Print This Post
Single-use plastics are everywhere — but two researchers are redefining the norm and championing sustainability.
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 kilometre over 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.
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.
Although simple, these efforts presented challenges. Biodegradable gloves are more expensive than nitrile gloves, and cleaning consumables is time-consuming and can increase the risk of contamination. However, the halving of waste was worth it,
We shared our progress with our supervisor, fish ecologist Denis Roy, and he was excited to jump in and take the next step. He teamed up with evolutionary biologist Jessica Gillung to secure funding, which they used to purchase a pipette-tip cleaning robot that decontaminates tips, enabling up to ten reuses. The robot is set to arrive before June and we estimate that it will reduce plastic waste by a further 35%.
We’re excited about the direction we’re heading in, and we now plan to organize departmental meetings to encourage others at our campus to adopt similar practices.
To adopt sustainable practices, first quantify the amount of plastic waste generated in your daily protocols. Waste produced by the scientific community is poorly described in the literature, and if labs across the country start to quantify theirs, we would have data to start work on. From there, it’s possible to target improvements and think about change and concrete action. When we began, we had to rethink our protocols and add extra steps to our workflows, which was daunting. But, as they say, nothing worth doing is easy, and the time we invested has absolutely been worth it.
A great starting point is to explore initiatives such as Green Lab certification, which provides valuable guidance for creating a more-sustainable research environment. Every small action adds up, and it’s the collective efforts of scientists that will truly drive change in our practices. So, don’t be afraid of the initial effort — it’s all part of the process.
If you enjoyed this article you can find the original post and more great content on the Nature Careers website doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-00500-w
Nature Careers Blog
