New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Plastic Pollution Perturbs Oyster Offspring

Laboratory tests suggest that when the shellfish suck in tiny plastic particles, their reproductive success suffers. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Getty Images/moodboard RF Thinkstock Images (MARS)

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

As many as 12 million tons of plastic waste end up in the world's oceans every year, according to a 2015 estimate in the journal Science. Over time, wind and waves grind and chew that plastic trash into tiny bits of what’s called "microplastic"—which happen to be about the same size and shape as the micro algae that filter feeders like oysters snack on. Meaning oysters can ingest it.

To find out the effects of consuming the debris, researchers at the French Institute for Ocean Studies raised oysters in water polluted with plastic microbeads, in concentrations similar to those observed in field studies. The shellfish sucked up the six-micrometer-wide plastic particles extremely efficiently—as they evolved to do with the tiny algae.

Two months later, the oysters exposed to microplastics produced half as many eggs and slower swimming sperm than did oysters that fed on algae alone. Perhaps, the researchers say, because plastic interferes with the oysters' energy uptake. And the offspring of the plastic-eaters were also smaller and slower-growing than the progeny of control oysters. The study is in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Rossana Sussarellu et al, Oyster reproduction is affected by exposure to polystyrene microplastics]


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The scientists say oysters will probably survive in spite of plastic pollution—they're still prolific reproducers. But until we clean up our act, there's no question we're giving them a raw deal.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe