Next Article in Journal
Cytotoxicity and Antimicrobial Resistance of Salmonella enterica Subspecies Isolated from Raised Reptiles in Beijing, China
Next Article in Special Issue
Monitoring Green Sea Turtles in the San Gabriel River of Southern California
Previous Article in Journal
Morphostructural Differences between the Historical Genetic Lines of the Spanish Merino Sheep
Previous Article in Special Issue
Increased Prevalence and New Evidence of Multi-Species Chelonid Herpesvirus 5 (ChHV5) Infection in the Sea Turtles of Mabul Island, Borneo
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Brief Report

A Preliminary Report of Plastic Ingestion by Hawksbill and Green Turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea

1
Red Sea Research Center, Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, Thuwal 23955, Saudi Arabia
2
Red Sea Global, Department of Environment and Sustainability, Riyadh 12214, Saudi Arabia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2023, 13(2), 314; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13020314
Submission received: 30 November 2022 / Revised: 24 December 2022 / Accepted: 30 December 2022 / Published: 16 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sea Turtles: Ecology, Distribution, and Conservation)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Plastic production has increased over the past decades, causing more plastic pollution to enter marine ecosystems. Because plastics persist in the environment for hundreds of years, they have become a threat to many living organisms. Animals may mistake plastic debris for food, which can cause illness or mortality. In this study, we analyzed the gastrointestinal tracts of ten sea turtles to assess the prevalence of plastic ingestion in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Plastics > 1 mm were collected and categorized into plastic type and color. This was the first report of plastic ingestion by turtles in the Red Sea. It is important to have baseline data on plastic ingestion because the human population surrounding the Red Sea is expected to increase within the coming decades. With more people residing in coastal areas, there may be an increased amount of plastic debris entering the ocean. This study found that 40% of the turtles had ingested plastics, meaning that plastic is currently a threat to turtles in the region, and conservation efforts should be implemented to remove plastics from the sea and to prevent plastic pollution from entering the environment.

Abstract

(1) Background: Plastic pollution is a major environmental concern confronting marine animals. Sea turtles are considered a bio-indicator of plastic pollution, but there is little information regarding plastic ingestion by turtles in the Red Sea. With large-scale development projects being built along the Saudi Arabian coast, it is important to have a baseline for plastic ingestion before construction is complete. (2) Methods: Ten deceased sea turtles (four hawksbill and six green turtles) were collected along the Saudi Arabian coastline. Necropsies were conducted, and the entire gastrointestinal tracts were extracted and the contents were passed through a 1 mm mesh sieve. (3) Results: We found that 40% of the turtles in this study had ingested plastics. Thread-like plastics were the most common plastic category, and multi-colored was the most prevalent color category. (4) Conclusions: Monitoring of the plastic ingestion by marine megafauna should be conducted as a long-term assessment of the developments’ impacts. Additionally, conservation efforts should be focused on removing plastics (namely ghost nests and fishing lines) from the reefs and reducing the amount of plastic entering the sea.

1. Introduction

Globally, most sea turtle species are at risk of extinction [1] due to human impacts, including incidental bycatch, coastal development, direct poaching, boat strikes, and pollution [1,2,3,4]. Ingestion of plastic debris is a potential threat for all sea turtle species [5] at all life stages [6]. An estimated 12 million tons of plastic enters the ocean each year [7], and the production and disposal of plastic used worldwide are projected to increase over the next decades [8].
Plastic pollution in the marine environment is primarily derived from either sea-based sources, such as rubbish dumped from boats, or land-based sources, such as runoff from rivers, wastewater systems, wind-blown litter, and plastic waste left on beaches [9]. Traces of plastic have been found in the entire trophic chain, ranging from zooplankton to cetaceans [10,11], and even in humans [12]. In the marine environment, plastics can absorb pollutants such as heavy metals, thus acting as a vector by facilitating the transport of harmful chemicals to living organisms [13]. However, it is important to note that a single piece of plastic, in general, does not have enough contamination to be responsible for the death of a turtle (e.g., [14]).
Marine plastic pollution also aids invasive species, such as barnacles and mollusks, as a medium for their dispersal [15]. Sea turtles are considered bio-indicators because they are among the first groups of wild animals affected by plastic pollution [16]. Sea turtles are visual feeders with the ability to see color [17], though the role of color in their food preferences is not fully understood [18].
Sea turtle populations in the Red Sea are understudied, as are the threats they face [19]. Increased development along the Saudi Arabian coast [20] could increase anthropogenic contaminants entering into the marine environment, including plastic pollution. Additionally, the human population growth rate around the Red Sea is expected to double in the next 20–30 years [21]. Given the pace and scope of expanded human development in this region, it is important to establish a baseline for plastic ingestion by Red Sea turtles. The aims of this study were to assess the mass of the plastics (>1 mm) ingested by sea turtles and to identify the most common plastic category and color.

