The effects of cotton fabric structure and finishing on fiber emissions during washing and degradation were studied. Fabrics with different combinations of yarn count, weave structure, or weave density, and the fabrics dyed, water-repellent or peach skin finished were prepared. Significant fabric structural factors and resultant physical properties influencing the fiber release were statistically driven. The results showed that, on average, 16 wt% of the fibers was filtered through a washing machine, and the filtration rate increased when the discharged fibers were on average longer. It was found that the cotton fabric with a higher yarn count or weave density and more compact weave structure released a lesser amount of fibers and that their average length tended to be shorter. Compared to the untreated fabric, the fabric with peach skin finish released more fibers and the average fiber length was longer, whereas the fabric with water-repellent finish released fewer fibers that had a shorter length. It was demonstrated that cotton fiber emission could be reduced when the fabric had a larger weave parameter, low fuzziness, high abrasion resistance, and low water absorbency. Cotton fibers submerged in seawater exhibited a lower primary degradation than that of fibers buried in soil. In addition, the cotton fibers submerged in seawater maintained at 7°C exhibited a lower biodegradability than that of fibers submerged in seawater at 20°C. Moreover, in seawater, water-repellent fabric was biodegraded less than untreated fabric.
LusherAMcHughMThompsonR.Occurrence of microplastics in the gastrointestinal tract of pelagic and demersal fish from the English Channel. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2013;
67(1-2): 94–99.
2.
BoucherJFriotD.Primary microplastics in the oceans: a global evaluation of sources report. 2017;
10.
Gland, Switzerland:
Iucn.
3.
AlmrothBAstromLRoslundS, et al.
Quantifying shedding of synthetic fibers from textiles; a source of microplastics released into the environment.Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2018;
25.2: 1191–1199.
4.
CesaFTurraABaruque-RamosJ.Synthetic fibers as microplastics in the marine environment: a review from textile perspective with a focus on domestic washings. Science of the Total Environment, 2017;
598: 1116–1129.
5.
FalcoFCoccaM.AvellaM, et al.
Microfiber release to water, via laundering, and to air, via everyday use: a comparison between polyester clothing with differing textile parameters. Environmental Science & Technology, 2020;
54.6: 3288–3296.
6.
Sillanp€a€aMSainioP.Release of polyester and cotton fibers from textiles in machine washings. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2017;
24.23: 19313–19321.
7.
ZambranoMPawlakJDaystarJ, et al.
Aerobic biodegradation in freshwater and marine environments of textile microfibers generated in clothes laundering: effects of cellulose and polyester-based microfibers on the microbiome. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2020;
151: 110826.
8.
LadewigSBaoSChowA. Natural fibers: a missing link to chemical pollution dispersion in aquatic environments. Environment Science Technology2015;
49(21): 12609–12610.
9.
SuariaGAchtypiAPeroldV, et al.
Microfibers in oceanic surface waters: a global characterization. Science Advances, 2020;
6(23): eaay8493.
10.
CesaFTurraACheconH, et al.
Laundering and textile parameters influence fibers release in household washings. Environmental Pollution, 2020;
257: 113553.
11.
ZambranoMPawlakJDaystarJ, et al.
Impact of dyes and finishes on the aquatic biodegradability of cotton textile fibers and microfibers released on laundering clothes: correlations between enzyme adsorption and activity and biodegradation rates. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2021;
165: 112030.
12.
PricUVidmarMMozerA, et al. Emissions of microplastic fibers from microfiber fleece during domestic washing. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2016;
23(21): 22206–22211.
13.
FalcoFGulloMGentileG, et al. Eco-sustainable finishing treatment of polyamide fabrics to reduce the release of microplastics during washing processes. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on
14.
Microplastic Pollution in the Mediterranean Sea. 2018; 219–222.
Springer,
Cham.
15.
FalcoFPaceECoccaM, et al.
The contribution of washing processes of synthetic clothes to microplastic pollution. Scientific Reports, 2019;
9(1): 1–11.
16.
RyanPSuariaGPeroldV, et al.
Sampling microfibers at the sea surface: the effects of mesh size, sample volume and water depth. Environmental Pollution, 2020;
258: 113413.
17.
LiLFreyMand BrowningK.Biodegradability study on cotton and polyester fabrics. Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, 2010;
5(4): 155892501000500406.
18.
VassilenkoKWatkinsMChastainS, et al. Me, My Clothes and the Ocean.
University of British Columbia, 2019.
19.
ZambranoMPawlakJDaystarJ, et al. Microfibers generated from the laundering of cotton, rayon and polyester based fabrics and their aquatic biodegradation. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2019;
142: 394–407.
20.
MacNamaraCGabrieleAAmadorC. Dynamics of textile motion in a front-loading domestic washing machine. Chemical Engineering Science, 2012;
75: 14–27.
21.
KimS. The science of detergent and washing. Kyomoon, Seoul, 2008.
22.
YunCParkC.The effect of fabric movement on washing performance in a front-loading washer III: focus on the optimized movement algorithm. Textile Research Journal, 2016;
86(6): 563–572.
23.
