# Interaction of elasmobranchs with litter in South Brazil: ingestion and oviposition patterns

Leonardo de Oliveira Soares Espinosa, Ana Luzia Lacerda, Maria Cristina

Oddone, Felipe Kessler, Maíra Carneiro Proietti

► To cite this version:

Leonardo de Oliveira Soares Espinosa, Ana Luzia Lacerda, Maria Cristina Oddone, Felipe Kessler, Maíra Carneiro Proietti. Interaction of elasmobranchs with litter in South Brazil: ingestion and oviposition patterns. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2025, 216, pp.117992. 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.117992. hal-05493815

HAL Id: hal-05493815

https://hal.science/hal-05493815v1

Submitted on 6 Feb 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
# Interaction of elasmobranchs with litter in South Brazil: ingestion and oviposition patterns

Leonardo de Oliveira Soares Espinosa<sup>a,*</sup>, Ana Luzia Lacerda<sup>a,b</sup>, Maria Cristina Oddone<sup>c</sup>, Felipe Kessler<sup>d</sup>, Maíra Carneiro Proietti<sup>a,e</sup>

Keywords:

Plastic pollution

Plastic ingestion

Habitat alteration

Skate

Shark

A B S T R A C T

Elasmobranchs, one of the most endangered animal groups, have been affected by different anthropogenic stressors, including marine litter. To better understand the interactions of elasmobranchs with litter we analyzed the gastrointestinal tract of sharks and examined skate nest composition in southern Brazil. Among 47 sharks caught in longline fisheries, three had ingested mesoplastic items (FO = 6.4 %); a subsample of 18 of these sharks was assessed for microplastic ingestion, revealing 34 microplastics in 12 individuals (FO = 66 %). Gillnet-captured sharks (n = 7) only ingested three microplastics (FO = 42.85 %). Sixteen skate nests examined for litter interaction presented a total of 269 egg capsules and 1676 litter items. The FO of litter in nests was 100 %, with plastic being the predominant material (96.71 %), mainly fishing lines (85.98 %). While litter ingestion by sharks was less frequent than other groups, litter prevalence in skate nests was high and primarily linked to fishing activities.

## 1. Introduction

Marine biodiversity is being impacted by the increasing presence of litter – mainly plastic – in the ocean (Derraik, 2002; Gall and Thompson, 2015). Plastics enter coastal and marine environments from direct or indirect sources (Li et al., 2016), especially through river discharge (Lebreton and Andrady, 2019) and dumping/runoff from shorelines due to improper waste management (Link et al., 2019). The amount of plastics floating in the global ocean has been estimated to be 24.4 trillion particles, weighing between 82 and 578 thousand tons (Isobe et al., 2021), and even higher quantities are estimated to be found on the seafloor (Canals et al., 2021). Due to their durability and prevalence in large quantities, plastics represent a significant ecological concern for aquatic organisms, with potential adverse interactions between this pollutant and marine life (Moura and Vianna, 2020).

Ingestion is the most reported form of interaction of marine fauna with plastics in the ocean, which has been observed for over 1200 marine species of various taxa (Gall and Thompson, 2015; Santos et al.,

2021). Plastic ingestion can cause internal injuries, obstruction of the gastrointestinal tract (GIT) and a false sense of food satiety, possibly leading to malnutrition and starvation (Puskic et al., 2020). In addition, plastics can be a substrate for the development of the plastisphere (Miao et al., 2023; Zettler et al., 2013), self-sufficient communities of organisms that grow on plastics (Delacuvellerie et al., 2022). Such communities can favor ingestion by making plastics resemble and smell like food items (Zettler et al., 2013). Plastic can also be used as shelter by organisms such as octopuses and hermit crabs (Barreiros and Luiz, 2009; Freitas et al., 2022), or as a substrate for oviposition for animals such as octopuses, nudibranchs, fish and elasmobranchs (Cordeiro and Oddone, 2019; De-la-Torre et al., 2022; Freitas et al., 2023; Goldstein et al., 2014; Oddone and Vooren, 2002; Valderrama-Herrera et al., 2023).

Reports of litter ingestion by elasmobranchs have increased in recent years (Bernardini et al., 2018; Hsu et al., 2021; Zicarelli et al., 2023), and in South Brazil, Barreto et al. (2019) described the presence of macrolitter such as plastic bags in the GITs of blue sharks, *Prionace glauca*. However, studies investigating plastic ingestion by

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Projeto Lixo Marinho, Instituto de Oceanografia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> UMR 7266 LIENSs (Littoral Environnement et Sociétés), CNRS - La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> Instituto de Ciencias Biologicas, Setor de Morfologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup> Escola de Química e Alimentos, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande, Rio Grande, Brazil</footnote>

<footnote><sup>e</sup> The Ocean Cleanup, Rotterdam, the Netherlands</footnote>

<footnote>* Corresponding author.</footnote>

<footnote>E-mail address: leonardo.espinosa@unibe.ch (L.O.S. Espinosa).</footnote>
elasmobranchs are still scarce (Gong et al., 2023), with a substantial portion of the extant research relying only on unaided visual inspection methodologies, which may underestimate the presence of plastic in GITs (Markic et al., 2019). It is imperative to understand the interaction between elasmobranchs and plastic waste via ingestion, especially given the exponential rise and increased availability of plastics in the marine environment.

Oviposition in litter can also cause potential impacts on marine organisms and has been reported for skates of the *Sympterygia* genus. In this genus, the posterior horns of egg capsules are modified into tendrils, which allow the females to anchor these egg capsules to substrates such as loose vegetation and plastic litter (Cordeiro and Oddone, 2019; Oddone and Vooren, 2002). The genus *Sympterygia* is endemic to South America and comprises two species on the Pacific coast, the Shorttail Fanskate *Sympterygia brevicaudata* and the Filetail Fanskate *S. lima*, as well as two species on the Atlantic coast, the Smallnose Fanskate *S. bonapartii* and the Bignose Fanskate *S. acuta*. In terms of conservation status, *S. lima* is classified in the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List as 'least concern', *S. brevicaudata* and *S. bonapartii* as 'near threatened,' and *S. acuta* as 'critically endangered' (IUCN, 2025).

There are records of skate oviposition in litter for both Pacific (De-la-Torre et al., 2022; Valderrama-Herrera et al., 2023) and Atlantic species (Cordeiro and Oddone, 2019; Ramos et al., 2021; Oddone and Vooren, 2002). Most of these records for Atlantic species are from Cassino Beach in South Brazil. This area presents a large diversity of elasmobranchs, and several species use its food-rich and protected waters to have their young, characterizing this region as a nursery (Vooren and Klippel, 2005). Therefore, large amounts of egg capsules can be found in Cassino Beach (Cordeiro and Oddone, 2019; Gularte et al., 2023), including records of *Sympterygia* spp. egg capsules attached to synthetic and natural substrates (Oddone and Vooren, 2008, 2002; Queiroz, 1986). Brant (2006) described the presence of plastic fragments, nylon lines, aluminum, wire, clothes and ropes, as well as natural components (algae, terrestrial vegetation stems, fish bones and scales, bivalve and gastropod shells, polychaeta tubes and bryozoans) in *Sympterygia* nests at this area. In addition, Ramos et al. (2021) reported skate egg capsules anchored to fishing lines at Cassino Beach, and Mabragaña et al. (2011) observed *S. bonapartii* and *S. acuta* egg capsules anchored to litter at the coast of Argentina. Although some studies have indicated the presence of litter in the substrate used for oviposition, few have described this interaction in detail.

Elasmobranchs generally have low growth rates and fecundity (Frisk et al., 2001), characteristics that make this group especially vulnerable to population reductions (Roff et al., 2018). In South Brazil, elasmobranch populations have been facing strong declines since the 1980s, mainly caused by fishing (Chelotti and Santos, 2020; Vooren and Klippel, 2005); other threats, such as interactions with litter, may contribute to this scenario. Given the heterogeneous distribution of marine litter (Goddijn-Murphy et al., 2025), studies assessing the degree of exposure of different animal groups and populations across various ecosystems, along with characterizing litter types and their sources, are essential for effective conservation efforts. Southern Brazil is a global hotspot for elasmobranch conservation (Vooren and Klippel, 2005), making it crucial to understand the extent and impacts of marine litter in the region. With intense fishing activity (Freire et al., 2021; Rodrigues et al., 2018), which is a major source of litter in the ocean (Allison et al., 2024; Gilman, 2015), elasmobranch populations in this area may be particularly vulnerable to this type of pollutant. However, few studies have investigated the interactions between elasmobranchs and plastics in South America (Fuentes et al., 2023). Considering the scarcity of data on this topic, and the importance of understanding the impacts of plastic pollution on elasmobranch populations (De-la-Torre et al., 2022), this work aimed to evaluate litter ingestion by sharks and oviposition in litter by skates in South Brazil, describing the amounts and main types of litter present in this interaction, and discussing their potential impacts.

## 2. Methods

### 2.1. *Shark gastrointestinal tract content analysis*

The sharks analyzed in this study were caught with two different types of fishing gears – pelagic longlines and gillnets – which catch specimens of different body sizes, constituting two assemblages (Fig. 1). Forty-seven gastrointestinal tracts (GITs) were obtained from sharks caught by the pelagic surface longline fishery in the extreme south of Brazil between May 2019 and January 2020, and were provided by the Demersal and Cephalopod Fisheries Resources Laboratory of the Oceanography Institute, Rio Grande Federal University (IO-FURG). The gastrointestinal tracts (GITs) were collected from 25 Mako sharks *Isurus oxyrinchus* (16 females, 7 males and 2 unidentified), 21 Blue sharks *Prionace glauca* (4 females, 15 males and 2 unidentified), and 1 Scalloped hammerhead shark *Sphyrna lewini* (male). The average total length (TL – measured from the tip of the tail to the tip of the snout) was 1.75 m (23 sharks measured), while the average fork length (FL – measured from the fork of the tail to the tip of the snout) was 1.63 m (24 sharks measured). Additionally, seven GITs of two hammerhead shark species were obtained in November 2019 from the coastal gillnet fishery at Cassino Beach, provided by the National Center for Research and Conservation of Marine Biodiversity in the Southeast and South – CEPSUL/ICMBio. Six of these GITs were of Scalloped hammerhead shark *S. lewini* (one female, five males), and one of Smooth hammerhead shark *S. zygaena* (male). The average TL of sharks caught with gillnets was 0.51 m; FL was not obtained for these individuals. Individual characteristics of the evaluated sharks are presented in Supplementary Material 1.

For the identification of micro (0.001–5 mm), meso (5–25 mm) and macrolitter (25 mm - 1 m) (size ranges based on GESAMP, 2019), GITs were opened and their contents separated. The entire GIT contents of the 47 sharks from the pelagic longline fishery were inspected with the naked eye for the identification of meso and macrolitter. Additionally, subsamples of eighteen of these GITs (10 of *I. oxyrinchus*, 7 of *P. glauca* and 1 of *S. lewini*) were inspected for smaller sized litter by digesting the organic content with KOH 10 % in an oven for 48 h at 70 °C (Bessa et al., 2018; Dehaut et al., 2016). After this step, we analyzed samples under a magnifying glass (Leica model M165C). Precautions to decrease contamination included using cotton lab coats and nitrile gloves, and cleaning all materials and surfaces with 70 % ethanol before and during analyses. Negative controls for plastic contamination were done by using two blanks per sample, consisting of Petri dishes (one on each side of the magnifying glass) with distilled water, which were inspected along with GIT contents; if plastic items were detected in the control plate with similar shape to those present in the stomachs, these records were excluded (as described in Neto et al., 2020; Pereira et al., 2023; Rummel et al., 2016). The seven GITs of specimens collected in gillnets (volume of 2–5 ml) were also digested with KOH 10 % for microplastic analysis, following the above-described procedure.

The debris were measured on graph millimeter paper (scale of 0.1 mm) and classified according to their material (plastic), type (e.g. fragments, films, fibers), size (in mm), malleability (rigid, flexible) and color (GESAMP, 2019). Nine microplastics found in the sharks caught in pelagic longlines were subjected to Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) to evaluate their polymer composition. The frequency of occurrence of litter (FO%, corresponding to the total number of GITs with litter in relation to the total number of GITs analyzed) and litter abundance (number of items) in the shark GITs were calculated. Total abundance was calculated as the total number of litter items ingested by the sharks, per assembly. The relative abundance of ingestion of different litter categories per assembly were also calculated by dividing the total number of items in each category by the total number of items ingested.
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1.** Study area of elasmobranch interactions with marine litter in South Brazil. The pelagic surface longline fisheries area is highlighted in green; the coastal gillnet fishery and skate nests sampling area is highlighted in red. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)</figcaption></figure>

## 2.2. Skate nests analysis

Sixteen skate nests were collected between October 2016 and December 2019 in opportunistic sampling events along the stretch of sand of Cassino Beach, in an area between coordinates 32.17S 52.13 W and 32.63S 52.42 W (Fig. 1). The different materials present in skate nests were separated according to their composition: egg capsules, plant material, and litter. Egg capsules were measured in length and width using analog calipers, and the species to which the egg capsules belonged were classified according to Oddone and Vooren (2008). Plant items were measured in length, width and height. Litter was classified according to material (plastic, rubber and fabric), type (fishing lines, fishing nets, fragments, bags and ropes), color and malleability, and was measured in terms of length, width and height (GESAMP, 2019; Ramos et al., 2021). The total weight of egg capsules, plant remains and litter were obtained for each nest. The frequency of occurrence of litter (FO%, corresponding to the total number of nests with litter relative to the total number of nests analyzed) and abundance of litter types in the skate nests were calculated.

# 3. Results

## 3.1. Litter ingestion by sharks caught off the southern coast of Brazil

Of the 47 sharks caught in the pelagic longline fishery that had their GITs inspected with the naked eye, three presented one litter item each, with a total abundance of three items and an FO of 6.4 % for plastics, which had between 7 and 20 mm (mesoplastics). In terms of material, all items were composed of plastic (relative abundance of 100 %), of which one was identified as expanded polystyrene. All items were classified as fragments in terms of type (Fig. 2, A1); the relative abundance of colors

was 66.6 % white, and 33.3 % silver (Fig. 2, A2). Plastics were ingested by a Mako shark (male, 1.1 m FL), which presented a 7 mm silver plastic fragment (Fig. 3, A); a Blue shark (male, 1.67 m FL), which presented a 20 mm plastic fragment (broken into two pieces during manipulation) with writing in Spanish, indicating possible international origin (Fig. 3, B); and a female Mako shark (female, 1.9 m TL), which presented a 10 mm expanded polystyrene fragment (Fig. 3, C). All litter items were malleable.

In the GIT subsamples (KOH-digested) from sharks caught in the longline fishery, a total of 34 plastic items were observed, with an FO of 66 % and average number per individual of 1.88 items. Sizes of plastics ranged from 1 mm to 6 mm, with most being in the micro size category (94.12 %); the mean size of items was 2.95 ± 1.55 mm. The relative abundance of plastic types was 67.65 % fiber and 32.35 % film (Fig. 2, B1). The relative abundance of colors was 38.23 % transparent, 23.53 % white, 14.71 % black, 14.71 % blue, 2.94 % red, 2.94 % green and 2.94 % yellow (Fig. 2, B2). FTIR of nine microplastics showed that the most abundant polymer was Polyurethane (PU) (45 %), followed by Poly-propylene (PP) (22 %), Polyethylene (PE) (11 %), Polyamide (PA) (11 %) and LATEX (11 %) (Fig. 4). No contamination with plastic was identified in the control petri dishes.

Of the seven shark GITs (KOH-digested) obtained from the gillnet fishery, three presented one microplastic (average size 1.9 mm) item each, with a total abundance of 3 items and an FO of 42.8 %. The relative abundance of plastic type was 66.6 % fiber and 33.3 % film (Fig. 5, A), and the relative abundance of colors was 33.3 % blue, 33.3 % transparent and 33.3 % black (Fig. 5, B). No contamination with plastic was detected in the control petri dishes.
A. Mesoplastic

1. Type

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

2. Color

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

B. Microplastic

1. Type

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

2. Color

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

**Fig. 2.** Characteristics of plastics ingested by sharks captured in the longline fishery off South Brazil. (A1) Relative abundance of type and (A2) colors of ingested mesoplastics; (B1) relative abundance of types and (B2) colors of ingested microplastics.

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

**Fig. 3.** Examples of plastics found in the gastrointestinal tracts (GITs) of sharks from pelagic longline fisheries off South Brazil: silver fragments (A); fragments with writing in Spanish (B); expanded polystyrene fragment (C).

3.2. *Litter in skate nests in South Brazil*

A total of 269 egg capsules, 558 plant items and 1676 litter items were observed in the 16 skate nests analyzed. Egg capsules were identified as belonging to *S. acuta* (236), *S. bonapartii* (9), and *Rioraja agassizi* (18); species identification was not possible for six egg capsules due to structural damage. Although *R. agassizi* egg capsules were found in the nests, they were not strongly anchored to the substrate due to the lack of morphological structures for this function, and were therefore excluded

from further analysis since we cannot affirm that the oviposition of these
skates occurred in the nest. The egg capsules had a mean length of 34.36
± 6.56 mm, a mean width of 24.88 ± 3.87 mm and a mean weight of
29.26 g per nest. The vegetation had a mean length of 13.10 ± 9.29 mm
and a mean width of 0.42 ± 0.63 mm. The mean weight of vegetation
per nest was 12.24 g, and this category was comprised of parts of higher
terrestrial or emergent aquatic plants (Fig. 6).

Litter was present in 100 % of the skate nests. Plastics were the most
abundant category (96.71 %), followed by fabric (3.28 %) and rubber
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 4.** Polymer composition of microplastics found in the gastrointestinal tracts (GITs) of sharks captured in pelagic longline fisheries off South Brazil. Polymer abundances: Polyurethane PU = 45%; Polypropylene PP = 22%; Polyethylene PE = 11%; Polyamide PA = 11%; LATEX = 11%.</figcaption></figure>

(0.01 %) (Fig. 7, A). The relative abundances of types were: 83.3 % fishing lines, 9.19 % fragments, 4.54 % ropes, 2.02 % fishing nets and 0.95 % plastic bags (Fig. 7, B). The relative abundances of colors were: 60.4 % blue, 18.2 % white, 11.3 % green, 2.2 % yellow, 2.2 % black, 1.7 % brown, 1 % orange, 1 % transparent, 0.7 % grey, 0.4 % red, 0.3 % multicolored and 0.06 % pink (Fig. 7, C). Blue fishing lines were the main component of the nests (FO 100 %). Most items were malleable,

with only three being classified as rigid. The mean abundance of litter per nest was 104.75 items, weighting an average of 62.73 g. In terms of size, the mean length of the items was 17.79 cm, with the mean width of 0.47 cm and the mean height of 0.21 cm.
<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 5. (A) Relative abundance of microplastic types and (B) colors found in the gastrointestinal tracts (GITs) of sharks caught in the gillnet fishery off South Brazil.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 6. Example of a skate nest collected at Cassino Beach, South Brazil (A), separated according to composition: egg capsules (B - left), litter (B - center) and plant material (B - right). Caliper (15 cm) for scale.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 7. (A) Relative abundance of material, (B) type and (C) color of litter found in skate nests at Cassino Beach, South Brazil. Colors with less than 2 % of frequency (brown, orange, transparent, grey, red, multicolored and pink) were grouped as “others” in graph C for better visualization. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)</figcaption></figure>
## 4. Discussion

In this work, we described the interactions of elasmobranchs with litter in the South Brazil oceanic and coastal zones. We evaluated plastic ingestion by four species of sharks, and oviposition on litter by two species of skates. In terms of ingestion, the frequency of occurrence (FO) of meso-sized plastics in pelagic shark GITs (6.4 %) can be considered low compared to other reported ingestion rates for marine vertebrates, such as sea turtles (57 %; Rizzi et al., 2019), teleost fish (25.8 %; Neto et al., 2020), seabirds (62 %; Colabuono et al., 2009) and mammals (34.6 %; Denuncio et al., 2011). For these aforementioned animal groups, depending on the studied regions, the FO of plastic ingestion can be up to 90 %. For instance, green turtles (*Chelonia mydas*) found stranded at Cassino Beach presented FO of plastic ingestion of 81.3 %, with one individual having ingested over 500 plastic pieces (Rizzi et al., 2019). The low FO% of ingested mesoplastics found in sharks may be caused by their high ability to detect prey, which could reduce their chance of ingesting visible synthetic materials. It is also possible that the ingested litter may be regurgitated since sharks voluntarily evert their stomach, which commonly occurs when they are caught in fisheries (Brunnschweiler et al., 2005). On the other hand, the FO of microplastics (60 %) was relatively high, and is in accordance with other studies investigating plastic ingestion by elasmobranchs. For instance, Parton et al. (2020) and Valente et al. (2019), respectively, described microplastic ingestion FOs of 67 % by deep-sea sharks and 68.8 % by demersal sharks. These studies also report that the most common microplastics found in shark GITs were blue fibers, which can have originated from fishing nets (Lacerda et al., 2022). As sharks are predators, a possible cause of the occurrence of microplastic could be due to trophic transfer (Gong et al., 2023).

Among the polymers found for microplastics in the shark GIT contents, Polypropylene (PP) and Polyethylene (PE) were observed, which is in accordance with other reports worldwide (e.g. Alomar and Deundero, 2017; Bernardini et al., 2018; Fernández and Anastasopoulou, 2019; Neves et al., 2015; Parton et al., 2020; Valente et al., 2019). The additional polymers that we found – including Polyurethane (PU) (45 %), the most common polymer in our results, and Polyamide (PA) – were not detected in other studies with sharks, although Neto et al. (2020) report the presence of these polymers in teleost fish that were also sampled in southern Brazil. Polyamide is widely used in the textile industry and in fishing equipment, such as lines and nets (Corti et al., 2023; Mondal et al., 2019). Its presence in the region may therefore be linked to fishing activities. The high occurrence of microplastics in the GITs of sharks is a cause for concern due to the potential effects of chronic exposure to this pollutant. Sharks have long lifespans, and in our study, we observed the presence of microplastics in the GITs of sharks from two ontogenetic groups (early juvenile and late juvenile), indicating exposure throughout their lives. Elasmobranchs, like other animals, can suffer from plastic ingestion due to the obstruction of their digestive system, preventing intestinal movements and the absorption of essential nutrients, which can weaken the animal's health (Kühn et al., 2015). In addition, plastics can carry toxic chemicals such as pesticides and heavy metals, which when ingested can contaminate the animals and potentially disrupt their hormonal balance, reproduction, and growth (Kumar et al., 2021; Rochman et al., 2013). Moreover, plastics in the ocean can host pathogens within the 'plastisphere' (Zettler et al., 2013), exposing sharks and skates to bacteria, fungi and viruses that can cause diseases (Lacerda et al., 2024; Amaral-Zettler et al., 2020).

All skate nests evaluated in this work presented a high occurrence of litter, demonstrating the widespread availability of this pollutant for oviposition in the ocean. Litter represented around three times the amount of natural substrates, and the most common litter type in the nests were fishing lines. The presence of these items has been reported for numerous locations worldwide, and is associated mainly with fishing activities (Palatinus et al., 2019; Sathish et al., 2019). Fishing lines and nets have already been reported in *S. acuta* nests in southern Brazil

(Brant, 2006; Oddone and Vooren, 2002 and 2008; Queiroz, 1986; Ramos et al., 2021), which reinforces how the inappropriate disposal of materials from fishing activities plays a role in marine ecosystem degradation. The nests did not contain some of the most abundant litter items found in a beach litter monitoring effort at Cassino Beach, such as cigarette butts and packaging (Ramos et al., 2021), likely since these types of litter were attributed to tourism activities on the beach, representing a different origin than those found in the present study. The presence of litter in *Sympterygia* nests can affect skate populations in several ways: for instance, the presence of plastics in nests can increase the nest size, consequently increasing their chance of being caught in fishing nets and pulled out of the water. In addition, plastics can directly affect the buoyancy of nests due to their buoyancy characteristics, which varies according to the type of plastic and its degradation state (Barnes et al., 2009). Thus, litter may increase the chance of nests floating and being carried by marine currents. The presence of egg capsules with live embryos has been observed in nests found at Cassino Beach (Brant, 2006; Oddone and Vooren, 2002), and the potential exposure to the sun due to the abovementioned factors can lead to the death of the embryo. If the egg capsules still hatch, the neonates are at risk of becoming entangled in the nets and fishing lines in the nests, possibly impacting the development and survival of these individuals. Plastic litter can also be a substrate for the accumulation of pathogenic microorganisms (Ormsby et al., 2023) and adsorption of toxic compounds (Gong et al., 2023). Consequently, a premature exposure of elasmobranchs to marine litter during early developmental stages may result in chronic health effects and developmental abnormalities.

Nest alteration caused by litter was most commonly observed for *S. acuta*, likely due to the fact that this species has egg capsules with tendrils. While *S. bonapartii* also has these structures, its lower frequency in nests may be related to its small population at Cassino Beach. In fact, at the region *S. acuta* egg capsules are found with a frequency of 10:1 when compared to *S. bonapartii* egg capsules (Cordeiro and Oddone, 2019). Therefore, it is likely that both species are impacted by litter in the area, mainly by fishing gear.

The interactions between elasmobranchs and plastic remain poorly studied, with most research focusing on the impacts of ingestion. However, our study highlights other forms of interaction, such as the use of marine litter for oviposition by skates, which was highly frequent. Understanding the true impact of these interactions is crucial for conservation, especially given that elasmobranch populations are already experiencing significant declines due to other anthropogenic disturbances. To prevent the modification of the oviposition habitat of these skates, initiatives aimed at reducing the inadequate disposal of fishing materials at sea are needed. We recommend that more collection sites for used nets and lines be implemented, alongside tax incentives for fishers who correctly dispose of fishing gear. Awareness-raising activities with fishing communities is also pivotal in reducing the incorrect disposal of fishing materials at sea, and consequently decreasing the impact of this type of pollution on elasmobranchs.

## Credit authorship contribution statement

**Leonardo de Oliveira Soares Espinosa:** Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization.
**Ana Luzia Lacerda:** Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Methodology, Conceptualization.
**Maria Cristina Oddone:** Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Data curation.
**Felipe Kessler:** Writing – review & editing, Formal analysis, Data curation.
**Maíra Carneiro Proietti:** Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration, Methodology, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.

## 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.

## Acknowledgements

L. Espinosa received an undergraduate research scholarship from The National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES) provided access to the Portal de Períodos. We acknowledge Centro de Pesquisa e Conservação da Biodiversidade Marinha do Sudeste e Sul (Cepsul - ICMBio) and Laboratório de Recursos Pesqueiros Demersais e Cefalópodes (FURG) for providing GIT samples. We acknowledge all Projeto Lixo Marinho - FURG team for help in nest collection at Cassino Beach: R. Barutot, A. Tarouco, M. Rizzi, F. Macedo, G. Guedes, A. Freitas, B. Ramos, M. Rocha, T. Barcat, G. Barbosa, T. Carvalho. We also acknowledge the Marine Pollution Bulletin's editor and reviewers for their valuable suggestions on the manuscript.

## Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

## References

Allison, N.L., Dale, A.C., Narayanaswamy, B.E., Turrell, W.R., 2024. Investigating local trawl fishing as a source of plastic beach litter. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 205, 116627.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2024.116627.

Alomar, C., Deudero, S., 2017. Evidence of microplastic ingestion in the shark Galeus melastomus Rafinesque, 1810 in the continental shelf off the western Mediterranean Sea. Environ. Pollut. 223, 223-229.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.01.015.

Amaral-Zettler, L.A., Zettler, E.R., Mincer, T.J., 2020. Ecology of the plastisphere. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 139-151.

Barnes, D.K.A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C., Barlaz, M., 2009. Accumulation and fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 364, 1985-1998.
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2008.0205.

Barreiros, J.P., Luiz, O.J., 2009. Use of plastic debris as shelter by an unidentified species of hermit crab from the Maldives. Mar. Biodivers. Rec. 2. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1755267208000377.

Barreto, R., Bornatowski, H., Fiedler, F.N., Pontalti, M., da Costa, K.J., Nascimento, C., Kotas, J.E., 2019. Macro-debris ingestion and entanglement by blue sharks (Prionace glauca Linnaeus, 1758) in the temperate South Atlantic Ocean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 145, 214-218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.05.025.

Bernardini, I., Garibaldi, F., Canesi, L., Fossi, M.C., Baini, M., 2018. First data on plastic ingestion by blue sharks (Prionace glauca) from the Ligurian Sea (North-Western Mediterranean Sea). Mar.

Pollut. Bull. 135, 303-310.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.07.022.

Bessa, F., Barria, P., Neto, J.M., Frias, J.P.G.L., Otero, V., Sobral, P., Marques, J.C., 2018. Occurrence of microplastics in commercial fish from a natural estuarine environment. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 128, 575-584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.01.044.

Brant, F.C., 2006. Morfologia e biometria do desenvolvimento embrionário da raia Sympterygia acuta Garman, 1877 (Elasmobranchii; Rajidae). In: M.Sc. Dissertation, 91. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG), Brazil.

Brunnschweiler, J.M., Andrews, P.L.R., Southall, E.J., Pickering, M., Sims, D.W., 2005. Rapid voluntary stomach eversion in a free-living shark. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc. United Kingdom 85, 1141-1144.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315405012208.

Canals, M., Pham, C.K., Bergmann, M., Gutow, L., Hanke, G., van Sebille, E., Angiolillo, M., Buhl-Mortensen, L., Cau, A., Ioakeimidis, C., Kammann, U., Lundsten, L., Papatheodorou, G., Purser, A., Sanchez-Vidal, A., Schulz, M., Vinci, M., Chiba, S., Galgani, F., Langenkämper, D., Möller, T., Nattkemper, T.W., Ruiz, M., Suikkanen, S., Woodall, L., Fakiris, E., Molina Jack, M.E., Giorgetti, A., 2021. The quest for seafloor macrolitter: a critical review of background knowledge, current methods and future prospects. Environ. Res. Lett. 16.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abc6d4.

Chelotti, L. de D., Santos, P.R.S. dos, 2020. Biodiversity and conservation of marine elasmobranchs in the extreme south of the Brazil. Southwestern Atlantic. Reg. Stud. Mar. Sci. 38, 101371.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2020.101371.

Colabuono, F.I., Barquete, V., Domingues, B.S., Montone, R.C., 2009. Plastic ingestion by Procellariiformes in southern Brazil. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 58, 93-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2008.08.020.

Cordeiro, L.O.A., Oddone, M.C., 2019. Diversity and abundance of hatched skate (Chondrichthyes: Elasmobranchii: Rajoidei) egg cases at Cassino Beach, Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil. Bol. Soc. Zool. Uruguay. 28 (2), 38-58. https://doi.org/10.26462/28.2.1.

Corti, A., Pagano, G., Lo Giudice, A., Papale, M., Rizzo, C., Azzaro, M., Vinciguerra, V., Castelvetro, V., Giannarelli, S., 2023. Marine sponges as bioindicators of pollution by synthetic microfibers in Antarctica. Sci. Total Environ. 902, 166043. https://doi.
Dehaut, A., Cassone, A.L., Fre`re, L., Hermabessiere, L., Himber, C., Rinnert, E., Rivi`ere, G., Lambert, C., Soudant, P., Huvet, A., Duflos, G., Paul-Pont, I., 2016. Microplastics in seafood: benchmark protocol for their extraction and characterization. Environ. Pollut. 215, 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.05.018.

Delacuvellerie, A., G´eron, A., Gobert, S., Wattiez, R., 2022. New insights into the functioning and structure of the PE and PP plastispheres from the Mediterranean Sea. Environ. Pollut. 295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118678.

De-la-Torre, G.E., Valderrama-Herrera, M., Urizar Garfias Reyes, D.F., Walker, T.R., 2022. Can oviposition on marine litter pose a threat to marine fishes? Mar. Pollut. Bull. 185, 114375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114375.

Denuncio, P., Bastida, R., Dassis, M., Giardino, G., Gerpe, M., Rodríguez, D., 2011. Plastic ingestion in Franciscana dolphins, Pontoporia blainvillei (Gervais and d'Orbigny, 1844), from Argentina. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 62, 1836–1841. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2011.05.003.

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.

Fern´andez, C., Anastasopoulou, A., 2019. Plastic ingestion by blue shark Prionace glauca in the South Pacific Ocean (south of the Peruvian Sea). Mar. Pollut. Bull. 149, 110501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.110501.

Freire, K.M.F., Almeida, Z. Da S. de, Amador, J.R.E.T., Araga˜o, J.A., Araújo, A.R. Da R., A´vila-da-Silva, A.O., Bentes, B., Carneiro, M.H., Chiquieri, J., Fernandes, C.A.F., Figueiredo, M.B., Hostim-Silva, M., Jimenez, E´.A., Keunecke, K.A., Lopes, P.F.M., Mendonça, J.T., Musiello-Fernandes, J., Olavo, G., Primitivo, C., Rotundo, M.M., Santana, R.F., Sant'Ana, R., Scheidt, G., Silva, L.M.A. da, Trindade-Santos, I., Velasco, G., Vianna, M., 2021. Reconstruction of marine commercial landings for the Brazilian industrial and artisanal fisheries from 1950 to 2015. Front. Mar. Sci. 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.659110.

Freitas, T.B.N., Leite, T.S., Ramos, B., Cosmo, A., Proietti, M.C., 2022. In an octopus’s garden in the shade: underwater image analysis of litter use by benthic octopuses. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 175, 113339.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.113339.

Freitas, T.B.N., Leite, T.S., Ramos, B., Proietti, M.C., 2023. Understanding the interactions between cephalopods and marine litter: a research evaluation with identification of gaps and future perspectives. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 190, 114814.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114814.

Frisk, M.G., Miller, T.J., Fogarty, M.J., 2001. Estimation and analysis of biological parameters in elasmobranch fishes: a comparative life history study. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58, 969–981.
https://doi.org/10.1139/f01-051.

Fuentes, S.N., Díaz Andrade, M.C., Awruch, C.A., Moya, A.C., Arias, A.H., 2023. Impacts of water pollutants on chondrichthyans species from South America: a review. Chemosphere 324.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2023.138262.

Gall, S.C., Thompson, R.C., 2015. The impact of debris on marine life. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 92, 170–179.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2014.12.041.

GESAMP, 2019. Guidelines for the Monitoring and Assessment of Plastic Litter in the Ocean. GESAMP Reports & Studies. 130 p.

http://www.gesamp.org/publications/ guidelines-for-the-monitoring-and-assessment-of-plastic-litter-in-the-ocean.

Gilman, E., 2015. Status of international monitoring and management of abandoned, lost and discarded fishing gear and ghost fishing. Mar. Policy 60, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.016.

Goddijn-Murphy, L., Woolf, D., James, N.A., 2025. Patterns and trends in marine microplastics density distributions using a long-term, global, field database. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 212, 117528.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2025.117528.

Goldstein, M.C., Carson, H.S., Eriksen, M., 2014. Relationship of diversity and habitat area in North Pacific plastic-associated rafting

communities. Mar. Biol. 161, 1441–1453.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00227-014-2432-8.

Gong, Y., Huang, X., Li, Z., Shen, Y., Li, Y., Zhu, J., Wu, F., 2023. Plastic ingestion and trophic transfer in an endangered top predator, the longfin mako shark (Isurus paucus), from the tropical western Pacific Ocean. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30, 107365–107370.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25532-5.

Gularte, N.S., Norbis, W., Oddone, M.C., 2023. Trends and seasonality of the occurrence of

hatched egg capsules of Rioraja agassizi (Müller & Henle 1841) (Chondrichthyes: Rajiformes) in a south Brazilian beach. Southwestern Atlantic Ocean. Environ. Biol. Fishes 106, 1569–1577.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10641-023-01435-9.

Hsu, Y.J., Tsai, W.P., Chiang, W.C., Huang, C.C., Chien, H.W., Lee, M., 2021. Incidence of plastic ingestion by the shortfin mako, Isurus oxyrinchus, off the northeast coast of Taiwan. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 172, 112820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112820.

Isobe, A., Azuma, T., Cordova, M.R., Cozar, A., Galgani, F., Hagita, R., Kanhai, L.D., Imai, K., Iwasaki, S., Kako, S., Kozlovskii, N., Lusher, A.L., Mason, S.A., Michida, Y., Mituhasi, T., Morii, Y., Mukai, T., Popova, A., Shimizu, K., Tokai, T., Uchida, K., Yagi, M., Zhang, W., 2021. A multilevel dataset of microplastic abundance in the world's upper ocean and the Laurentian Great Lakes. Microplastics and Nanoplastics 1, 1–14.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s43591-021-00013-z.

IUCN, 2025. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2025-1. https://www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed 17 April 2025).

Kühn, S., Bravo Rebolledo, E.L., Van Franeker, J.A., 2015. Deleterious effects of litter on marine life. In: Bergmann, M., Gutow, L., Klages, M. (Eds.), Marine Anthropogenic Litter. Springer, Berlin, pp. 75–116. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16510-3_4.

Kumar, M., Chen, H., Sarsaiya, S., Qin, S., Liu, H., Awasthi, M.K., Taherzadeh, M.J., 2021. Current research trends on micro- and nano-plastics as an emerging threat to global environment: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 409, 124967.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124967.

Lacerda, A.L., Briand, J.-F., Lenoble, V., Oreste, E.Q., Kessler, F., Pedrotti, M.L., 2024. Assessing the Plastisphere from floating plastics in the northwestern Mediterranean
Sea, with emphasis on viruses. Microorganisms 12, 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/
microorganisms 12030444.

Lacerda, A.L.d.F., Taylor, J.D., Rodrigues, L.d.S., Kessler, F., Secchi, E., Proietti, M.C., 2022. Floating plastics and their associated biota in the Western South Atlantic. Sci. Total Environ. 805, 150186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150186.

Lebreton, L., Andrady, A., 2019. Future scenarios of global plastic waste generation and disposal. Palgrave Commun. 5, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0212-7.

Li, W.C., Tse, H.F., Fok, L., 2016. Plastic waste in the marine environment: a review of sources, occurrence and effects. Sci. Total Environ. 566–567, 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.05.084.

Link, J., Segal, B., Casarini, L.M., 2019. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear in Brazil: a review. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 17, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2018.12.003.

Mabragaña, E., Figueroa, D.E., Scenna, L.B., Díaz de Astarloa, J.M., Colonello, J.H., Delpiani, G., 2011. Chondrichthyan egg cases from the south-West Atlantic Ocean. J. Fish Biol. 79, 1261–1290. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1095-8649.2011.03111.x.

Markic, A., Gaertner, J.C., Gaertner-Mazouni, N., Koelmans, A.A., 2019. Plastic ingestion by marine fish in the wild. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 657–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2019.1631990.

Miao, L., Li, W., Adyel, T.M., Yao, Y., Deng, Y., Wu, J., Zhou, Y., Yu, Y., Hou, J., 2023. Spatio-temporal succession of microbial communities in plastisphere and their potentials for plastic degradation in freshwater ecosystems. Water Res. 229, 119406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.119406.

Mondal, S., Thomas, S.N., Kumar B., M., 2019. Changes in properties of polyamide netting materials exposed to different environments. J. Fish. Res. 03, 2–5. https://doi.org/10.35841/fisheries-research.3.2.1-3.

Moura, M., Vianna, M., 2020. A new threat: assessing the main interactions between marine fish and plastic debris from a scientometric perspective. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 30, 623–636. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-020-09621-z.

Neto, J.G.B., Rodrigues, F.L., Ortega, I., Rodrigues, L. dos S., Lacerda, A.L.d.F., Coletto, J. L., Kessler, F., Cardoso, L.G., Madureira, L., Proietti, M.C., 2020.

Ingestion of plastic debris by commercially important marine fish in southeast-South Brazil. Environ. Pollut. 267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115508.

Neves, D., Sobral, P., Ferreira, J.L., Pereira, T., 2015. Ingestion of microplastics by commercial fish off the Portuguese coast. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 101, 119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.11.008.

Oddone, M.C., Vooren, C.M., 2002. Egg-cases and size at hatching of Sympterygia acuta in the South-Western Atlantic. J. Fish Biol. 61, 858–861. https://doi.org/10.1006/jfbi.2002.2117.

Oddone, M.C., Vooren, C.M., 2008. Comparative morphology and identification of egg capsules of skate species of the genera *Atlantoraja* Menni, 1972, *Rioraja* Whitley, 1939 and *Sympterygia* Müller & Henle, 1837. Arq. Cie^ncias do Mar 41, 5–13.

Ormsby, M.J., Akinbobola, A., Quilliam, R.S., 2023. Plastic pollution and fungal, protozoan, and helminth pathogens – A neglected environmental and public health issue? Sci. Total Environ. 882, 163093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.163093.

Palatinus, A., Kovačić Viršek, M., Robić, U., Grego, M., Bajt, O., Šiljić, J., Suaria, G., Liubartseva, S., Coppini, G., Peterlin, M., 2019. Marine litter in the Croatian part of the middle Adriatic Sea: simultaneous assessment of floating and seabed macro and micro litter abundance and composition. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 139, 427–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2018.12.038.

Parton, K.J., Godley, B.J., Santillo, D., Tausif, M., Omeyer, L.C.M., Galloway, T.S., 2020. Investigating the presence of microplastics in demersal sharks of the north-East Atlantic. Sci. Rep. 10, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68680-1.

Pereira, R., Rodrigues, S.M., Silva, D., Freitas, V., Almeida, C.M.R., Ramos, S., 2023. Microplastic contamination in large migratory fishes collected in the open Atlantic Ocean. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 186, 114454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2022.114454.
Puskic, P.S., Lavers, J.L., Bond, A.L., 2020. A critical review of harm associated with plastic ingestion on vertebrates. Sci. Total Environ. 743, 140666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140666.

Queiroz, E.L., 1986. Estudo comparativo da alimentação de Sympterygia Acuta. Garman, 1877 e S. Bonapartei Müller y Henle, 1841 (Pisces: Rajiformes) com relação a distribuição, abundância, morfologia e reprodução, nas águas litorâneas do Rio Grande do Sul-Brasil. In: M.Sc. Dissertation, 140. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG), Brazil.

Ramos, B., Alencar, M.V., Rodrigues, F.L., Lacerda, A.L. de F., Proietti, M.C., 2021. Spatio-temporal characterization of litter at a touristic sandy beach in South Brazil. Environ. Pollut. 280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116927.

Rizzi, M., Rodrigues, F.L., Medeiros, L., Ortega, I., Rodrigues, L., Monteiro, D.S., Kessler, F., Proietti, M.C., 2019. Ingestion of plastic marine litter by sea turtles in southern Brazil: abundance, characteristics and potential selectivity. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 140, 536-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.01.054.

Rochman, C.M., Hoh, E., Kurobe, T., Teh, S.J., 2013. Ingested plastic transfers hazardous chemicals to fish and induces hepatic stress. Sci. Rep. 3, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03263.

Rodrigues, A.R., Abdallah, P.R., Gasalla, M.A., 2018. Harvesting costs and revenues: implication of the performance of open-access industrial fishing fleets off Rio Grande. Brazil. Mar. Policy 93, 104-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.04.008.

Roff, G., Brown, C.J., Priest, M.A., Mumby, P.J., 2018. Decline of coastal apex shark populations over the past half century. Commun. Biol. 1, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-018-0233-1.

Rummel, C.D., Loïder, M.G.J., Fricke, N.F., Lang, T., Griebeler, E.M., Janke, M., Gerdts, G., 2016. Plastic ingestion by pelagic and demersal fish from the North Sea and Baltic Sea. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 102, 134-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.11.043.

Santos, R.G., Machovsky-Capuska, G.E., Andrades, R., 2021. Plastic ingestion as an evolutionary trap: toward a holistic understanding. Science 80 (373), 56-60. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abh0945.

Sathish, N., Jeyasanta, K.I., Patterson, J., 2019. Abundance, characteristics and surface

degradation features of microplastics in beach sediments of five coastal areas in Tamil Nadu. India. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 142, 112-118.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2019.03.037. Valderrama-Herrera, M., Cardenas, S.A., Calvo-Mac, C., Celi-Vértiz, R.G., Chumpitaz-

Levano, V.L., Flores-Miranda, W.E., Lopez-Tirado, Z.M.T., Molina-Alvarez, M., Rubio-Cheon, D.N., Trucios-Castro, M., Fernaández Severini, M.D., Forero López, A. D., Ramos, W., Pretell, V., Castro, I.B., Ribeiro, V.V., Dobaradaran, S., Espinoza-Morribero, D., Ben-Haddad, M., Dioses-Salinas, D.C., De-la-Torre, G.E., 2023.

Rajids ovipositing on marine litter: a potential threat to their survival. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2023.114941.

Valente, T., Sbrana, A., Scacco, U., Jacomini, C., Bianchi, J., Palazzo, L., de Lucia, G.A., Silvestri, C., Matiddi, M., 2019. Exploring microplastic ingestion by three deep-water elasmobranch species: a case study from the Tyrrhenian Sea. Environ. Pollut. 253, 342-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.07.001.

Vooren, C.M., Klippel, S., 2005. Açoes para a conservação de tubarões e raias no sul do Brasil. Igaré, Porto Alegre.

Zettler, E.R., Mincer, T.J., Amaral-Zettler, L.A., 2013. Life in the “plastisphere”: microbial communities on plastic marine debris. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 7137-7146. https://doi.org/10.1021/es401288x.

Zicarelli, G., Romano, C., Gallo, S., Valentino, C., Pepe Bellomo, V., Leonetti, F.L., Giglio, G., Neri, A., Marsili, L., Milazzo, C., Faggio, C., Mancusi, C., Sperone, E., 2023. Diet and plastic ingestion in the Blackmouth catshark Galeus melastomus, Rafinesque 1810, in Italian waters. Animals 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13061039.