A new family of materials comprised of cellulose, cellulose nanomaterials (CNMs), having properties and functionalities distinct from molecular cellulose and wood pulp, is being developed for applications that were once thought impossible for cellulosic materials. Commercialization, paralleled by research in this field, is fueled by the unique combination of characteristics, such as high on-axis stiffness, sustainability, scalability, and mechanical reinforcement of a wide variety of materials, leading to their utility across a broad spectrum of high-performance material applications. However, with this exponential growth in interest/activity, the development of measurement protocols necessary for consistent, reliable and accurate materials characterization has been outpaced. These protocols, developed in the broader research community, are critical for the advancement in understanding, process optimization, and utilization of CNMs in materials development. This review establishes detailed best practices, methods and techniques for characterizing CNM particle morphology, surface chemistry, surface charge, purity, crystallinity, rheological properties, mechanical properties, and toxicity for two distinct forms of CNMs: cellulose nanocrystals and cellulose nanofibrils.

No abstract

Background:A rich body of literature exists that has demonstrated adverse human health effects following exposure to ambient air particulate matter (PM), and there is strong support for an important role of ultrafine (nanosized) particles. At present, relatively few human health or epidemiology data exist for engineered nanomaterials (NMs) despite clear parallels in their physicochemical properties and biological actions in in vitro models.Objectives:NMs are available with a range of physicochemical characteristics, which allows a more systematic toxicological analysis. Therefore, the study of ultrafine particles (UFP, <100 nm in diameter) provides an opportunity to identify plausible health effects for NMs, and the study of NMs provides an opportunity to facilitate the understanding of the mechanism of toxicity of UFP.Methods:A workshop of experts systematically analyzed the available information and identified 19 key lessons that can facilitate knowledge exchange between these discipline areas.Discussion:Key lessons range from the availability of specific techniques and standard protocols for physicochemical characterization and toxicology assessment to understanding and defining dose and the molecular mechanisms of toxicity. This review identifies a number of key areas in which additional research prioritization would facilitate both research fields simultaneously.Conclusion:There is now an opportunity to apply knowledge from NM toxicology and use it to better inform PM health risk research and vice versa. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP424