods. Primer-E, Plymouth.
Andrades, R., Pegado, T., Godoy, B.S., Reis-Filho, J.A., Nunes, J.L.S., Grillo, A.C.,
Machado, R.C., Santos, R.G., Dalcin, R.H., Freitas, M.O., Kuhnen, V.V., Barbosa, N.
D., Adelir-Alves, J., Albuquerque, T., Bentes, B., Giarrizzo, T., 2020. Anthropogenic
litter on Brazilian beaches: baseline, trends and recommendations for future
approaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 151, 110842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2019.110842.
Araújo, M.C.B., Costa, M.F., 2019. A critical review of the issue of cigarette butt pollution
in coastal environments. Environ. Res. 172, 137–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envres.2019.02.005.
Araújo, M.C.B., Silva-Cavalcanti, J.S., Costa, M.F., 2018. Anthropogenic litter on beaches
with different levels of development and use: a snapshot of a coast in Pernambuco
(Brazil). Front. Mar. Sci. 5 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2018.00233.
Asensio-Montesinos, F., Anfuso, G., Randerson, P., Williams, A.T., 2019. Seasonal
comparison of beach litter on Mediterranean coastal sites (Alicante, SE Spain).
Ocean & Coastal Management 181, 104914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ocecoaman.2019.104914.
Asensio-Montesinos, F., Anfuso, G., Ramírez, M.O., Smolka, R., Sanabria, J.G.,
Enríquez, A.F., Arenas, P., Bedoya, A.M., 2020. Beach litter composition and
distribution on the Atlantic coast of Cádiz (SW Spain). Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 34,
101050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2020.101050.
Aytan, U., Sahin, F.B.E., Karacan, F., 2019. Beach litter on Sarayköy Beach (SE Black
Sea): density, composition, possible sources and associated organisms. TrJFAS 20,
137–145.
Becherucci, M.E., Rosenthal, A.F., Seco Pon, J.P., 2017. Marine debris in beaches of the
Southwestern Atlantic: an assessment of their abundance and mass at different
spatial scales in northern coastal Argentina. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 119, 299–306. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.04.030.
Begliomini, F.N., Maciel, D.C., de Almeida, S.M., Abessa, D.M., Maranho, L.A., Pereira, C.
S., Yogui, G.T., Zanardi-Lamardo, E., Castro, Í.B., 2017. Shell alterations in limpets
as putative biomarkers for multi-impacted coastal areas. Environ. Pollut. 226,
494–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.04.045.
Blickley, L.C., Currie, J.J., Kaufman, G.D., 2016. Trends and drivers of debris
accumulation on Maui shorelines: implications for local mitigation strategies. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 105, 292–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.02.007.
Brouwer, R., Hadzhiyska, D., Ioakeimidis, C., Ouderdorp, H., 2017. The social costs of
marine litter along European coasts. Ocean & Coastal Management 138, 38–49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.01.011.
Cabral, H., Fonseca, V., Sousa, T., Costa Leal, M., 2019. Synergistic effects of climate
change and marine pollution: an overlooked interaction in coastal and estuarine
areas. Int J Environ Res Public Health 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16152737.
Campana, I., Angeletti, D., Crosti, R., Di Miccoli, V., Arcangeli, A., 2018. Seasonal
patterns of floating macro-litter across the Western Mediterranean Sea: a potential
threat for cetacean species. Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei 29, 453–467. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s12210-018-0680-0.
7
Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978
Campbell, J., Bowser, A., Fraisl, D., Meloche, M., 2019. Citizen Science and Data
Integration for Understanding Marine Litter. Presented at the Data for Good
Exchange, New York.
Clarke, K., Gorley, R.N., 2006. PRIMER v6: User Manual/tutorial, 29. PRIMER-E,
Plymouth, pp. 1060–1065.
Corraini, N.R., de Souza de Lima, A., Bonetti, J., Rangel-Buitrago, N., 2018. Troubles in
the paradise: litter and its scenic impact on the North Santa Catarina island beaches,
Brazil. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 131, 572–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2018.04.061.
CPPS, 2007. Basura Marina en el Pacífico Sudeste: una revisión del problema. Comisión
Permanente del Pacífico Sur, Guayaquil, Ecuador (31 pp.).
Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a
review. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44, 842–852. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-326X(02)
00220-5.
Dunlop, S.W., Dunlop, B.J., Brown, M., 2020. Plastic pollution in paradise: daily
accumulation rates of marine litter on Cousine Island, Seychelles. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
151, 110803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110803.
Fernandino, G., Elliff, C., Reimão, I., Brito, T., Bittencourt, A., 2015a. Plastic fragments as
a major component of marine litter: a case study in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. Revista
de Gestão Costeira Integrada 16. https://doi.org/10.5894/rgci649.
Fernandino, G., Elliff, C.I., Silva, I.R., 2015b. Degree of pollution by benthic litter in
beaches in Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. Scientia Plena 11.
Freire, I., Bijkerk, R., Silva, C., Goya, S.C., Alcantara Carrio, J., 2018. Incremento da
erosao nas praias da baia de santos.
Galgani, F., Hanke, G., Werner, S., Vrees, L., 2013. Marine litter within the European
Marine Strategy Framework Directive. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 70, 1055–1064. https://doi.
org/10.1093/icesjms/fst122.
Galgani, L., Beiras, R., Galgani, F., Panti, C., Borja, A., 2019. Editorial: impacts of marine
litter. Front. Mar. Sci. 6 https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2019.00208.
Gallo, F., Fossi, C., Weber, R., Santillo, D., Sousa, J., Ingram, I., Nadal, A., Romano, D.,
2018. Marine litter plastics and microplastics and their toxic chemicals components:
the need for urgent preventive measures. Environ. Sci. Eur. 30, 13. https://doi.org/
10.1186/s12302-018-0139-z.
García-Rivera, S., Lizaso, J.L.S., Millán, J.M.B., 2018. Spatial and temporal trends of
marine litter in the Spanish Mediterranean seafloor. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 137, 252–261.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.09.051.
Gjyli, L., Vlachogianni, T., Kolitari, J., Matta, G., Metalla, O., Gjyli, S., 2020. Marine litter
on the Albanian coastline: baseline information for improved management. Ocean &
Coastal Management 187, 105108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ocecoaman.2020.105108.
Harari, J., Camargo, R. de, 1998. Modelagem numérica da região costeira de Santos (SP):
circulação de maré. Rev. Bras. Oceanogr. 46, 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1590/
S1413-77391998000200004.
Hartley, B.L., Pahl, S., Veiga, J., Vlachogianni, T., Vasconcelos, L., Maes, T., Doyle, T.,
d’Arcy Metcalfe, R., Öztürk, A.A., Di Berardo, M., Thompson, R.C., 2018. Exploring
public views on marine litter in Europe: perceived causes, consequences and
pathways to change. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133, 945–955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2018.05.061.
Henderson, L., Green, C., 2020. Making sense of microplastics? Public understandings of
plastic pollution. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 152, 110908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2020.110908.
Hengstmann, E., Gräwe, D., Tamminga, M., Fischer, E.K., 2017. Marine litter abundance
and distribution on beaches on the Isle of Rügen considering the influence of
exposition, morphology and recreational activities. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 115, 297–306.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.12.026.
Hidalgo-Ruz, V., Honorato-Zimmer, D., Gatta-Rosemary, M., Nuñez, P., Hinojosa, I.A.,
Thiel, M., 2018. Spatio-temporal variation of anthropogenic marine debris on
Chilean beaches. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 126, 516–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2017.11.014.
Ivar do Sul, J.A., Costa, M.F., 2007. Marine debris review for Latin America and the
Wider Caribbean Region: from the 1970s until now, and where do we go from here?
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 54, 1087–1104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2007.05.004.
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.
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.
Lescreck, M.C., Petroni, R.G.G., Cortez, F.S., Santos, A.R., Coutinho, P.O., Pusceddu, F.H.,
2016. Análise da qualidade sanitária da areia das praias de Santos, litoral do estado
de São Paulo. Engenharia Sanitaria e Ambiental 21, 777–782. https://doi.org/
10.1590/s1413-41522016149550.
Lo, H.-S., Wong, L.-C., Kwok, S.-H., Lee, Y.-K., Po, B.H.-K., Wong, C.-Y., Tam, N.F.-Y.,
Cheung, S.-G., 2020. Field test of beach litter assessment by commercial aerial drone.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 151, 110823 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110823.
Machado, A.A., Fillmann, G., 2010. Estudo da contaminação por resíduos sólidos na ilha
do Arvoredo, reserva biológica marinha do Arvoredo - SC, Brasil. RGCI 10, 381–393.
https://doi.org/10.5894/rgci215.
Magini, C., Harari, J., Moledo, D., Abessa, D., 2007. Circulação recente de sedimentos
costeiros nas praias de Santos durante eventos de tempestades: dados para a gestão
de impactos físicos costeiros 26, 349–355.
Marin, C.B., Niero, H., Zinnke, I., Pellizzetti, M.A., Santos, P.H., Rudolf, A.C., Beltrão, M.,
Waltrick, D. de S., Polette, M., 2019. Marine debris and pollution indexes on the
beaches of Santa Catarina State, Brazil. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 31, 100771 https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rsma.2019.100771.
V.V. Ribeiro et al.
Maziane, F., Nachite, D., Anfuso, G., 2018. Artificial polymer materials debris
characteristics along the Moroccan Mediterranean coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 128, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.12.067.
