Multiple analytical methods are used to quantify micro- and nanoplastics (MNP) in biota; however, there has been limited examination of how well analytical method parameters are reported within studies. We surveyed 100 peer-reviewed publications that identified or quantified MNP in biota using atomic force microscopy (AFM), inductively coupled plasma (ICP), pyrolysis-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (py-GC-MS), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), Raman, or surface spectroscopy/scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Of the 100 articles data charted, the most prevalent analytical method was FTIR (40%), followed by Raman (27%), py-GC-MS (24%), surface spectroscopy/SEM (19%), ICP (-MS and -OES; 15%), and AFM (5%). Seventy-five percent included only one analytical method, 20% included two methods, and 5% included three methods. The level of detail in the description of methods was systematically evaluated, and most method-specific parameters had a low to moderate reporting rate (i.e., percent of articles that reported analytical method parameter details) in the primary and supplemental text; these findings informed the development of minimum reporting recommendations. The resulting recommendations are intended to encourage transparency and reproducibility via clear and complete reporting of analytical methods in peer-reviewed literature, which in turn will allow for the evaluation of study quality and facilitate the comparison of results within the field of MNP research, particularly MNP in biota samples. Ultimately, this will support the broader use of MNP characterization data in exposure and risk assessment activities.