2. Materials and Methods

Ten deceased green and hawksbill turtles were collected from the Saudi Arabian Red Sea coast (Figure 1). All ten specimens were strandings that were discovered and referred to us by local fishermen, governmental agencies, or giga-project environmental departments. The entire gastrointestinal (GI) tracts of the hawksbill turtles and green turtles were extracted during necropsies. Although no work with live animals was conducted in this study, the research team had approval from King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) and from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) to work with marine turtles under protocol 19IACUC07. The minimum curved carapace length and width (CCL and CCW, respectively) and plastron length were recorded [22]. The digestive tracts were removed, and metallic clamps were used to contain the ingested materials. The GI tracts were stored at −20 °C until further analysis was possible. For analysis, the GI tracts were thawed out overnight, and the entire contents of each were strained through a 1 mm mesh sieve using fresh water to dilute the GI contents (following [23]). Plastic pieces were retrieved with forceps, cleaned, dried in a Binder incubator for three days at 30 °C, then stored.
For plastic categorization, the INDICIT protocol was followed (https://indicit.cefe.cnrs.fr/indicit-documents/ accessed on 1 October 2022), which includes five categories: (1) sheet-like plastics (e.g., plastic bags), (2) thread-like plastics (e.g., nylon lines or ropes), (3) foams (e.g., polystyrene foam), (4) fragments (e.g., hard plastics), and (5) non-plastic items (e.g., metal or foil). Additionally, the predominant color of the plastic was recorded. Each piece of plastic was photographed and measured (length × width × height) using a Leica IC80 HD stereoscope and weighed using a Mettler Toledo XS205 Dual Range Balance. For plastic fibers that could not be measured individually, the overall mass was recorded. The plastic categories and colors identified were compared by mass for the total amount of plastic retrieved from the turtles as well as compared by mass for each individual turtle. Due to the limited sample size, no statistical tests were computed to compare plastic categories or colors whether spatially or temporally. We used a non-parametric Kendall tau correlation to assess the relationship between the curved carapace lengths of the stranded turtles and the total mass of the plastics ingested using R Studio [24]. This test was used because some of the data did not meet the statistical prerequisites to conduct parametric tests (i.e., our data showed non-normal distribution).

3. Results

Ten turtles were necropsied between 2019 and 2022, and of these, four were hawksbill turtles and six were green turtles. Four out of ten turtles (40%) had plastics >1 mm in their digestive tracts, but there was a large range in the number and mass of the plastics in each turtle (Table 1). Of the turtles that ingested plastics, two were green turtles and two were hawksbill turtles. There was no significant correlation between the curved carapace length of the turtles and the mass of the plastics found in their gastrointestinal (GI) tracts (τb = 0.381, p = 0.155). The size of plastic items ranged from 0.19 to 351 cm. Of these, 6% were <0.5 cm, 30% were between 0.5 and 2 cm, and 64% were >2 cm.
Turtle G08_2022, a green turtle reported dead in the Al Wajh marina, had more than 10 times as much plastics by mass in its GI tract than any other turtle. Turtle H01_2019 was a hawksbill turtle found in King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) that had a single 351 cm piece of nylon fishing line wrapped around its right front flipper, entering through its mouth, passing through its entire GI tract, and ending out of its cloaca. Turtles H05_2021 and G06_2021 both had relatively small amounts of plastic in their digestive tracts (Table 1). Turtle H05_2021 showed signs of bloating syndrome [25] when it was found in Umluj, and it was brought to the Fakieh Aquarium (Jeddah) for rehabilitation. This condition occurs when turtles have gases built up in their GI tracts, increasing buoyancy and preventing sub-surface dives [25]. This turtle excreted a fragment of hard plastic and later died, suggesting that the plastic could have been the cause of the illness.
Out of the five plastic categories, thread-like plastics were the most common. By mass, they comprised 75% of the plastics (Figure 2a). The thread-like category included ropes, nylon fishing lines, small fibers, and other threads. This was followed by sheet-like plastics, which comprised 22% of the plastics by mass. The sheet-like plastic category included plastic bags and other thin flexible plastics. Hard fragments and non-plastic items (e.g., aluminum foil) comprised the remaining 3%. No items in the industrial plastic or foam categories were found, which includes items consisting of Styrofoam.
Next, the proportion of each type of plastic consumed was compared between the four individual turtles that consumed plastic. Thread-like plastics were the dominant type in each turtle (Figure 2c), and turtle H05_2021 was the only turtle with hard fragments in its digestive tract. Turtle G08_2022 had the highest diversity of plastic, with low proportions of fragments and non-plastic items (Figure 2c). As previously mentioned, turtle H01_2019 had a single item in its digestive tract, which was the 351 cm piece of nylon fishing line and which was categorized as “thread-like”.
Fourteen different colors of plastics were identified. Small fibers that were measured together were categorized as “multi-colored”, which was the predominant category, comprising 31% of the colors by mass (Figure 3a). This was followed by white, which was largely composed of the same fiber types that were very common in turtle G08_2022 (Figure 3a). Other commonly found colors were black, blue, and transparent (Figure 3a).
Finally, the proportion of each color of plastic consumed was compared between the four individual turtles that consumed plastic (Figure 3b). Similar trends persisted in this analysis, with turtle G08_2022 having consumed the highest diversity of colors and turtle H01_2019 having consumed the lowest diversity. Turtle H05_2021 had only consumed plastic of two different colors, whereas turtle G06_2021 had consumed plastic of seven distinct colors (Figure 3b).