Mokos, M., Rokov, T., Zubak Čižmek, I., 2020. Monitoring and analysis of marine litter in
Vodenjak cove on Iž Island, central Croatian Adriatic Sea. Rend. Fis. Acc. Lincei.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12210-020-00934-6.
Munari, C., Corbau, C., Simeoni, U., Mistri, M., 2016. Marine litter on Mediterranean
shores: analysis of composition, spatial distribution and sources in north-western
Adriatic beaches. Waste Manag. 49, 483–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2015.12.010.
Nachite, D., Maziane, F., Anfuso, G., Williams, A.T., 2019. Spatial and temporal
variations of litter at the Mediterranean beaches of Morocco mainly due to beach
users. Ocean & Coastal Management 179, 104846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ocecoaman.2019.104846.
National Academy of Sciences, 1975. Marine litter. In: Assessing Potential Ocean
Pollutants (A Report of the Study Panel on Assessing Potential Ocean Pollutants to
the Ocean Affairs Board). Commission on Natural Resources, Natural Research
Council, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, USA, p. 438.
Nelms, S., Coombes, C., Foster, L., Galloway, T., Godley, B., Lindeque, P., Witt, M., 2017.
Marine anthropogenic litter on British beaches: a 10-year nationwide assessment
using citizen science data. Sci. Total Environ. 579, 1399–1409. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.137.
Nelms, S.E., Eyles, L., Godley, B.J., Richardson, P.B., Selley, H., Solandt, J.-L., Witt, M.J.,
2020. Investigating the distribution and regional occurrence of anthropogenic litter
in English marine protected areas using 25 years of citizen-science beach clean data.
Environ. Pollut. 263, 114365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.114365.
Pack, E.C., Kim, H.S., Jang, D.Y., Koo, Y.J., Yu, H.H., Lee, S.H., Lim, K.M., Choi, D.W.,
2019. Risk assessment of toxicants on WHO TobReg priority list in mainstream
cigarette smoke using human-smoked yields of Korean smokers. Environ. Res. 169,
206–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.11.012.
Pasternak, G., Zviely, D., Ribic, C.A., Ariel, A., Spanier, E., 2017. Sources, composition
and spatial distribution of marine debris along the Mediterranean coast of Israel.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 114, 1036–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2016.11.023.
Pervez, R., Wang, Y., Mahmood, Q., Zahir, M., Jattak, Z., 2020. Abundance, type, and
origin of litter on No. 1 Bathing Beach of Qingdao, China. J Coast Conserv 24, 34.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-020-00751-x.
Pieper, C., Amaral-Zettler, L., Law, K.L., Loureiro, C.M., Martins, A., 2019. Application of
matrix scoring techniques to evaluate marine debris sources in the remote islands of
the Azores Archipelago. Environ. Pollut. 249, 666–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
envpol.2019.03.084.
Poeta, G., Battisti, C., Bazzichetto, M., Acosta, A.T.R., 2016. The cotton buds beach:
marine litter assessment along the Tyrrhenian coast of central Italy following the
marine strategy framework directive criteria. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 113, 266–270.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.09.035.
Prevenios, M., Zeri, C., Tsangaris, C., Liubartseva, S., Fakiris, E., Papatheodorou, G.,
2018. Beach litter dynamics on Mediterranean coasts: distinguishing sources and
pathways. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 129, 448–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2017.10.013.
Pusceddu, F.H., Sugauara, L.E., de Marchi, M.R., Choueri, R.B., Castro, Í.B., 2019.
Estrogen levels in surface sediments from a multi-impacted Brazilian estuarine
system. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 142, 576–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2019.03.052.
Rangel-Buitrago, N., Gracia, C.A., Velez-Mendoza, A., Carvajal-Florián, A., Mojica-
Martinez, L., Neal, W.J., 2019a. Where did this refuse come from? Marine
anthropogenic litter on a remote island of the Colombian Caribbean sea. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 149, 110611 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110611.
Rangel-Buitrago, N., Vergara-Cortés, H., Barría-Herrera, J., Contreras-López, M.,
Agredano, R., 2019b. Marine debris occurrence along Las Salinas beach, Viña Del
Mar (Chile): magnitudes, impacts and management. Ocean & Coastal Management
178, 104842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.104842.
Ribeiro, V.V., Santos, V.R.D., 2020. Pellets plásticos na praia de Santa Cruz dos
Navegantes, Guarujá (SP), durante evento de frente fria no inverno de 2019. Revista
Internacional de Ciências 10, 108–123. doi:10.12957/ric.2020.47373.
Richards, J.P., Heard, J., 2005. European environmental NGOs: issues, resources and
strategies in marine campaigns. Environmental Politics 14, 23–41. https://doi.org/
10.1080/0964401042000310169.