BaeJParkJAnS.The mechanical properties and hand of cotton fabrics with the variation of weft density. Science of Emotion and Sensibility, 2005;
8(4): 345–354.
24.
FabresJSavelliHSchoolmeesterT, et al. Marine litter vital graphics.
United Nations Environment Programme and GRID-Arendal, 2016.
25.
LuMXieRLiuZ, et al.
Enhancement in electrical conductive property of polypyrrole-coated cotton fabrics using cationic surfactant. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2016;
133(32).
26.
ISO 16065-2:2014. Pulps - Determination of fibre length by automated optical analysis - Part 2: Unpolarized light method.
27.
KS L ISO 4604:2008. Textile glass - Woven fabrics-Determination of conventional flexural stiffness-Fixed-angle flexometer.
28.
ASTM D4966-12:2016. Standard test method for abrasion resistance of textile fabrics.
29.
AATCC Test Method 197-2011. Vertical wicking of textiles.
30.
ParkCKangYImS.Biodegradability of cellulose fabrics. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2004;
94(1): 248–253.
31.
AATCC TM 30-1993. Antifungal activity, assessment of textile materials: mildew and rot resistance of textile materials.
32.
ASTM D6991-05. Standard test method for measurements of internal stresses in organic coatings by cantilever (beam) method.
33.
KS K 0520:2015. Textiles - tensile properties of fabrics-determination of maximum force and elongation at maximum force the grab method.
34.
ISO 14851:2019. Determination of the ultimate aerobic biodegradability of plastic materials in an aqueous medium - method by measuring the oxygen demand in a closed respirometer.
35.
ZaeemMChathaA. Investigation of low formaldehyde easy-care textile finishes on dyed cotton fabric. Journal Chemical Social Pak, 2019;
41(6): 975.
36.
ZambranoMPawlakJDaystarJ, et al.
Impact of dyes and finishes on the microfibers released on the laundering of cotton knitted fabrics. Environmental Pollution, 2021;
272: 115998.
37.
ShirtcliffeNMcHaleGNewtonM, et al. Superhydrophobic copper tubes with possible flow enhancement and drag reduction. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 2009;
1(6): 1316–1323.
38.
SrinivasanJSenguptaAKothariV.Air-jet texturing of spun cotton yarns for improved comfort. Part II: Texturability of carded spun yarns compared to combed spun yarns. Textile Research Journal, 1992;
62(3): 169–174.
39.
AkgunMBecerirBAlpayH.Assessing the relationship among fabric constructional parameters, fractional reflectances and cover factors of polyester fabrics by experimental and mathematical methods.Fibers and Polymers, 2010;
11(2): 291–302.
40.
MorinoHMatsudairaMFurutaniM.Predicting mechanical properties and hand values from the parameters of weave structures. Textile Research Journal, 2005;
75(3): 252–257.
41.
ZupinZHladnikAandDimitrovskiK. Prediction of one-layer woven fabrics air permeability using porosity parameters. Textile Research Journal, 2012;
82(2): 117–128.
42.
TahvildarAEzazshahabiNMousazadeganF.Appearance and comfort properties considering yarnspinning system and weave structure in worsted woven fabrics. Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, 2019;
14: 1558925019845978.
43.
TanakaK.Effects of the structure of spun yarns and fabrics on their fuzz. Journal of the Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1967;
13(3): 81–89.
44.
GargoubiSBaffounAHarzallahOA, et al. Water repellent treatment for cotton fabrics with long-chain fluoropolymer and its short-chain eco-friendly alternative. The Journal of the Textile Institute, 2020;
111(6): 835–845.
45.
KimSParkJImS. Effect of oxygen plasma treatment on hydrophilicity and biodegradability of poly(butylene succinate). AATCC Review, 2006;
6(7).
CarlucciAPramerD.Factors affecting the survival of bacteria in sea water. Applied Microbiology, 1959;
7(6): 388–392.
48.
WiebeWSheldonWPomeroyL. Bacterial growth in the cold: evidence for an enhanced substrate requirement. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1992;
58(1): 359–364.
49.
ReichardtW.Differential temperature effects on the efficiency of carbon pathways in Antarctic marine benthos. Marine Ecology Progress Series. Oldendorf, 1987;
40(1): 127–135.
50.
PardoAForchiassinF.Influence of temperature and pH on cellulase activity and stability in Nectria catalinensis. Revista Argentina de microbiologia, 1999,
31.1: 31–35.
51.
AksuZ.Application of biosorption for the removal of organic pollutants: a review. Process Biochemistry, 2005;
40(3-4): 997–1026.
52.
VarjaniSRakholiyaPNgH, et al.
Microbial degradation of dyes: an overview. Bioresource Technology, 2020; 123728.
53.
WashingtonJJenkinsT.Abiotic hydrolysis of fluorotelomer-based polymers as a source of perfluorocarboxylates at the global scale. Environmental Science & Technology, 2015;
49(24): 14129–14135.
54.
SchellenbergerSJ€onssonCMellinP,et al. Release of side-chain fluorinated polymer-containing microplastic fibers from functional textiles during washing and first estimates of perfluoroalkyl acid emissions. Environmental Science & Technology, 2019;
53(24): 14329–14338.