4. Discussion

Previous studies have found that the surface waters of the Saudi Arabian Red Sea have a low concentration of plastic debris compared to all other coastal seas [26]. This lack of surface plastics is hypothesized to be the result of the low contribution of plastic waste into the Red Sea (no river input) and/or fast removal rates of plastic debris from the surface [26]. Given this low level of existing plastic pollution, the relatively high incidence (40%) of plastic ingestion observed in both the hawksbill and green turtles is concerning and warrants further study.
Thread-like plastics, including fibers, ropes, and nylon fishing lines, were the most common type of plastic detected in the stomachs of the affected turtles. Artisanal fishing is common in Saudi Arabian waters, and lost or abandoned fishing gear, such as nets and fishing lines, have been seen on many reefs along the coast (personal observation). Apart from the threat of entanglement, this gear can also break down and be ingested by turtles and other marine fauna. Reduced fishing pressure could help to limit the future input of thread-like plastics into the Red Sea environment, while reef cleanup efforts could remove discarded gear already present. Both methods have the potential to reduce mortality from gear entanglement while also increasing the tourism appeal of local reefs.
There was no clear pattern in the coloring of ingested plastics, though white, multi-colored, and black were most common out of the 14 color categories recorded. We found that the green turtles in our study were ingesting more colors of plastic compared to the hawksbill turtles, but this might be a result of our small sample size. Additional studies are needed to make definite conclusions about the differences between the species regarding plastic ingestion.
A global analysis of plastic ingestion estimated that up to 52% of sea turtles may have ingested plastic debris [27]. This is higher than our findings, where 40% of the turtles included had ingested plastics >1 mm. Furthermore, a study of 464 green turtles necropsied in Texas between 1987 and 2019, 48.7% were found to have ingested plastics [28] (Table 2). The same study also found that plastic ingestion doubled from 1987–1999 (32.5%) to 2019 (65.5%) [28], highlighting the urgency of this issue. Although no work has been published on plastic ingestion by turtles in the Red Sea, there was a study conducted on debris ingestion by green, hawksbill, and olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) in the United Arab Emirates [29,30]. Of the stranded turtles included in that study, 85.7% of green turtles and 83.3% of hawksbill turtles contained marine debris, which is a higher rate than we found in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea [29,30] (Table 2).
The small sample size in our study makes interpretation difficult, and there is a need for future studies to expand on this work, especially in the other countries bordering the Red Sea. The current results showed that 50% of the hawksbill turtles (2/4) and 33% of the green turtles (2/6) had ingested anthropogenic marine debris. In the future, it will be useful to have long-term monitoring data on plastic ingestion by turtles in the Red Sea.