Ríos, N., Frias, J.P.G.L., Rodríguez, Y., Carriço, R., Garcia, S.M., Juliano, M., Pham, C.K.,
2018. Spatio-temporal variability of beached macro-litter on remote islands of the
North Atlantic. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 133, 304–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2018.05.038.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 163 (2021) 111978
Rosevelt, C., Los Huertos, M., Garza, C., Nevins, H.M., 2013. Marine debris in central
California: quantifying type and abundance of beach litter in Monterey Bay, CA. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 71, 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2013.01.015.
Santos, I.R., Friedrich, A.C., Wallner-Kersanach, M., Fillmann, G., 2005. Influence of
socio-economic characteristics of beach users on litter generation. Ocean & Coastal
Management 48, 742–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.08.006.
Santos, A.A., Nobre, F.S. de M., Ribeiro, F., Nilin, J., 2020. Initial beach litter survey in a
conservation unit (Santa Isabel Biological Reserve, Sergipe) from northeast Brazil.
Mar. Pollut. Bull. 153, 111015 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111015.
Sarafraz, J., Rajabizadeh, M., Kamrani, E., 2016. The preliminary assessment of
abundance and composition of marine beach debris in the northern Persian Gulf,
Bandar Abbas City, Iran. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. U. K. 96, 131–135. https://doi.org/
10.1017/S0025315415002076.
Schulz, M., Krone, R., Dederer, G., Wätjen, K., Matthies, M., 2015. Comparative analysis
of time series of marine litter surveyed on beaches and the seafloor in the
southeastern North Sea. Mar. Environ. Res. 106, 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marenvres.2015.03.005.
Šilc, U., Küzmič, F., Caković, D., Stešević, D., 2018. Beach litter along various sand dune
habitats in the southern Adriatic (E Mediterranean). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 128, 353–360.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.01.045.
Silva, M.L. da, Sales, A.S., Martins, S., Castro, R. de O., Araújo, F.V. de, 2016. The
influence of the intensity of use, rainfall and location in the amount of marine debris
in four beaches in Niteroi, Brazil: Sossego, Camboinhas, Charitas and Flechas. Mar.
Pollut. Bull. 113, 36–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2016.10.061.
Silva, M.L. da, Castro, R.O., Sales, A.S., Araújo, F.V. de, 2018. Marine debris on beaches
of Arraial do Cabo, RJ, Brazil: an important coastal tourist destination. Mar. Pollut.
Bull. 130, 153–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.03.026.
Simeonova, A., Chuturkova, R., Yaneva, V., 2017. Seasonal dynamics of marine litter
along the Bulgarian Black Sea coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 119, 110–118. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.03.035.
Smith, S.D.A., Gillies, C.L., Shortland-Jones, H., 2014. Patterns of marine debris
distribution on the beaches of Rottnest Island, Western Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
88, 188–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.09.007.
Suciu, M.C., Tavares, D.C., Costa, L.L., Silva, M.C.L., Zalmon, I.R., 2017. Evaluation of
environmental quality of sandy beaches in southeastern Brazil. Mar. Pollut. Bull.
119, 133–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.04.045.
Terzi, Y., Seyhan, K., 2017a. Seasonal and spatial variations of marine litter on the south-
eastern Black Sea coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 120, 154–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2017.04.041.
Terzi, Y., Seyhan, K., 2017b. Seasonal and spatial variations of marine litter on the south-
eastern Black Sea coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 120, 154–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
marpolbul.2017.04.041.
Terzi, Y., Erüz, C., Özşeker, K., 2020. Marine litter composition and sources on coasts of
south-eastern Black Sea: a long-term case study. Waste Manag. 105, 139–147.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.01.032.
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.
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.
Tutman, P., Kapiris, K., Kirinčić, M., Pallaoro, A., 2017. Floating marine litter as a raft for
drifting voyages for Planes minutus (Crustacea: Decapoda: Grapsidae) and
Liocarcinus navigator (Crustacea: Decapoda: Polybiidae). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 120,
217–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.04.063.
UNEP, 2009. Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. UNEP, Nairobi, p. 232.
UNEP/IOC, 2009. UNEP/IOC Guidelines on Survey and Monitoring of Marine Litter.
Regional Seas Reports and Studies No. 186 IOC Technical Series No. 83.
Williams, A.T., Randerson, P., Allen, C., Cooper, J.A.G., 2017. Beach litter sourcing: a
trawl along the Northern Ireland coastline. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 122, 47–64. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.05.066.
Wilson, S.P., Verlis, K.M., 2017. The ugly face of tourism: marine debris pollution linked
to visitation in the southern Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 117,
239–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.01.036.
Zhou, P., Huang, C., Fang, H., Cai, W., Li, D., Li, X., Yu, H., 2011. The abundance,
composition and sources of marine debris in coastal seawaters or beaches around the
northern South China Sea (China). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 1998–2007. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.06.018.