This is a five-week experiment where there will be an analysis of 48 experimental chicken eggs with their development of microplastics (polystyrene). While the control which used deionized water without polystyrene was a total of 21 control eggs. There will be eggs opened on day 7 and day 14 of the development of the chicken embryo. It will be compared to a control group of chicken embryos that are from the same farm and the same HH stage to prevent as many outside variables as possible. Humans can regularly consume around 5 grams or more microplastics and even though the effects of it are still not totally known, many can agree it is not a healthy lifestyle to live. We are using polystyrene as it is the most common and widely used microplastic as it is also known as a one-use item.
How the experiment will commence
Using different concentrations of polystyrene (density) with concentrations of 100Um, 300Um, and 500Um. We obtained these concentrations by diluting from original source of 5 μm, and the density is 1.064 g/cm3 of polystyrene.
By injecting with an insulin syringe size of (size of the syringe) after sterilization with ethanol, different concentrations were injected
The eggs will be opened and observed for the presence of abnormalities in the eyes, heart, and vasculature
weight, length, heartbeat, and mortality will also be recorded
The data collected from the observations will be compared (comparison of the different concentrations)
Across the 69 eggs, we determined that there was no relationship between concentration of MPs and underdevelopment of the embryo. Similarly, there was no relationship between concentration of MPs and embryo length and weight taken at 7 days old. There was also no relationship between concentration of MPs and embryo weight at 14 days old, but there was some positive relationship between concentration of MPs. and embryo length taken at 14 days old. Regarding concentration of MPs and heartbeat (bpm) of the embryo, we found no significant relationship. Lastly, regarding concentration of MPs and decreased weight in embryos taken before and after injection, there was some positive relationship.
A common observation we found as we increased the concentration of polyesterene is how the veins seemed to be a lot redder and more present. The veins of the embryo tend to be regular bright red surrounding the embryo for the control group. The experimental however, had more erratic veins and some were connected to the shell. Also in some instances, the higher concentration of embryos had more pale bodies and underdeveloped eyes, and also the yolk seemed more thicker and darker than usual at certain points.
We initially predicted a negative relationship between the concentration of MPs and chicken embryo length and weight. However, based on our data, the embryo weight and length at 7 days old showed no relationship with the concentration of MPs. Similarly, embryo weight at 14 days old showed no relationship with concentration. However, embryo length at 14 days indicated some positive relationship with concentration which goes against our initial hypothesis. One reason why embryo length at 14 days old and concentration had some positive relationship might be because we only had 2 control embryos, which could skew the results. Furthermore, it could be possible that MPs increase embryo weight. Overall, it is important to note that we had different sample sizes across all 4 graphs. Most data seemed to be inconclusive or needing more research but one data that came to be different was the change in decreased weight from day 1 to when the egg was opened. All eggs naturally decreased in weight, but this data in the change in decreased weight (g) vs. Concentration of MPs shows the difference between the decrease in weight comparing the varying concentrations of polystyrene. From the data, it is confirmed that there could be some relationship between the two variables
Some limitations or weaknesses could have been the effectiveness of technique we performed when opening the egg to observe the embryo as it was difficult to measure heartbeat to obtain as data. Some other limitations were how we were not able to do a double-blind experiment due to time limitations which could have skewed our observations. In the future, having a set number of data points for both 7 days and 14 days and equal control and experimental data points for both days would be beneficial. Additionally, having a larger sample size could result in more accurate results.
Lu, Y., Zhang, Y., Deng, Y., Jiang, W., Zhao, Y., Geng, J., Ding, L., & Ren, H. (2016). Uptake and Accumulation of Polystyrene Microplastics in Zebrafish (Danio rerio) and Toxic Effects in Liver. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(7), 4054-4060. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b00183
Marco Tarasco, Paulo J. Gavaia, Anabela Bensimon-Brito, Fabrice P. Cordelières, Tamára Santos, Gil Martins, Daniela T. de Castro, Nádia Silva, Elsa Cabrita, Maria J. Bebianno, Didier Y.R. Stainier, M. Leonor Cancela, Vincent Laizé, Effects of pristine or contaminated polyethylene microplastics on zebrafish development, Chemosphere,Volume 303, Part 3, 2022,
Wang, L., Xue, N., Li, W., Wufuer, R., Zhang, D. Ecotoxicological Effects of Microplastics on Bird Embryo Development by Hatching without Eggshell. J. Vis. Exp. (174), e61696, doi:10.3791/61696 (2021).
Wang, J., Li, X., Gao, M., Li, X., Zhao, L., & Ru, S. (2022). Polystyrene microplastics increase estrogenic effects of 17α-ethynylestradiol on male marine medaka (Oryzias melastigma). Chemosphere, 287, 132312
Ho, B. T., Roberts, T. K., & Lucas, S. (2018). An overview on biodegradation of polystyrene and modified polystyrene: the microbial approach. Critical reviews in biotechnology, 38(2), 308-320.
Ronca, S. (2017). Polyethylene. In Brydson's plastics materials (pp. 247-278). Elsevier.
Dusza, H. M., Katrukha, E. A., Nijmeijer, S. M., Akhmanova, A., Vethaak, A. D., Walker, D. I., & Legler, J. (2022). Uptake, Transport, and Toxicity of Pristine and Weathered Micro- and Nanoplastics in Human Placenta Cells. Environ Health Perspect, 130(9), 97006. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp10873
Ho, B. T., Roberts, T. K., & Lucas, S. (2018). An overview on biodegradation of polystyrene and modified polystyrene: the microbial approach. Critical reviews in biotechnology, 38(2), 308-320. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2017.1355293
Ragusa, A., Svelato, A., Santacroce, C., Catalano, P., Notarstefano, V., Carnevali, O., Papa, F., Rongioletti, M. C. A., Baiocco, F., Draghi, S., D'Amore, E., Rinaldo, D., Matta, M., & Giorgini, E. (2021). Plasticenta: First evidence of microplastics in human placenta. Environ Int, 146, 106274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106274
Sun, M., Ding, R., Ma, Y., Sun, Q., Ren, X., Sun, Z., & Duan, J. (2021). Cardiovascular toxicity assessment of polyethylene nanoplastics on developing zebrafish embryos. Chemosphere, 282, 131124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.131124
Zheng, H., Wang, J., Wei, X., Chang, L., & Liu, S. (2021). Proinflammatory properties and lipid disturbance of polystyrene microplastics in the livers of mice with acute colitis. Science of The Total Environment, 750, 143085. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143085
Cox, K. D., Covernton, G. A., Davies, H. L., Dower, J. F., Juanes, F., & Dudas, S. E. (2019). Human Consumption of Microplastics. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(12), 7068-7074. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b01517