Abstract Microplastics (MP) are perceived as a threat to aquatic ecosystems but bear many similarities to suspended sediments which are often considered less harmful. It is, therefore pertinent to determine if and to what extent MPs are different from other particles occurring in aquatic ecosystems in terms of their adverse effects. We applied meta-regressions to hazard data extracted from the literature and harmonized the data to construct Species Sensitivity Distributions (SSDs) for both types of particles. The results demonstrate that the average toxicity of MPs is approximately one order of magnitude higher than that of suspended solids. However, the estimates were associated with large uncertainties and did not provide very strong evidence. In part, this is due to the general lack of comparable experimental studies and dose-dependent point estimates. We, therefore, argue that a precautionary approach should be used and MP in the 1–1000 µm size range should be considered moderately more hazardous to aquatic organisms capable of ingesting such particles. Organisms inhabiting oligotrophic habitats like coral reefs and alpine lakes, with naturally low levels of non-food particles are likely more vulnerable, and it is reasonable to assume that MP pose a relatively higher risk to aquatic life in such habitats. Synopsis A meta-analysis indicates that microplastics are one order of magnitude more toxic than suspended sediments/solids, an estimate surrounded by considerable uncertainty. Graphical abstract

What is particular about microplastics? A meta-analysis of the toxicity of microplastics and suspended sediments