Two people wearing white coats and blue gloves. Man on left sits at laptop, woman on right stands holding pipette
Anthony Gagliano (left) and Marie Launay complete the final step of their protocol, preparing a DNA library from material extracted from their fish species of interest.Credit: Denis Roy
On completing my first day of preparing genetic libraries in July 2024, my team and I were confronted with rubbish bins overflowing with plastic, single-use pipette tips, tubes and gloves. As a PhD student studying fish biology at the Natural Resources Department at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, it was hard to ignore the troubling mismatch between a widespread reliance on single-use plastic and working in a research field focused on conservation.
Although data on this issue are scarce, in 2020, researchers at a small, seven-person microbiology laboratory in Edinburgh, UK, churned out a staggering 97 kilograms of biohazardous and plastic waste in just one month1. Plastic is now showing up in some of the most remote parts of the planet; in the Beaufort Sea, a section of the Arctic Ocean to the north of Canada and Alaska, an average of 7,570 microplastic particles were recorded per square kilometreover an 12-day period in 20222. Its impact is widespread, from littering the ocean floor to infiltrating the food web.
Teaming up with Anthony Gagliano, a fellow master’s student dedicated to the conservation of freshwater fish, I embarked on a conservation project studying genetic diversity in different fish populations: the Arctic cod (Boreogadus saida) in my case, and hybrid sunfish (Lepomis gibbosus x L. macrochirus) for Anthony. Although plastic pollution wasn’t the main focus of our research, safeguarding water bodies is essential to our work, and we knew we had to address the disconnect between our values and laboratory practices.
Researchers have raised alarms about excessive plastic use in scientific laboratories in the past. However, few quantifiable data exist on the actual amount of plastic waste generated by common protocols. Filling that gap became our first goal.
Quantifying the issue
Between June and August 2024, we extracted DNA from 518 fish and used it to produced genetic libraries for our species of interest. A genetic library consists of DNA fragments that have been cut into even smaller pieces, amplified and tagged with special labels, allowing the sequencing device to recognize and read them. By analysing the DNA sequences, we aimed to assess the adaptation potential of populations of different species, to inform conservation policies. The protocol required the use of disposable sterile materials to prevent cross-contamination.
At left, hand in blue glove holding microtube. At right, hand in blue glove holding tweezers. In between the hands is a petri dish containing a fish specimen
Marie Launay takes a piece of an Arctic Cod's fin ray to use in the DNA extraction process.Credit: Marie Launay
To quantify the waste produced, we set aside the plastic produced from the first batch of 96 libraries, which included items such as pipette tips, tubes, plates and packaging. Once processed, we found that our first batch had produced 7.57 kg of plastic waste, with library preparation alone accounting for around 3.85 kg.
Our entire project would have produced close to 41 kg of plastic waste if we had continued with our course of action. Using this data as a baseline, it became painfully clear how big the issue was: some large-scale genetic labs process thousands of samples per year, which, if using similar procedures, would generate an astonishing amount of waste.
Awareness to action
Sustainable practices can feel overwhelming for researchers because they require extra thought, time and funds to adopt. So, we decided to start small with practical, achievable adjustments.
We began by reusing consumables and making more-sustainable purchases. For example, we reused pipette tips by autoclaving them to clean them. By purchasing non-loaded tips with minimal packaging, and refilling the boxes ourselves, we reduced our plastic waste by almost 50%. This also saved on costs, because refill bags are more affordable than pre-loaded boxes.
We also developed a cleaning and decontamination protocol for the shearing tubes used to fragment DNA into smaller pieces for sequencing. Our protocol requires the use of ultraviolet light as well as a specialized cleaning solution to minimize contamination and allows the tubes to be safely reused.
Enjoying our latest content?
Login or create an account to continue
Access the most recent journalism from Nature's award-winning team
Explore the latest features & opinion covering groundbreaking research
Access through your institution
or
Sign in or create an account
Continue with Google
Continue with ORCiD