5. Conclusions

Monitoring of the plastic ingestion by marine megafauna should be conducted as a long-term assessment of the impacts of the upcoming, large-scale developments (locally known as “giga-projects”). Additionally, conservation efforts should be focused on removing plastics (namely ghost nests and fishing lines) from the reefs and reducing the amount of plastic entering the environment. Sea turtles are flagship species that have broad appeal and significance in ecotourism efforts, including in the nascent tourism industry in Saudi Arabia. This highlights the need to conserve the species by reducing the sources of anthropogenic contamination in the environment. This work provides a baseline for plastic ingestion that could be useful for long-term systematic sampling and for assessing whether the problem of plastic ingestion worsens or improves as the giga-projects continue development. These giga-projects have strong environmental standards, so using this work as a baseline would be a good way to assess if they are indeed improving the quality of the marine environment.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.K.T. and M.L.B.; fieldwork, L.K.T., R.S.H. and K.S.; analysis, L.K.T.; writing—original draft preparation, L.K.T.; writing—review and editing, J.E.M.C., K.S., R.S.H. and M.L.B.; supervision, M.L.B.; funding acquisition, M.L.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (baseline research funds to M.L.B.).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable because all turtles were found deceased.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Areen Nasif and Alexa Foster for their help with the necropsies. We would also like to thank the National Center for Wildlife (NCW) for helping us obtain some of the stranded turtles used in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Stanford, C.B.; Iverson, J.B.; Rhodin, A.G.J.; Paul van Dijk, P.; Mittermeier, R.A.; Kuchling, G.; Berry, K.H.; Bertolero, A.; Bjorndal, K.A.; Blanck, T.E.G.; et al. Turtles and tortoises are in trouble. Curr. Biol. 2020, 30, R721–R735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mortimer, J.A.; Donnelly, M. Eretmochelys imbricata. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species; IUCN: Grand, Switzerland, 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Casale, P.; Affronte, M.; Insacco, G.; Freggi, D.; Vallini, C.; D’Astore, P.P.; Basso, R.; Paolillo, G.; Abbate, G.; Argano, R. Sea turtle strandings reveal high anthropogenic mortality in Italian waters. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2010, 20, 611–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Abdulqader, E.A.A.; Miller, J.; Al-Mansi, A.; Al-Abdulkader, K.; Fita, N.; Al-Nadhiri, H.; Rabaoui, L. Turtles and other Marine megafauna bycatch in artisanal fisheries in the Saudi Waters of the Arabian Gulf. Fish. Res. 2017, 196, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Duncan, E.M.; Broderick, A.C.; Fuller, W.J.; Galloway, T.S.; Godfrey, M.H.; Hamann, M.; Limpus, C.J.; Lindeque, P.K.; Mayes, A.G.; Omeyer, L.C.M.; et al. Microplastic ingestion ubiquitous in marine turtles. Glob. Change Biol. 2019, 25, 744–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Schuyler, Q.; Hardesty, B.D.; Wilcox, C.; Townsend, K. To eat or not to eat? Debris selectivity by marine turtles. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e40884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jambeck, J.R.; Geyer, R.; Wilcox, C.; Siegler, T.R.; Perryman, M.; Andrady, A.; Narayan, R.; Law, K.L. Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science 2015, 347, 768–771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lebreton, L.; Andrady, A. Future scenarios of global plastic waste generation and disposal. Palgrave Commun. 2019, 5, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Coe, J.M.; Rogers, D.B. Marine Debris: Sources, Impacts, and Solutions; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  10. Desforges, J.P.W.; Galbraith, M.; Ross, P.S. Ingestion of microplastics by zooplankton in the Northeast Pacific Ocean. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2015, 69, 320–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fossi, M.C.; Panti, C.; Baini, M.; Lavers, J.L. A Review of plastic-associated pressures: Cetaceans of the Mediterranean Sea and Eastern Australian shearwaters as case studies. Front. Mar. Sci. 2018, 5, 173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cox, K.D.; Covernton, G.A.; Davies, H.L.; Dower, J.F.; Juanes, F.; Dudas, S.E. Human consumption of microplastics. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 7068–7074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. 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.; et al. Transport and release of chemicals from plastics to the environment and to wildlife. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2009, 364, 2027–2045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Clukey, K.E.; Lepczyk, C.A.; Balazs, G.H.; Work, T.M.; Li, Q.X.; Bachman, M.J.; Lynch, J.M. Persistent organic pollutants in fat of three species of Pacific pelagic longline caught sea turtles: Accumulation in relation to ingested plastic marine debris. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 611, 402–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Gregory, M.R. 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. 2009, 364, 2013–2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. González Carman, V.; Denuncio, P.; Vassallo, M.; Berón, M.P.; Álvarez, K.C.; Rodriguez-Heredia, S. Charismatic species as indicators of plastic pollution in the Río de La Plata Estuarine Area, SW Atlantic. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8, 699100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Fritsches, K.A.; Warrant, E.J. Vision. In The Biology of Sea Turtles; Wyneken, J., Lohmann, K.J., Musick, J.A., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2013; Volume III, pp. 31–58. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kühn, S.; Bravo Rebolledo, E.L.; van Franeker, J.A. Deleterious effects of litter on marine life. In Marine Anthropogenic Litter; Bergmann, M., Gutow, L., Klages, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 75–116. ISBN 978-3-319-16510-3. [Google Scholar]
  19. PERSGA. Regional Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Turtles and Their Habitats in the Red Sea Conservation of Marine Turtles and Gulf of Aden; Regional Organization for the Conservation of the Environment of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden: Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  20. PIF Giga-Project Initiatives, Public Investment Fund Program Document. Available online: www.pif.gov.sa (accessed on 20 November 2022).
  21. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables; United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bolten, A.B. Techniques for measuring sea turtles. In Research and Management Techniques for the Conservation of Sea Turtles; IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group: Ross, CA, USA, 1999; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  23. Matiddi, M.; De Lucia, G.A.; Silvestri, C.; Darmon, G.; Tomás, J.; Pham, C.K.; Camedda, A. Data collection on marine litter ingestion in sea turtles and thresholds for good environmental status. J. Vis. Exp. 2019, 147, e59466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2022. Available online: https://www.gbif.org/tool/81287/r-a-language-and-environment-for-statistical-computing (accessed on 4 December 2022).
  25. George, R.H. Health problems and diseases of sea turtles. In The Biology of Sea Turtles; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1996; Volume I, pp. 363–385. ISBN 0203737083. [Google Scholar]
  26. Martí, E.; Martin, C.; Cózar, A.; Duarte, C.M. Low abundance of plastic fragments in the surface waters of the Red Sea. Front. Mar. Sci. 2017, 4, 333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Schuyler, Q.A.; Wilcox, C.; Townsend, K.A.; Wedemeyer-Strombel, K.R.; Balazs, G.; van Sebille, E.; Hardesty, B.D. Risk analysis reveals global hotspots for marine debris ingestion by sea turtles. Glob. Change Biol. 2016, 22, 567–576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Choi, D.Y.; Gredzens, C.; Shaver, D.J. Plastic ingestion by green turtles (Chelonia Mydas) over 33 years along the coast of Texas, USA. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 173, 113111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yaghmour, F.; Al Bousi, M.; Whittington-Jones, B.; Pereira, J.; García-Nuñez, S.; Budd, J. Marine debris ingestion of green sea turtles, Chelonia Mydas, (Linnaeus, 1758) from the eastern coast of the United Arab Emirates. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yaghmour, F.; Al Bousi, M.; Al Naqbi, H.; Samara, F.; Ghalayini, T. Junk food: A preliminary analysis of ingested marine debris by hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata and Olive Ridley Lepidochelys olivacea sea turtles (Testudines: Cheloniidae) from the eastern coast of the United Arab Emirates. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2021, 173, 113073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Pham, C.K.; Rodríguez, Y.; Dauphin, A.; Carriço, R.; Frias, J.P.G.L.; Vandeperre, F.; Otero, V.; Santos, M.R.; Martins, H.R.; Bolten, A.B.; et al. Plastic ingestion in oceanic-stage loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) off the North Atlantic Subtropical Gyre. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2017, 121, 222–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Darmon, G.; Schulz, M.; Matiddi, M.; Liria Loza, A.; Tom, J.; Camedda, A.; Chaieb, O.; El Hili, H.A.; Bradai, M.N.; Bray, L.; et al. Drivers of litter ingestion by sea turtles: Three decades of empirical data collected in Atlantic Europe and the Mediterranean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2022, 185, 114364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. Locations of the stranded turtles collected along the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Green dots represent the green turtle specimens (Chelonia mydas), whereas red dots represent the hawksbill turtle specimens (Eretmochelys imbricata).
Figure 1. Locations of the stranded turtles collected along the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Green dots represent the green turtle specimens (Chelonia mydas), whereas red dots represent the hawksbill turtle specimens (Eretmochelys imbricata).
Animals 13 00314 g001
Figure 2. (A) The proportion of plastic categories found by mass in the digestive tracts of the turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Plastic categories followed the INDICIT protocol, which includes (1) fragments (e.g., hard plastics), (2) non-plastic items (e.g., metal or foil), (3) sheet-like plastics (e.g., plastic bags), (4) thread-like plastics (e.g., nylon lines or ropes), or (5) foams (e.g., polystyrene foam). (B) Photographs depicting examples of each type of plastic found in the gastrointestinal contents of the turtles in this study. (C) The proportion of each plastic type found in the digestive tracts of the four deceased sea turtles.
Figure 2. (A) The proportion of plastic categories found by mass in the digestive tracts of the turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Plastic categories followed the INDICIT protocol, which includes (1) fragments (e.g., hard plastics), (2) non-plastic items (e.g., metal or foil), (3) sheet-like plastics (e.g., plastic bags), (4) thread-like plastics (e.g., nylon lines or ropes), or (5) foams (e.g., polystyrene foam). (B) Photographs depicting examples of each type of plastic found in the gastrointestinal contents of the turtles in this study. (C) The proportion of each plastic type found in the digestive tracts of the four deceased sea turtles.
Animals 13 00314 g002
Figure 3. (A) The proportion of the colors of plastic found by mass in the digestive tracts of the turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. (B) Photographs displaying examples of the most common colors of plastic found in the gastrointestinal contents of turtles in this study. (C) The proportion of each color of plastic found in the digestive tracts of the four deceased sea turtles.
Figure 3. (A) The proportion of the colors of plastic found by mass in the digestive tracts of the turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. (B) Photographs displaying examples of the most common colors of plastic found in the gastrointestinal contents of turtles in this study. (C) The proportion of each color of plastic found in the digestive tracts of the four deceased sea turtles.
Animals 13 00314 g003
Table 1. Information on the unique ID, species, location of the deceased turtle, curved carapace length (CCL), and the mass of the plastics (g) found in each turtle’s digestive tract.
Table 1. Information on the unique ID, species, location of the deceased turtle, curved carapace length (CCL), and the mass of the plastics (g) found in each turtle’s digestive tract.
Turtle IDSpeciesLocationCCL (cm)Mass of Plastics (g)
H01_2019HawksbillKAUST (Thuwal)59.60.8297
G02_2021GreenUmluj74.40
G03_2021GreenUmluj28.00
H05_2021HawksbillUmluj19.00.1747
G06_2021GreenJeddah58.00.2194
H07_2021HawksbillUmluj49.50
G08_2022GreenAl Wajh7810.321
G09_2022GreenUmluj29.20
G10_2022GreenUmluj41.30
H11_2022HawksbillKAUST (Thuwal)42.20
Table 2. Comparison of plastic ingestion found in this study with some findings from the literature. All studies used comparable methods (sieving gut contents through a 1 mm mesh sieve) [28,29,30,31,32]. The table includes the location of the study, turtle species, percent (%) of turtles that ingested plastics, and the reference to the study.
Table 2. Comparison of plastic ingestion found in this study with some findings from the literature. All studies used comparable methods (sieving gut contents through a 1 mm mesh sieve) [28,29,30,31,32]. The table includes the location of the study, turtle species, percent (%) of turtles that ingested plastics, and the reference to the study.
LocationSpecies% of Turtles that Ingested PlasticsReference
Saudi Arabian Red SeaHawksbill50% (2/4)This study
Saudi Arabian Red SeaGreen33% (2/6)This study
Texas, USAGreen48.7% (226/464)Choi et al., 2021
United Arab EmiratesGreen85.7% (12/14)Yaghmour et al., 2018
United Arab EmiratesHawksbill83.3% (5/6)Yaghmour et al., 2021
United Arab EmiratesOlive Ridley28.6% (2/7)Yaghmour et al., 2021
AzoresLoggerhead83.3% (20/24)Pham et al., 2017
Atlantic and MeditteraneanLoggerhead69.2% (764/1103)Darmon et al., 2022
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tanabe, L.K.; Cochran, J.E.M.; Hardenstine, R.S.; Scott, K.; Berumen, M.L. A Preliminary Report of Plastic Ingestion by Hawksbill and Green Turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Animals 2023, 13, 314. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13020314

AMA Style

Tanabe LK, Cochran JEM, Hardenstine RS, Scott K, Berumen ML. A Preliminary Report of Plastic Ingestion by Hawksbill and Green Turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Animals. 2023; 13(2):314. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13020314

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tanabe, Lyndsey K., Jesse E. M. Cochran, Royale S. Hardenstine, Kirsty Scott, and Michael L. Berumen. 2023. "A Preliminary Report of Plastic Ingestion by Hawksbill and Green Turtles in the Saudi Arabian Red Sea" Animals 13, no. 2: 314. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13020314

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop