Ecotoxicity to Freshwater Organisms and Cytotoxicity of Nanomaterials: Are We Generating Sufficient Data for Their Risk Assessment?

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to investigate the eco-cytotoxicity of several forms of nanomaterials (NM), such as nano-CuO, nano-TiO2, nano-SiO2 and nano-ZnO, on different aquatic species (Raphidocelis subcapitata, Daphnia magna and Lemna minor) following standard protocols and on human cell lines (Caco-2, SV-80, HepG2 and HaCaT). Predicted no-effect concentrations (PNEC) or hazard concentrations for 5% of the species (HC5) were also estimated based on the compilation of data available in the literature. Most of the NM agglomerated strongly in the selected culture media. For the ecotoxicity assays, nano-CuO and nano-ZnO even in particle agglomeration state were the most toxic NM to the freshwater organisms compared to nano-TiO2 and nano-SiO2. Nano-ZnO was the most toxic NM to R. subcapitata and D. magna, while nano-CuO was found to be very toxic to L. minor. Nano-CuO was very toxic to Caco-2 and HepG2 cells, particularly at the highest tested concentrations, while the other NM showed no toxicity to the different cell lines. The HC5 and PNEC values are still highly protective, due to data limitations. However, the present study provides consistent evidence of the potential risks of both nano-CuO and nano-ZnO against aquatic organisms and also their effects on public health.

Silicon Improves the Redox Homeostasis to Alleviate Glyphosate Toxicity in Tomato Plants—Are Nanomaterials Relevant?

“…Yet, in order to fully unravel the potential of nanotechnology-based solutions, additional studies are needed, namely, to test other types of Si NMs, as well as several concentrations and modes of application. NMs physical-chemical features (e.g., size, ionic charge and morphology), by modulating the formation of aggregates, can possibly limit their biological effects [ 92 , 93 ]. Therefore, one cannot exclude that, at the concentration tested, nano-SiO 2 could have formed aggregates, lowering its ameliorative potential, and bringing it closer to that found for conventional Si.…”

Quantification and Ecological Risk Assessment of Colloidal Fullerenes Nanoparticles in Sediments by Ultrasonic-Assisted Pressurized Liquid Extraction and High Performance Liquid Chromatography

“…In many previous studies, the risk is calculated from predicted environmental concentration (PEC) and predicted no effect concentration (PNEC) established from probabilistic species sensitivity distributions (pSSDs) values [10,[34][35][36][37][38]. However, in this study, the risk characterisation ratio (RCR), normally referred to as hazard Risk Quotient (RQ), was calculated based on the established formula, but using measured environmental concentration (MEC) with the proposed extraction method and highest observed no effect concentration (HONEC) taken from toxicological studies of Ponte et al [10] to assess C61-PCBM ecological risk in studied river system:…”

“…In the environment, nanomaterials agglomerate, which leads to their sedimentation. Therefore, assessment of ecological risk of organisms exposed to nanomaterial-containing sediments is paramount [38,41]. Additionally, ecological risk assessment studies must focus on crucial biological species that are directly or indirectly responsible for ecosystem processes in the environment, such as benthinic organisms [28].…”

Emerging investigator series: metal nanoparticles in freshwater: transformation, bioavailability and effects on invertebrates

“…7,8 Numerous research studies show that the effects of nanomaterials on freshwater organisms exist at all biological levels and all stages of the organism's life cycle. 9–11…”

“…7,8 Numerous research studies show that the effects of nanomaterials on freshwater organisms exist at all biological levels and all stages of the organism's life cycle. [9][10][11] Aquatic invertebrates represent well-established model organisms for MNP toxicological studies. 12 Some invertebrates, including bivalves, 13,14 gastropods 15,16 and crustaceans, 17,18 are considered good environmental quality indicators due to their wide geographic distribution, abundant numbers and easy availability.…”