ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Built Environ.

Sec. Indoor Environment

Volume 11 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fbuil.2025.1556698

Homes Under the Microscope: results from a pilot community science approach to measure airborne microfibres in the home

Provisionally accepted
  • 1University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom
  • 2University of the West of England, Bristol, England, United Kingdom
  • 3Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS), Lowestoft, United Kingdom

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Non-natural airborne microfibres are an emerging concern in indoor air pollution, yet relatively little is known about their sources or concentrations. This is particularly relevant in home environments, where individuals spend significant amounts of time, but which are challenging for researchers to access at scale. Consequently, the concentration of indoor airborne microfibres remains poorly constrained. This paper presents results from the pilot phase of a participatory community (or citizen) science project, where participants collected airborne microfibres in their homes using simple, low-cost passive samplers consisting of petri dishes lined with forensic tape. Microfibre deposition rates were then quantified through a combination of participant-contributed microscopy images and laboratory-based manual counting. The study found an average indoor microfibre deposition rate of 1,960 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹, with significant variability between homes (mean rates ranging from 570 to 4,534 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹). Among rooms sampled, bedrooms had the highest deposition rates (2,893 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹), followed by bathrooms (2,482 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹), with kitchens (1,225 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹) and living rooms (942 fibres m⁻² day⁻¹) showing lower rates. This study demonstrates a scalable, community-driven method for measuring indoor microfibres in the built environment.

Keywords: Microfiber (MF), Indoor air, Textiles & clothing, Citizen Science (CS), Microplastic (MP)

Received: 09 Jan 2025; Accepted: 07 Apr 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Pringle, Sardo, Lamb-Riddell, De Vito, McGoran, Laggan, Hansen and Williams. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Kirsty J Pringle, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Research integrity at Frontiers

94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good

Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.


Find out more